Tony Blair has chosen to speak out on the moral crisis of the welfare state but he may have raised expectations that he cannot fulfil. Stating that you cannot take out what you do not put in is aimed as much at taxpayers as at clai-mants, because Blair knows that restoring confidence in the welfare state is good politics as well as sound economics. A willingness to talk about fundamental reform of welfare means breaking with the moral relativism which dogged Labour for much of the postwar era, and which disconnected it from ordinary voters throughout the 1980s. Judging by the reaction to his speech, the prime minister has achieved his immediate political objective. He has succeeded in setting the stage for a programme of reforming social security without, as yet, having to announce the details.
Optimists argue that it does.
They say that Blair's speech was simply the first stage, a necessary softening up exercise. The appointment of Frank Field, whose views on remoralising welfare are well known, and Martin Taylor of Barclays Bank, who will attempt to fuse together taxes and benefits, are seen as signs of the prime minister's ultimate ambitions. From now on, political objectives will determine the shape of the social security system, not the other way round. This is a long way from post-ideology, where what counts is what works. It is also a distinctly American theme, picked up in a recent Social Market Foundation book by Robert Skidelsky, Beyond the Welfare State.