Labour begins to turn against universal benefits

Welfare spokesman Liam Byrne says that benefits to the elderly will need to be "looked at".

Last week, we heard Nick Clegg question the future of universal benefits for the elderly such as the winter fuel allowance and free bus passes, and now Labour is doing the same. On the Today programme this morning, Liam Byrne suggested that a better "balance" needed to be struck between means-tested and universal benefits. The shadow work and pensions secretary said:

There has always been a balance in the welfare state between universal benefits and targeted benefits and I'm afraid as part of Ed's zero-based review that balance has got to be looked at

To date, Ed Miliband's leadership has been characterised by a strong defence of universal benefits, most obviously in the case of child benefit. He believes, as Richard Titmuss put it, that "services for the poor will always be poor services" and that "middle class benefits" are important to sustain public support for the welfare state. But such is the fiscal mess that Labour will inherit (the latest independent forecasts suggest the deficit will be £99.5bn in 2015) that this stance will become harder to defend. As Clegg quipped last week, "at a time when people’s housing benefit is being cut", Labour wants to protect "Alan Sugar’s free bus pass". While there are many on the left who will rightly argue that the cuts to working-age benefits are not a reason to reduce support for the elderly, there are others who will sympathise with Clegg's argument.

Owing to David Cameron's pre-election pledge to protect benefits for the elderly, there is no prospect of the coalition restricting eligibility before 2015. But it does now look as if all three of the main parties will go into the next election promising, to varying degrees, to limit universal payments.

Shadow work and pensions secretary Liam Byrne warned that Labour would need to make cuts to welfare. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

How Theresa May laid a trap for herself on the immigration target

When Home Secretary, she insisted on keeping foreign students in the figures – causing a headache for herself today.

When Home Secretary, Theresa May insisted that foreign students should continue to be counted in the overall immigration figures. Some cabinet colleagues, including then Business Secretary Vince Cable and Chancellor George Osborne wanted to reverse this. It was economically illiterate. Current ministers, like the Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, Chancellor Philip Hammond and Home Secretary Amber Rudd, also want foreign students exempted from the total.

David Cameron’s government aimed to cut immigration figures – including overseas students in that aim meant trying to limit one of the UK’s crucial financial resources. They are worth £25bn to the UK economy, and their fees make up 14 per cent of total university income. And the impact is not just financial – welcoming foreign students is diplomatically and culturally key to Britain’s reputation and its relationship with the rest of the world too. Even more important now Brexit is on its way.

But they stayed in the figures – a situation that, along with counterproductive visa restrictions also introduced by May’s old department, put a lot of foreign students off studying here. For example, there has been a 44 per cent decrease in the number of Indian students coming to Britain to study in the last five years.

Now May’s stubbornness on the migration figures appears to have caught up with her. The Times has revealed that the Prime Minister is ready to “soften her longstanding opposition to taking foreign students out of immigration totals”. It reports that she will offer to change the way the numbers are calculated.

Why the u-turn? No 10 says the concession is to ensure the Higher and Research Bill, key university legislation, can pass due to a Lords amendment urging the government not to count students as “long-term migrants” for “public policy purposes”.

But it will also be a factor in May’s manifesto pledge (and continuation of Cameron’s promise) to cut immigration to the “tens of thousands”. Until today, ministers had been unclear about whether this would be in the manifesto.

Now her u-turn on student figures is being seized upon by opposition parties as “massaging” the migration figures to meet her target. An accusation for which May only has herself, and her steadfast politicising of immigration, to blame.

Anoosh Chakelian is senior writer at the New Statesman.

0800 7318496