Will unions fight
Fowler's demolition of social security?
By GERRY HUNWICK
Socialist Viewpoint, No. 6, June 1985. Page 4 ment benefits, tary
Six weeks revIews, enough time to go any changes
They did, workers, Tory MPs,
Directors, and the right wing
Institute.
Tory MP)
Rowe
CBE
National).
Despite attack on claimants.
On April 2 last year, Norman Fowler announced the setting up of four teams to review the social security system covering: provision for retiresupplemenand for children and young people. Fowler claims that the result is the "most substantial examination of the social security system since the Beveridge Report". (The Beveridge Report has been the basis of the welfare state since 1944.) Anyway, it seems that the Fowler Review was not substantial enough, since they added another team to cover maternity benefits.
after announcing the Fowler then gave organisations only ten weeks to submit written evidence to those reviews - hardly through all the complexities of the benefit system. The people who would be affected by in the benetit sytsem were not asked to submit evidence.
however, ask social the Institute of the Centre for Policy Studies (the Tory Party "think tank"),
Adam Smith
When the time came to give spoken the review teams (supposedly independent) were chaired by such people as Rhodes Boyson
Norman Fowler (Tory ninister). Tony Newton (Tory MP) Alan Blakemore CBE, and Jeremy
(Chair Abbey the much vaunted "independence" of these reviews, they were a farce. They were not designed to see how claimants can be better off, but to see where cuts could be made without provoking too much resistance. That's why not one single claimants' oranisation was asked to 'submit evidence" to these reviews To have claimants' views and experiences of the social security system would show up the reviews for what they were — a thinly disguised
A Green Paper has now been published with the main proposals from the reviews. Leaks in advance suggested where some of the major
cutbacks were intended. They were broadly correct, though Fowler has not as expected opted to abolish or means-test child benefits. The central proposals include:
*abolition of Family Income Supplement, to be replaced by the pay packets of the low paid;
*supplementary benefit to be replaced by an "incentive support scheme",
State Earnings-
Related Pensions Scheme, replacing it with compulsory private insurance
*abolition of one-off payments for cookers, clothes, furniture, etc.
grant: means-tested payments only;
*abolition of the £30 death grant:
means test introduced;
*a heavy cut in benefit to help pay rates: even the poorest will now have to pay at least 20% of their own rates.
Other plans include further cuts in housing benefitntil figures are vided to spell out the cash implications of the Green Paper, we cannot know for certain exactly how big are benefit cuts are coming — and on a massive scale. Certainly they represent the most fundamental attack on claimants' living standards since the
These cuts go hand in hand with other attacks that have been made on claimants over the last six years the introduction of the Specialist leams; the arrest ot 286 claimants in
"Operation Major";
the restrictions in board and lodging
SO RISKS HAVE
YOU CAN'T HAVE
REWARDS IF YOU
TO BE
ENCOURAGED
DON'T TAKE RISKS while handing out over f6.000 million in tax cuts.
Shadow Minister Michael Meacher - have been:
off the pensions bill: f4.50 per week from each retired couple.
5% behind inflation: to save £140 million a year.
* Reducing supplementary benefit for strikers' families.
taken inflation: snatching back f200 million.
million each year.
* The taxation of unemployment benefit: cutting 1700 million a year.
forecast inflation - trimming another £550 million.
another f390 million a year.
unemployment benefit; not increasing Family Income Supplement this
These cuts also go hand in hand with the abolition of the wages councils, the introduction of YTS conscription and the gradual destruction of the NHS and its facilities.
The backdrop is a huge increase in the number of unemployed people over the last six years.
To achieve wage cuts and restore
British capitalism to profitability in the wake of recession and envisaged
' further recession, it is essential that an atmosphere of fear to strike back unemployment wages is created. The chief weapon historically)
unemployment — lower benefits help driving desperate available unemployement, thus leavmassively strengthened in terms of hiring and firing and wage-cutting.
The Fowler review does present problems for those concerned with back against it.
almost all Tory legislative attacks over the last six years, they have been careful to make sure that it is not a full frontal attack, thus making the job of organising a fightback much more
The implications of the attack will not sink in for some time to come.
What is necessary now is for the maxover this issue between civil service unions, unemployed and organisations, organisations
WILL PUT THE RISK
FOR STARTERS,
BACK IN
OUR ECONOMIC
BEING DISABLED
PACKAGE...
The new Tory plan to smash up the welfare state in order to finance more tax concessions for the rich forms part of a consistent pattern since 1979. In six years.
Thatcher has snatched over £10,000 million in benefits from the very poorest -
Major landmarks in these cuts - a full list of which has been compiled by
* Breaking the link between earnings and pensions, to clip £500 million per year
* Leaving maternity, sickness, unemployment and invalidity benefits lagging
* The decision in November 1981 to claw back 1% of benefits which had over-
* The abolition of the earnings-related unemployment benefit: cutting £360
* The November 1983 switch to basing benefits on retrospective rather than
* Cuts in housing benefits and payments for 18-20 year olds - slashing back
Socialist Viewpoint, No. 6, June 1985. Page 5
Fowler: the Thatcher government has snatched over £10 billion from the poor, and handed over £6 billion in tax cuts to the richest minority. workers, etc.
We must create a movement of opposition to these cuts government's intenUnemployed and claimants organisations must now begin to develop new, bolder tactics — tactics unemployed and claimants agenda and into the limelight, pointing out that every worker is being hit by these changes - if only by increased pension deductions - and everyone is potentially in the same position as the unemployed
Unions must begin to pay much firmer attention to the recruitment of members, both full and associate. Every union activist should be concerned that these issues are brought to the attention of the rest of the union membership. Every Laboui Party activist should make sure issues are campaigned on at a constituency level.
Crucially — the CPSA and SCPS (who already have an ongoing "Action For Benefits" campaign) must be really prepared to take action (which affects claimants as little as possible) n oppostion to the fowler Review
Infortunately the lack of effectiv opposition from CPSA and SCPS workers to the Specialist Claims Control Unit and the Regional Benefit Investigation Teams means that the job of campaigning now is made harder. But, nevertheless, this must be made
Finally, we must remember - that if this round of benefit cuts goes will it mean massive drop in living standards for the low-paid and employed, but it will prepare the ground for further attacks in the same direction. We have no option but to make a priority our opposition to the Fowler Review cuts.