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. If you receive it, you’ll also find your subscriber number at the top of our weekly highlights email.

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.spectator.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050. If you’ve only just subscribed, you may not yet have been issued with a subscriber number. In this case you can use the temporary web ID number, included in your email order confirmation.

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'.

If you have any difficulties creating an account or logging in please take a look at our FAQs page.

Coffee House

Why Fraser Nelson is wrong about a jobs ‘miracle’

16 April 2014

3:52 PM

16 April 2014

3:52 PM

In his blog earlier today, Fraser Nelson argues:

‘The UK jobs miracle is happening mainly due to radical welfare reform – the type Labour ducked in office..Under Labour, record numbers of people in work were celebrate as an end in itself – but most of the increase was accounted for by immigration. So more jobs did not mean less poverty – not if a quarter of Glasgow and Liverpool were still languishing on the dole at the peak of a boom. This time, it’s different. The welfare reforms are restoring the see saw link between jobs and dole queues.’

I suppose I should by now get over the fact that intelligent, articulate journalists feel able to write with such certainty about data they simply don’t understand. It cannot be repeated too many times that the explosion in the numbers of people ‘on the dole’ (by which Fraser means the number on ‘out of work benefits’, including lone parents on income support and those on incapacity benefits) occurred in the period from 1979 to the mid 1990s, after which it began to fall:

image003

[Alt-Text]


So the rise occurred despite the low immigration of the 1980s; and the fall continued through the high immigration 2000s, in large part (I would argue) because of the success of welfare reform and of tax credits in improving work incentives.

But that’s by the by – Fraser’s main point here is that the fall should have been even sharper, had policy been even more radical; and that things are very different now. Of course, it’s very difficult to establish the counterfactual. But it’s easy to verify Fraser’s last statement: the link, or lack of it, between jobs and welfare reforms, in the 2000s and now. Here is a chart of the simple ratio between overall employment (from the LFS) and the number of people on out of work benefits (from DWP), between August 1997 and August 2013. This gives you a pretty rough and ready measure of the extent to which the availability of jobs (total employment) relates to the number of people on the dole (out of work benefits).

image004

The ratio rose steadily throughout the 2000s, until the recession, when it fell very sharply. It’s since recovered, so we’re now back to where we were in 2007; that is, there are almost 7 people in work for 1 on out of work benefits, compared to a ratio of 5 to 1 in 1997. That’s good news. But the idea that there wasn’t progress up to 2007, and that there has since been sort of step change is nonsense. What we’ve seen is, abstracting from the macroeconomic environment, continued slow and steady progress, not some sort of miracle. It doesn’t make a good headline, and politicians on all sides (or their journalistic acolytes) don’t particularly like to hear it, but the story of welfare reform over the last two decades is mostly one of continuity.

Jonathan Portes is Director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research

Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.


Show comments
Close