Why church leaders are wrong to attack welfare cuts

Another day, another welfare row. The practical outworking of the Government’s most controversial idea – that people on welfare should actually be better off in work, continues to spark outrage. Today it is church leaders who line up to try to land punches on Iain Duncan Smith, making an attack on his decision that welfare payments (like the average salary) should not keep pace with inflation.

In leading the biggest package of welfare reform since the first foundation stone of social security was laid by William Beveridge, IDS is familiar with the poverty lobby’s ongoing shock-and-awe strategy. Yet like so many who have gone before, today’s critics miss the bigger picture.

Undoubtedly there are serious problems with some of the Government’s approaches to reducing the working welfare budget: regional benefit caps would have been fairer; tacking under-occupancy in social housing should have been designed differently; the endless commitment to throwing bungs at rich pensioners and middle class couples is unjustifiable; and many of the imminent measures should have been applied to new claimants only to save some immediate pain.