Tag Archives: benefits sanctions

Jack Nicholls

Young people need liberal listening, not authoritarian threats

By Jack Nicholls | Mon 25th November 2024 - 12:27 pm

Young people, so says the DWP Secretary, must ‘learn or earn’ or lose benefits. Be warned, dear reader, this is an angry post.

This announcement by Liz Kendall has put three things in my mind. Firstly, never underestimate the excessive power of rhyme in policy creation. Secondly, the authoritarian parties will never resist the temptation to hammer young people with a mixture of higher expectations and the threat of less money. Thirdly, it reminded me of one of the formative experiences for my liberalism.

I have worked with young people during a couple of periods in a varied career. The young people …

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 37 Comments
Caron Lindsay

What party members think about a universal basic income and benefits sanctions

By Caron Lindsay | Mon 19th September 2016 - 8:30 am

Lib Dem Voice has polled our members-only forum  to discover what Lib Dem members think of various political issues, the Coalition, and the performance of key party figures. 741 party members responded – thank you – and we’re publishing the full results.

The social security debate at Conference this afternoon will be dominated by two major arguments. George Potter recommended rejection of the motion as a whole because it chose not to endorse a universal basic income and because it supports the use, albeit much restricted, of sanctions. Supporters of the UBI may well support an amendment calling for a negative income tax from Calderdale while an amendment signed by members opposes the use of benefits sanctions in any circumstances. We asked our members what they thought of the idea of UBI and sanctions.

Are you in favour of a universal basic income?

Yes 60.32%

No  39.68%

Here are some of the comments made:

It would be a clear, distinct policy and place the Party firmly on the “Left” (which, as Charles Kennedy and Paddy Ashdown proved) is the only place it can survive.

The nature of work is changing and society needs to catch up. The markets can no longer be a funnel for the rich to build up their wealth. Redistribution needs to be far more aggressive.

No. It is fundementally wrong as it discriminates against the most vulnerable in society. Common denominators always end up being the lowest.

Continue reading »
Posted in Conference and LDV Members poll | Also tagged and | 31 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Simon R
    It's nice to see an attempt to not just suggest a policy but think through in detail how it could be implemented and how much it would cost. But @Mike Pete...
  • Steve Trevethan
    Thank you for a most interesting article. What is to stop paying N.H. S. staff decent attractive pay and making sure that they enjoy their work (mostly) with...
  • Craig Levene
    Nobody at moment Denis. Those who talk about AOC or Newsom just goes to show how detached the Dem party is from reality. They only have themselves to blame for...
  • Mick Taylor
    Unfettered capitalism -of the sort Donald Trump gavour - is not good for workers or consumers. This was recognised even by Adam Smith, who whilst thinking capit...
  • Denis Loretto
    Who is the leader or even potential leader of the Democrats? What prospect is there of their putting together an inspiring campaign? Is their only hope a fall-a...