Liz Kendall says living on benefits won’t be an option under Labor

The party said there would be “no way to live on benefits” under a Labor government as it set out plans to reduce the number of young people not in work, education or training.

Shadow work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall said the party would recruit a further 8,500 mental health workers and promised that the sickness benefits bill would be Labour’s responsibility.

But Kendall did not specify what form tougher measures on universal credit would take.

“Under our transformed Labour, there will be no choice to live on welfare if you can work,” she said in a speech at Demos, a centre-left think tank in London, as she sought to outline Labour’s view of “investment” in the economy. promise. young people.

“Not just because the British people believe rights should go hand in hand with responsibilities. But because being unemployed at a young age or lacking basic qualifications can damage your job prospects and wages for the rest of your life.”

The tough language on benefits – reminiscent of New Labor in the 1990s – has raised concerns about the impact of sanctions on those struggling with mental health problems.

Kendall also spoke of overhauling jobcentres, ending the “tick-box culture” and devolving employment support to local areas, “because the men – and even the women – of Whitehall will never know what is right for Leicester, Liverpool and Leeds is the best”.

She also took aim at what she said was “the Conservative Party’s claim to be tough on benefits” and said 600,000 people would be receiving incapacity and disability benefits over the next five years, costing an extra £33 billion.

Kendall was speaking as new figures revealed that almost 851,000 young people aged 16-24 are not in education, employment or training (Neet) – a figure that has increased by 20,000 in a year. This is mainly due to the increase in NEET young people.

Kendall was challenged during the question and answer session by Ollie Steadman, policy and campaigns manager at charity Mind, who welcomed Kendall’s emphasis on the need for “high quality” work before commenting.

But, he added: “Many of these people may be a little concerned about discussions about liability and that could lead to sanctions and a wider or harsher system that is not conducive to mental health.”

Stedman later said: “Supporting disabled people to find long-term, fulfilling employment can only be achieved through supportive approaches. Punitive action will not work and will only push disabled people further into poverty.

“Whoever forms the next UK government should restore trust in the benefits system by establishing a commission led by disabled people to redesign benefits assessments.”

Responding to his question, Kendall said there was clear evidence that having a good job was very good for mental health, adding: “We know that if you work well, you can reduce your relapses by a third. Even half that. It’s better for you. It’s better for the NHS and it’s better for the taxpayer.”

Other concerns were expressed by Dr Michael Orton of the Institute of Employment Studies at the University of Warwick, who welcomed much of what Kendall had outlined, particularly around devolved employment support.

“But there are questions about how different this is from the schemes of the 1980s and the evidence that these schemes had a marginal impact at best,” he said.

“Some key issues are not mentioned, including fluctuating health conditions, which standard work cannot accommodate, and the need to update our social care system to cope with new challenges, rather than repeating punitive practices that do more harm than good.”