Anderson devised decommodification indices to measure the accessibility, coverage and performance of social welfare schemes, this led to his distinguishing 3 ideal type welfare regimes as the following;
- Conservative/corporist regime in which occupationally segregated benefits were introduced by conservative dominated governments to secure both working class adherence and middle class support (France, Germany, Austria)
- Social Democratic regime coalition of left wing labour organisations and farmers secured a state committed to full employment and generous redistributive universal welfare benefits, incorporating both middle and working class interests (Scandinavian, Sweden)
- Liberal Welfare regime in which the absence of stable cross-class alliances, state welfare mainly operated on selective lines as a residual safety net for the poor (USA,UK)
(Alcock P. 2003 p21,22)
Andersons liberal welfare regime in which the UK system operates (as we shall see later) distributes unequally and discriminatory which in turn leads to marginalisation of it’s members of society and notion of citizenship results in conflict compared to the Swedish social democratic regime in which distribution is universal hence equal amongst all members participation and full membership of citizenship hence based on the notion of solidarity.
The term citizenship implies different things in different welfare states and depending on the states notion of citizenship can we determine the individuals location as citizens. T, H Marshall perceives the development of citizenship as a process with it’s own internal dynamic over and above the class conflicts which he recognises to exist in society, he argues that there was decreasing income inequality between occupations, and, there has been ‘the great extension’ of common culture social solidarity based. He suggested, on increasing common experiences across society, finally there was a search for equality within society, which led to the enrichment of the universal status of citizenship; this ‘enrichment’ is fundamentally about the gaining of ‘rights’ by individuals. These involve three sets of rights, civil refers to legal equality, political rights refer to the extension of the franchise and social rights refer to ‘equality of opportunity to educational, medical and welfare services. His account of citizenship claims to be a universalistic one, that citizenship can be applied to any society and at any time.
“Citizenship is status bestowed and those who are full members of a community. All who possess the status are equal with respect to rights
and duties with which the status is bestowed”
( T, H Marshall et al Lister 1997 pp28,29)
His model of citizenship put forward a new model of citizenship based on economic, social and political rights, all of which are characteristic of this collective approach to social welfare after 1945. This model of ‘social citizenship’ was to be challenged with by the Conservative Party and Thatchers victory in 1979, with promises of less state intervention, lower levels of public spending (which equated in substantial cuts in welfare spending) on housing and stricter eligibility criteria for benefits, the Thatcher
years had in effect eroded the political consensus in favour of a market led welfare state.
The political, economic and social changes have forced the present New Blair Government to rethink of the term ‘citizenship’ rather than just looking at poverty and access to social rights (the traditional basis of the post war welfare state) but also as entailing the performance of certain social duties/responsibilities, in which conceptions of ‘citizenship have become increasingly bound up with ‘duty’ to take up offers of employment or training from the state. Here the stress is on individual responsibility to participate as an active citizen by ensuring he/she has an adequate provision for retirement etc as opposed to the more traditional notion of individual citizens having a right to social protection against core risks such as sickness, unemployment, old age etc- supplied by the state through public taxation.
Blair governments main strategy to tackle poverty and equality is through ‘social inclusion’ as Blair quotes:
“the millennium symbolises a new era opening for Britain… our main
aim is no less than to set British political life on a new course for the
future”
Tony Blair, Labour party 1997
‘Social Inclusion’, pledges to clearly strengthen the rights of British citizens of the Maastricht Treaty. Which brings us back to previously discussed policy spending and pensions for older people. Public spending policies, NSF and pensions in the UK
One of the main sources of exclusion is the labour market pensions policies were implemented as a labour market device to encourage the exit of older workers, At present the government are mindful of the decline in the numbers of young people entering employment and the cost of pensions, the government is currently running campaigns to try to persuade employers to recruit or retain older workers through the new deal 50+ and other similar programmes.
Older people face considerable discrimination from their employers i.e. age restrictions in job advertisements are a common barrier to employment, employers also restrict access to training programmes to workers under the age of 50, they also hold stereotypical attitudes towards older people i.e. they are hard to train, more cautious (hence slower), cannot adapt to new technology etc although there is no evidence of this, discrimination exerts a powerful influence over the life chances of older people. Such discriminatory attitudes not only offend social justice but increasingly at odds with Britians ageing population and the workforce.
The British government has tried to combat such discrimination by educating employers, most recently via a voluntary code of practice about the value of recruiting and retaining older workers. Additionally, the European Directive requires that the present government is to enact anti-age-discrimination legislation by 2006.
