Tory benefits sanctions condemned as 'class war' against the poor

Webster attacked the sanctions system - which sees financial penalties imposed on claimants for alleged breaches in jobcentre rules - as a "scattergun" approach which fails to take into account most people do want jobs.

He argued the punitive element began with Margaret Thatcher's policies in the wake of de-industrialisation in the 1980s and is continuing with Conservative politicians today promoting the view that benefit claimants are a separate group from "hard-working taxpayers".

This trend is reflected in the rise of so-called 'poverty porn' on television, which was established by Channel 4 series Benefits Street. Last week the BBC sparked controversy after it emerged it is planning a new show called Britain's Hardest Grafter, which will make the unemployed and low-paid workers compete against each other for a cash prize.

Webster, who will deliver a talk on the sanctions system at Glasgow University tomorrow, said the system is based on the false assumption that claimants are "skiving" and that people have to be forced into employment.

He blames the "ruling elite" for failing to recognise the impact of the de-industrialisation of the 1980s and the subsequent detrimental effect on the jobs economy.

He said: "If you have a big wipe-out of people's livelihoods like this, then the adjustment takes a very long time. You are talking about decades. Basically it was expected that somehow employment would bounce back much more quickly than in fact was realistic.

"So they invented theories about cultures of worklessness, which basically all boil down to saying the problem is the unemployed people themselves, rather than the economy not generating employment.

"It then follows from that you have got to push people into doing more to look for work and lowering their expectations.

"In other words people have got to be prepared to work for less and be less choosy about jobs - so you have got to put more pressure on them."

He added: "In my opinion, it is a class issue - it is because power in society is held by people who simply have no interest or understanding of poor people and just can't relate to their experience.

"The sanctioning system is part of that whole world view and it has grown incrementally since the 1980s. When the Thatcher government came into power in1979, unemployment insurance system involved very little pressure on unemployed people at all.

"But the Thatcher government started bringing in more requirements on the unemployed."

Sanctions involve a reduction in benefit - often to nil - and can range from one week up to as long as three years.

Webster said while the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) claimed that around 5% of all Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) claimants were sanctioned monthly, he calculated the annual number to be as high as 20%.

He also said the DWP was saving "significant amounts" of money through the sanctions system - an estimated £330million annually in direct savings and as much again when factors such as people being deterred from trying to claim benefits were taken into account.

Last week the Queen's Speech to parliament, containing the government's legislative plans for the year ahead, included a pledge by the Conservatives to save £12 billion from the welfare bill. This will include a freeze on working-age benefits for two years, but other targets have not yet been revealed.

Webster attacked the notion of 'them and us' and that taxpayers are somehow different to welfare claimants.

"That is not the reality," he said. "In the five years up to 2014 there were over eight million people who claimed JSA. During that period the number of people who were on JSA at any one time was only 1.5million. So you are talking about a huge turnover."

In March, MPs on the House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee concluded a wide-ranging independent review of the benefit sanctions regime is urgently needed. It heard evidence that sanctions were often being used for trivial infringements and left claimants struggling to cope without income.

Hanna McCulloch, policy and parliamentary officer at charity Child Poverty Action Group in Scotland said imposing sanctions was a "false economy" as it meant other public services had to pick up the pieces.

She said: "It throws people into a crisis situation, who then have to rely on homelessness or mental health services, or who miss medical appointments as they don't have the bus fare to go and get there.

"There is just this snowball effect which has an impact on local, publicly funded services as a result and it is local authority and Scottish Government funded organisations and the NHS which are going to increasingly feel the burden of this.

"There is also the cost of sanctions in terms of personal cost. Quite often family relationships break down as people living apart from their children don't have the bus fare to go and see them."

The DWP said sanctions in Scotland had fallen from 84,200 in 2013 to 55,864 in 2014 and the conditions for receiving benefits are always made clear to jobseekers.

A spokesman added: "The number of sanctions in Scotland is falling as more claimants fulfil their commitments to look for work.

"The truth is that every day Jobcentre Plus advisers are helping people into work, with a near record number of people now in jobs.

"Sanctions are only used as a last resort for the tiny minority who refuse to take up the support which is on offer."

Examples of sanctions collected by the Child Poverty Action Group in Scotland:

A father with dyslexia, spinal arthritis and a chronic lung condition was sanctioned for not attending a 'work-focused' interview. He told the Jobcentre in advance that he didn't have enough money to get to the office. He was then told to walk to appointment, but was unable to due to health conditions. He was sanctioned for 13 weeks.

One man could not sign on because his children were left with him unexpectedly by their mother. He was sanctioned for 15 days.

The lone parent of a five-year-old child was sanctioned for four weeks for failing to keep an appointment with her careers adviser. She had been in the jobcentre for her first appointment but, due to being misdirected, did not hear them call her name.

A woman with two children - a three-year-old and a fifteen-year-old - was sanctioned for being ten minutes late for an appointment because of problems with public transport.

A pregnant woman with two young children failed to complete mandatory work activity because she did not have access to a computer. She was without money for six days.

One man was sanctioned for missing an appointment with his job centre. He went without money for several weeks and in the interim he was arrested for shoplifting food.

One father was sanctioned because he forgot to bring his documents with him to an appointment. It took several weeks before he received a hardship payment and he had to rely on the charity of family and friends to feed his young son.