‘Liberals’ close their minds to welfare reform

On Tuesday, I accepted an invitation to go on Vincent Browne’s show on TV3.

The topics up for discussion were to include the recently published Social Welfare and Pensions Bill and the water charge.

We never got around to discussing the water charge as the Social Welfare Bill dominated the discussion, particularly the proposed change to the one-parent family payment.

Joan Burton, minister for social protection, is proposing to radically change this element of social welfare. Up until 2011, the payment provided long-term income support to lone parents with no requirement for them to engage in employment, education or training, until children were aged 18, or 22 if in full-time education.

In Apr 2011, legislation was introduced to reduce the maximum age limit of the youngest child for receipt of the one-parent family payment. The intention is to amend the legislation further so that for new applicants from May 3, the maximum age limit of the youngest child for receipt of the payment will reduce to 12 and to 7 in 2014.

The logic behind this change according to the minister, apart from trying to save money, is to reduce long-term welfare dependency and passive income support to people of working age, on the basis that the best way out of poverty and social exclusion is through paid employment.

I dared to suggest there might be some sense to this proposal and commented that some single parents make a lifestyle choice to become a single parent.

Obviously others do not. For example if a spouse dies or if a spouse leaves the relationship.

Where husbands walk out of a relationship, the full vigour of the law should be applied to make sure they live up to their financial and parental responsibilities.

In the aftermath of this programme, I got an incredibly vitriolic response and apparently on social media, the abuse I got had to be seen to be believed.

Many of those who attacked me on this issue and indeed on any other, I have the temerity to address, would generally describe themselves as being of a liberal bent. I thought that the definition of a liberal is somebody who is open-minded and unprejudiced.

These people may believe themselves to be liberal, but once somebody proposes something that does not fit snugly into their belief system, the response is often vitriolic and very personal.

During the so-called boom years, those on the right could in many cases stand accused of not having an open mind to alternative viewpoints. I fell foul of such people in the late 1990s when I trenchantly opposed Ireland’s membership of EMU. The pendulum has now swung.

Given Ireland’s current state, which is still not too far removed from bankruptcy, every euro of the €53bn we spend on the day-to-day running of the State should be fair game for critical analysis, just as every possible way of raising extra revenues should be analysed.

The €21bn spent on social protection should be fair game, just like everything else. I never agreed with the notion those who invested in bank bonds should be given a 100% safety net, but unfortunately that decision was taken and we have to live with the consequences.

Those opposed to any examination of social protection spending should recognise that it is financed by those who work and pay tax and these people surely should be allowed comment on how their hard-earned money is spent.

The key priority in the economy has got to be the provision of incentives to those who create employment, because it is only through employment creation that the resources will be generated to provide a safety net to the less well off in society.

So-called liberals need to open their minds to such alternative ideas.