Why the young favour pensioner benefits over those for the unemployed

Focus groups reveal that young voters view older groups as more deserving. The sense of welfare as an insurance policy is being lost.

More than three-quarters of over 65s voted at the last election, compared with less than half of those aged 18–24. It is tempting to see this as the real reason behind the Prime Minister’s New Year pledge to protect pensions spending. Behind all the talk of "values" there is a fairly straightforward piece of electoral arithmetic.

In practice, however, this is more than simply pandering to the 'grey vote'. Demos/Ipsos-MORI research shows that those born between 1980 and 2000 are three times as likely to choose pensions than unemployment benefits as a priority for public spending. Young people may have borne the brunt of the downturn, with youth unemployment topping 1 million at times, but support for older generations remains strong. This is what Cameron is playing into when he says that people who have worked hard should have dignity and security in old age – and why George Osborne feels more comfortable targeting benefits for those under-25.

Those who worry that the young are getting a raw deal must engage with why public opinion tilts in this direction. Focus groups reveal that people want to protect pensioners not because they think they will benefit one day, or even that their own parents or grandparents will benefit now, but because they see older groups as more deserving. This is because of a combination of two things: the perception that the elderly are vulnerable, through no fault of their own, and that they have earned entitlements through contributions over time.

The contrast with attitudes to the unemployed is striking. Many see those out of work as more responsible for their own situation and less likely to have put into the system. Britain may have one of the stingiest systems of support for the unemployed in Europe, but that is because those in work fear they are subsidising those who are not. The sense of welfare as an insurance policy, that all those who are able to pay contribute to, is being lost.

Of course, self-interest is part of the story. Older groups put pensions top of their priority list, while younger groups think child benefit is more important. But what the 'grey vote' narrative misses is the extent to which different generations are willing to make sacrifices for one another. There may be more money to be saved in the pensions budget, but there are more votes in protecting it. 

People enter the Jobcentre Plus office in Bath, England. Photograph: Getty Images.

Duncan O’Leary is deputy director of Demos

Show Hide image

Mumslink shows how online parenting networks are coming of age

Women online are changing the relationship between digital domesticity and digital independence. 

The habit of “speaking as a mother” came in for its fair share of criticism this summer. Andrea Leadsom’s insinuation of superiority over Theresa May, her rival for the Tory leadership, elicited widespread scorn – not least from those who have done most to strengthen the voice of mothers as a group: internet mums.

Over the past 15 years, the ten million users a month who log on to Mumsnet have been courted by politicians in webchats and speeches alike. The 2010 general election was even named “the Mumsnet election” in their honour.

From the start, parenting networks attracted users interested in comradeship, as much as those after information. 

For Jo Williamson, a mother-of-two, the trigger was the day her second child left for school, a jarring experience. “I went into a blind panic, thinking: ‘Blimey, I’m going to be sitting in an empty house just waiting for everybody to come back.’” In response, Jo and her business partner Jane Pickard came up with the idea for a new site that focuses on the fluid nature of many women’s professional and family lives.

The resulting network, Mumslink, uses carefully edited news feeds to introduce readers to ideas, businesses and charities that complement all aspects of their lives – from recipe tips to volunteering. “There are so many women out there with a plethora of talents but most of the time, because you’re with your children, nobody asks you to get involved,” Williamson says.

Similar feelings of isolation led Siobhan Freegard to found Netmums, one of the UK’s largest parenting sites. Back in 2000, she had barely heard of “social networks”, nor of Mumsnet, which launched around the same time, yet she knew that mothers needed a place “to share their stories and maybe meet up in the offline world, too”.

Such identity-building led to divisions over “the right way” to be a mother. A tense rivalry developed between the slightly younger Netmums and the more educated and affluent Mumsnetters (Tesco and Waitrose didn’t sponsor different networks for nothing). Within the sites’ pages, differences of opinion over working v stay-at-home parenting sparked allegations of hostility and bullying. Still, the media researcher Sarah Pedersen says there’s an argument that these sites have helped produce a reduction in depression and anxiety, as well as greater opportunities for women to negotiate “the tension between themselves and their role as mothers”.

There are signs that this online culture is growing up. The perception of mums as “a bit insular and thick” is more easily countered, says Justine Roberts, the founder of Mumsnet, “now that so many mothers are able to express their individuality, their interests and their expertise in the public domain”.

According to Freegard, the very act of online sharing has helped begin to repair the rifts within the parenting debate. “With social media, we see working mums and part-time mums, and we see mums changing roles as their children change ages, and we understand that there are different angles to things – that everyone has their story.”

This is more pronounced in the world of video blogging, Freegard says. On her YouTube channel, Channel Mum, people talk calmly about controversial subjects that would have been a “bloodbath” on Netmums, such as ear piercing for very young children. “With video, you can see the person in real life and that helps you feel for their story,” she says.

Perhaps the greatest effect, however, has been on how the internet allows parents to work from home. As many as 160,000 part-time ventures have been started by British women in the past two years alone, self-styled kitchen-table start-ups. Sites such as Mumslink (similarly funded by Williamson and Pickard and run out of the former’s front room in Hertfordshire) aim to help this home-based workforce with new clients. One Mumslinker visits the site to write about her own line of natural nail varnish, another to promote her hot-tub business. The company Digital Mums uses it to encourage women to expand their digital skills.

Commercial savvy is something that Freegard is also keen to develop at Channel Mum – equipping her contributors with financial advice and small stipends. “I remember looking at mummy bloggers and thinking, ‘You guys didn’t get properly organised,’” she says. Freegard points out that most early mum bloggers never grew their audience beyond those already involved in parenting online, and struggled to become more professional as a result.

Quite what the future relationships will be between the brands, businesses and audiences for information on parenting has yet to be established. Some users will baulk at being increasingly cast in the role of consumer. At the same time, the networks’ names – Mumsnet, Netmums, Mumslink, Channel Mum – suggest that parenting is still a woman’s domain.

Yet a better balance seems to be emerging in the relationship between digital domesticity and digital independence. Greater gender equality in the distribution of start-up funding, more job vacancies that allow flexible working, and increasing numbers of prominent women in the tech industry are just some of the things the community is striving to promote. In Britain, which has an ageing population and an ever-growing community of carers, the rise of these networks seems sure to be a net gain for us all. 

For more, visit: mumslink.com

India Bourke is the New Statesman's editorial assistant.

This article first appeared in the 25 August 2016 issue of the New Statesman, Cameron: the legacy of a loser