Seeff Slams "Broken Society" Claim (Chingford and Woodford Green Liberal Democrats)

Seeff Slams "Broken Society" Claim

January 31, 2010 12:06 PM

Following the latest research report from his "independent" think tank, Iain Duncan Smith and the Tories once again invoke the spectre of a "broken society" in an attempt to frighten law abiding citizens. Violence, child abuse, drink and drugs related crime and unwanted pregnancies are, they claim, more prevalent amongst children brought up by cohabiting parents who (they say) are less likely to provide a stable family life. They conclude from this that if marriage is encouraged through tax breaks, parents would stay together whilst bringing up their children and the problems will disappear. Geoff Seeff, LibDem prospective parliamentary candidate for Chingford and Woodford Green despairs at this reasoning.

Firstly, regardless of whether or not our current social problems, serious though they are, evidence a broken society, it is a fact that it has been ever thus. IDS would have you believe that there was some golden age when it was eternally spring, children played happily in green meadows and all adults were unfailingly civil to each other. The Victorian era was particularly brutal if you did not have health and wealth whilst the 20th century had more than its fair share of gangsterism, violence and abuse of children. The one major difference between then and now is that we know about the problems almost as soon as they occur, thanks to extensive media coverage.

One of a number of reasons for thinking that our society is functioning rather well is the fact that, more than ever, we have thousands of voluntary organisations raising funds and doing phenomenal work for a wide range of good causes, illustrating that most of us care about the human condition and the welfare of our fellow citizens. The overwhelming majority of citizens are hard working, law abiding folk who look after their families and join with their neighbours to try to create strong and supportive communities.

Everyone recognises the tragic consequences of family breakdown. However, it is not the fact of marriage that creates stability but the nature of the individual partners in a relationship and the influences on them. Responsible people will care for their children just as well regardless of marital status. Conversely, persuading inherently irresponsible people to go through the formalities of marriage will not help their offspring. In the recently reported case of the two feral children in Doncaster, the parents were married.

There are many compelling reasons to get married but Geoff doubts that a tax benefit features high on the list of those who want to make the commitment. Tax breaks for married couples will simply transfer money from where it is needed to people who don't need it, at least for the purpose of creating stability.

He proposes four policies to strengthen the social fabric:-

* Increase NHS use of counselling services for families having relationship and other difficulties. Talking therapies can be more effective and cheaper than dealing with the consequences of families breaking up.

* The creation of a volunteer "army" for young adults not in work or in further education. Participants will be paid to carry out community work or environmental projects under professional supervision. They will gain self-esteem, learn trade and life skills and develop respect for person and property.

* Ensure that education about alcohol and sex is modelled on the practices adopted on the Continent where there is far less incidence of binge drinking and teenage pregnancies.

* All individuals selling or serving alcohol should undergo training on responsible use of alcohol and be licensed personally. The licence will be lost if they knowingly sell alcohol to underage persons or to persons who are already or likely to be drunk. This is the system operating successfully in Australia.

Geoff does not claim that these measures will obviate poverty or make model citizens of us all. However, he says they they could each contribute to a significant improvement in general welfare and civil behaviour at much less net cost to the public purse than tax breaks for married couples.

Chingford and Woodford Green Liberal Democrats