X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

Please note: Previously subscribers used a 'WebID' to log into the website. Your subscriber number is not the same as the WebID. Please ensure you use the subscriber number when you link your subscription.

Coffee House

Why Ed Balls is so confident about benefit wars

14 December 2012

2:19 PM

14 December 2012

2:19 PM

The debate over benefit uprating will run and run because both sides think they are winning. George Osborne thinks the public resent generous benefits rises. Liam Byrne and Ed Balls want to call this a ‘strivers tax’ and think blue collar workers will fall into their arms. Byrne told Coffee House yesterday that Labour will be hurt opposing to the Welfare Uprating Bill.

I understand that the Shadow Cabinet reached its decision after YouGov’s polling showing C2DE  voters  – the three lowest socio-economic groups – saying benefits should have been increased in line with inflation. Osborne’s Bill would increase welfare by 1pc, behind expected inflation. Some 42 per cent of C2DE respondents said it was wrong, 28 said it was right, 15 per cent proposed no increase at all on benefits. Polling after Ed Balls had confirmed the party’s position showed 59 per cent of voters backed Labour’s opposition. Hence the smile on Balls’ face

[Alt-Text]


I understand that Labour believes that families on working tax credits (also affected by the real-terms freeze) could turn against the Conservatives in key marginal constituencies. In Dan Byles’ North Warwickshire constituency, for instance, the MP has a majority of only 54, while there are 6,800 families on working tax credits. Similarly, George Eustice has a majority in his Camborne and Redruth constituency of 66, but there are 7,100 families on working tax credits. A Labour source tells me:

‘Osborne, in search of a welfare dividing line, has just cost the careers of dozens of his colleagues because the losers outweigh a Tory majority by a factor of several.’

Hence the enthusiasm on both sides to keep this going: neither believe they have anything to lose by provoking the other.

P.S. Whether Labour is actually right to be quite so happy about its position on benefits is a matter Jonathan will address shortly on Coffee House.

UPDATE: Jonathan has posted on why Labour’s confidence is mis-placed: it’s worth a read as it shows that the party may hope that those on working benefits will vote for them, but they still don’t have the evidence to back that up.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
Close