That we have to choose between economic prosperity and adequate incomes and benefits for all people. The research has shown that it was not necessary for those on benefits and low incomes to suffer as much as they did during the reform process. We need to challenge the myth that those who are concerned about poverty are opposed to all the economic reforms and to economic prosperity. This is not the case and need not be so. Many of the economic reforms, such as the removal of subsidies, were if not necessary, probably inevitable in an economy which is increasingly global.
Prosperity is to be encouraged.
That discerning between the deserving and undeserving poor is both possible, desirable and helpful. Our welfare system has built into its structures a fear of the undeserving getting more than is their due and of the need for retribution or sanctions to discourage the undeserving from 'ripping off the system'. The desire to differentiate between the deserving and the undeserving poor is, I believe, one of the underlying factors behind the change to a more targeted benefit system, and is behind the benefit cuts and the suggestions that the unemployment benefit should be time limited. However, the evidence shows that the reasons people are on benefits are complex and most often have to do with macro-economic and structural issues that are beyond the control of an individual. Overseas research has also shown that cutting benefits has a very small impact on labour force participation.