• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

Colm Keaveney calls for an end of the era of "welfare for life"


gijoe

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
15,377
Not exactly singing off the the 'protecting the most vulnerable' hymn sheet. Is this yet another shot across the bows of Eamon Gilmore?

Mr Keaveney said future Budgets had to make radical decisions such as recognising that the era of "welfare for life" was at an end -- and, at the other end of the scale, targeting high-profile tax exiles who pay no tax in Ireland.
Keaveney warns of middle-class strain - National News - Independent.ie
 
Last edited:


ruserious

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
29,621
Welfare should be generous enough to live on, but not enough to run away from paying work and should only be used as a safety net.
 
S

simeongrimes

Welfare should be generous enough to live on, but not enough to run away from paying work and should only be used as a safety net.
But how do you do that when low paying work is barely generous enought to live on?
 

borntorum

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
12,805
I was listening to an interview Andy O'Mahony carried out with Eric Hobsbawm in the 90s. Hobsbawm was a Marxist, of course, but he pointed out that many of the social welfare programs that were created in the post war era were created at a time of full employment and when it was thought that this would be the new norm in the future. Therefore, social welfare programs were instituted on the basis that they would be little used. They were not intended to be mass programs to be relied on upon by many people for many years.
 

Analyzer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
46,189
Once again Keaveney is making comments that happen to point the finger at senior LP figures.

Did former Anglo Banglo employee Arthur Spring have anything to say about this. considering the way the banks are going these days ?
 

tigerben

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Messages
4,620
About time too, we all know people who have been on the dole/lone parents and other benefits for twenty + years. All people on full time benefits should be counted as unemployed( not pensioners) and then with the full figure known , broke down in to groups. Then the figure on full time benefits and the reason why would be known to the public. It might shock a lot of people and make the unemployment benefits figure look tame in comparison.
 

ruserious

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
29,621
But how do you do that when low paying work is barely generous enought to live on?
Tax breaks to small businesses to allow them pay their staff more or take on more workers which will just go back into the economy anyway, spinning the wheel of wealth.
 

hmmm

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
2,834
There's confusing messages from Labour at the moment. On the one hand, they don't want to cut the minimum wage, so guaranteeing that lower end jobs will not be created and leading to high unemployment, particularly amongst young people. They are also promising to protect social welfare rates, while at the same time saying that welfare can't be for life.
 

Podolski1.5

Well-known member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
576
When he talks about "welfare for life" I assume he means TDs, bankers and senior managerial pensions
 

Red_93

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
4,678
Not exactly singing off the the 'protecting the most vulnerable' hymn sheet.
Eh why isn't it? What he has effectively said is that we need to get people off long term welfare and back into the labour force. Few on the left or right would disagree that people should have jobs over relying on welfare.
 

Plebian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2011
Messages
9,342
Colm talking sh1te again and kissing up to the mythical middles-class now that you've ceded the working class to SF and the ULA/INDs. It's very simple, you only provide welfare for those who need it because of illness or qualify for it becuase of unemployment, as in they look for and take a job if it's there or they take a training place if offered. It's not rocket science, it can be sorted and it can be fair.

Or Colm, you take Govt spending and you do nothing significant to reform it in a value for money way such that it rolls back the waste at the top, and then you talk about social welfare lifers to deflect from the fact that you're taxing the middle class to pay for the unreformed state.
 

cottage_economist

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
527
I know a great many people drawing benefits, none of whom are lazy, deliberately unemployed, or find it easier to live on the dole than to work.

All of these people had jobs and were active contributors to the economy. Their jobs were taken from them, there is about one job to every 100 unemployed here in Mayo, so they have little chance of finding another. Anyone who believes dole (or the minimum wage) should be cut ought to put themselves in the position of these people.

Any suggestions as to what course of action, other than drawing benefits, they could take?
 

General Urko

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
15,761
Oh this disgusting redneck clown is definitely going to be a one term only TD! Rem getting the wife a job, taking it in the neck from multi-millionaire farmers concerned about their children.s full maintenance grants at 3rd level and now attacking and terrifying vulnerable people who have traditionally been the Labour party's main constituency. He is making himself the ultimate fake socialist and unlike some of his colleagues who are likewise, he will definitely be gone come next GE!
Basically if Labour allow the dole to be touched re amounts or eligibility rules it's 5th place in next GE!
Connolly and Larkin are already turning!
 

Con Gallagher

Well-known member
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
2,413
What about cutting the rate paid to new claimants? (After all this has been applied to new teachers and other new entrants to the public sector). But with the safety net that if someone gets a job who was on the old rate, they could still get the old rate if they lose that job within 12 months.

The same approach could be applied to the children's allowance for children born 9 months after budget day.

Disparity appears unfair and arbitrary but one can't miss what one never had.

Leaving aside the effect on the state budget, welfare for life puts someone in an undignified existence. It should be tackled by education, training, a decent minimum wage, targeting the black economy and ending the dependency/entitlement culture. (That culture is spread far further than those without jobs, as the recent debacle on public sector expenses has shown and the €500k plus banking jobs).
 

Marcos the black

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2009
Messages
18,708
Jaysus... I've been calling for this for years :). Not exactly earth shattering..
 

runwiththewind

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
12,697
About time too, we all know people who have been on the dole/lone parents and other benefits for twenty + years. All people on full time benefits should be counted as unemployed( not pensioners) and then with the full figure known , broke down in to groups. Then the figure on full time benefits and the reason why would be known to the public. It might shock a lot of people and make the unemployment benefits figure look tame in comparison.
Spot on tiger. Welfare was never meant to support people for life. I think we are seeing the beginings of the end for welfare state across Europe as it's no longer affordable.
 

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top