.png)
1 month ago
9
That one in eight young people in the UK are not in education, employment or training is a dismal statistic. Nearly a decade after the school-leaving age was raised to 18 in England (in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland it remains 16), and 25 years after Tony Blair aimed to have 50% of young people in higher education, Britain under the Tories went backwards.
The problem of a shrinking workforce, and the rising benefits bill it entails, is not limited to young adults. The UK’s lack of a post-pandemic bounceback in employment is a concern in other age groups, particularly the over-50s. But the government is right to be alarmed by the phenomenon of young people emerging from 14 years of schooling unable to work or undertake training. Unemployment and long-term illness are not a great start to anyone’s adult life.
So it makes sense that this week’s announcements about benefits will be directed at young claimants. The challenge for Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, is to convince them that finding work – or signing up for a course – serves their interests as well as the government’s. Years of harsh rhetoric around the benefits system and its working-age recipients have made this task far harder. Rather than a basic entitlement and a necessity – particularly for families with children, disabled people and those living in unaffordable housing – social security has been wrongly depicted, by politicians and others opposed to the welfare state, as a reward for doing nothing. If the new government intends to reduce the number of people on sickness or disability benefits from 2.8 million back to closer to the 2 million figure of five years ago, it needs to do this without coercion. As this column has argued often, one of the lessons of the past 14 years is that demoralising people is more likely to make them ill than productive.
The lifting of the minimum wage announced in last month’s budget was a positive move. So was the pledge that the 16% increase in the lower hourly rate for workers aged 18-20 (from £8.60 to £10) will eventually lead to equalisation with older workers’ pay. Problems around working conditions, job insecurity and the lack of progression opportunities remain. But at least ministers recognise that if people are to be encouraged to work, then work must pay them enough to live on.
The transformation of jobcentres into what Ms Kendall calls a “a genuine public employment service” is also welcome. A stronger emphasis on proactive advice should help more people find suitable roles. Linking jobcentres with other services is also constructive and in line with a health reform agenda that emphasises prevention, early intervention and co-working with councils and the voluntary sector.
The limited nature of many of the jobs on offer is one problem Ms Kendall can’t solve. The government’s argument is that by investing in the health service, particularly in areas with the longest waiting lists, while also boosting the labour market, they can nudge the nation back towards a better overall state of health. The hope is that this, in turn, will foster the kind of economic development that creates more fulfilling opportunities and, eventually, lives.
The proof, as always, will be in the pudding. But policies to incentivise employment were inevitable given the shifts of the past few years. As long as social and health support systems are in place, this approach is a reasonable one.
