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

I hate to admit it, but Ed Miliband has a point about welfare and language

7 April 2013

4:11 PM

7 April 2013

4:11 PM

In his Mail on Sunday column today, James Forsyth gives a fascinating insight into what both main parties are thinking as we move from welfare wars into local election campaign mode. His piece is, as usual, full of gems – but one in particular caught my eye.

Several of those closest to [Ed Miliband] tried to persuade him to use the term ‘benefit cheat’ in a speech soon after he became leader. They believed that Miliband, the son of an academic, needed to speak in the way that voters do. But Miliband refused. He’s determined not to take the tactical approach to the issue beloved by the triangulators of New Labour. Instead, he wants to position himself as a ‘one nation’ politician capable of uniting the whole country.

I think a Miliband victory would be a disaster for Britain, but he is very difficult to dislike (a strong attribute in politics). One of his more attractive traits is a sense of decency. The same was true of the late Michael Foot, of course, it didn’t make him electable. But Miliband looks like he will be more successful. He has refused to go after the Tories for closing prisons*, because he agrees with the policy. Politically daft, if you ask me, as the Tories are very vulnerable on this. But I grudgingly admire him for sticking to his (misguided) principles.

On welfare, Miliband seems to have decided to take another political hit. George Osborne has long goaded him about his position on welfare, and last year he even crossed the floor to thank the Labour leader for voting against reform. Something you can never imagine Iain Duncan Smith doing – he wants bipartisan support for this agenda. The American experience shows that welfare reform works best with all-party support. But I wonder if, longer term, Miliband’s more restrained language will bring dividends.

[Alt-Text]


If the Tories learnt anything from their failure to win the last four elections, it should be that their biggest problem is people mistrusting their motives. Being uncharitable about the poor and unemployed, or portraying welfare reform as a way of getting one over on the Labour Party, risks inflicting longlasting damage to the Tory reputation. Recontaminating the brand. Onlookers will be amazed at how quickly the Tories seem to forget these basic lessons.

In the last week, we have been reminded that the Conservatives have not lost the capacity to self-mutilate. In the 1990s, the problem was a Spock-like obsession with economics. Now, it’s an obsession with political tactics. Iain Duncan Smith has spent years building a social justice agenda for the Conservatives which is not just plausible, but widely accepted. Not once has he ever blamed the unemployed for their plight, or spoken about ‘scroungers’. His welfare reform agenda is an extraordiary achievement, the greatest triumph of Tory modernisation. It’s a success worth protecting.

Labour’s great advantage is that people tend to regard the party as well-meaning, even if naïve and ineffectual. Being seen as well-intentioned and led by a leader who is (as Michael Gove puts it) “in politics for the right reasons” is a pretty strong asset. Especially if voters think the next election is an ugly baby contest where they have to choose the least bad option.

Ed Miliband has no choice but to embrace welfare reform. But if he manages to keep the reputation of being decent and well-meaning in the process, it will be a strong asset for his party in 2015.

* Prisons are closing, but I’m told there will be more adult places in 2015 than 2010. More on this later.

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