Pensions are one of the central social policy issues but they are also one of the most contentious because of their sheer scale and their escalating cost in an ageing society. Social security is by far the largest single expenditure programme in the UK and over half of it is devoted to older people. Older people form one of the largest groups of people living in poverty in the UK and are poorer than those in Sweden.
As previously mentioned the post war Labour government introduced the NI pension which is financed on a Pay as you go (PAYG) basis. This means that the NI contributions of those in employment go to pay the pensions of those in retirement. Other important elements of state welfare provision such as NHS and social services are financed on a similar basis. However the PAYG system was vulnerable to political interference Margaret Thatcher whilst cutting public expenditure and because of the scale of pension spending, this was the prime target therefore the government altered the uprating link for Ni pension from earnings to prices, therefore the reduction of the value of the existing pensions in addition the government 1986 cut in half the value of SERP. These cuts had a deterrent effect on younger generations – undermining their confidence in the state pension and encouraging them to invest in private pensions. If this trend continues the NI pension would have been worth less than 10% of average earnings come 2020. At present the basic pension for males based on 44 years full NI contributions and 39 years full contribution for females.
Adequate pension funds are a crucial aspect to tackle poverty in older age, as the chairman of pension commission states;
“if pensioners are not to be poorer in old age, or if the future workers
are not to give up much more consumption to fund other peoples
old age, the average working life is going to be longer, there is an inevitability about it”.
(Adair Turner The Guardian 16th October 2004)
Currently The Blair govt has implemented a further change to the pension system by enhancing the ‘partnership’ between the state and the private sector; therefore public expenditure by the state on pensions will shift towards the private sector. Improvements in the position of the poorest pensions was seen as a priority and this is achieved through the provision of the means tested Minimum Income Guarantee which is more or less a form of income support for older people.
As for long term care for older people, in 2000 the government produced the NHS plan nursing care provided free (paid by taxation) and personal care which is not. In addition, National Service Framework for Older People 2001 was outlined building upon more positive treatment in policy of later life, it sets out 8 standards addressing the health care needs of older people and principle among these is the rooting out of age discrimination in delivery of health care of person centred care, promoting health and independence for older people and matching services to individuals needs. And although it gives older people more say in their own health delivery does not however always come cost free to them for example, depending on the individuals resources, if the older person has property or other capital they will be penalised when it comes to residential care as they will be required to pay part of, or all of their costs. In addition, the Fair Access to Care Services which introduced eligibility framework can also be seen a form of oppression, as should a person be found to be in the low category of need the authority is not however obliged to provide support.
The present day aging population are also affected on a social scale, the plight of older people whose resources are insufficient to enable them to enjoy the average quality of life taken by granted by the majority of citizens, although these citizens may be technically living above the official poverty line, they are nevertheless ‘deprived’ in relation to others for example they spend the best part of their pension on food and therefore are denied access to other social needs such as shopping for new clothes, hairdresser/barbers, travelling abroad, going to pub for a pint, visiting family who do not reside nearby and so on.
In comparison the Swedish Institutional model of welfare, this model as previously mentioned rests on the concept of a more comprehensive welfare state which provides universal services, available to all citizens whose needs are not satisfied by the market, based upon the principles of equal rights, entitlements, and citizenship and not based on means testing but as universal basis of citizenship. Welfare in Sweden is an integrated part of public policies, which the state provides benefits and services for citizens outwith the market, unlike in the UK. Sweden as a Social Democratic State (Epsing Anderson) provides social protection on an more equal basis compared to the UK, as it provides to citizens regardless of age, status and income, the state does not wait until their citizens have exhausted all means before intervention. As the key element on the provision of welfare services is universalistic, provided for on the basis of ‘rights’ and ‘citizenship’, hence a solidaristic approach to welfare provision.
The Adel reform which is the Swedish policy came into force in 1992 giving all the responsibility for the health and social care of older people to the local authorities Municipalities). The aim was to create a better organised structure of services, thus making it possible to use resources more efficiently. With the reform the municipalities received a great deal of financial autonomy, which created a strong incentive for them to expand their own housing and care facilities for older people. A great majority of elderly people in Sweden live in their own home, this is undoubtedly sustained by the high quality of community care services. The government also make available grants for housing adaptions so it is easier for people to remain in their own homes. This is also funded by the Swedish state welfare. With the National Action Plan on Policy introduced in January 1999 aimed to combat the inequalities and oppression that many older people can be facing. The Swedish Riksdag has defined the following objectives for the national policy regarding older people primarily as
“citizens with entitlement to live an active life and have a say in their
everyday live secondly, that they are can grow old in security and retain
their independence and finally that older citizens shall be treated with
respect and have access to good health and social services”
1st Oct 2004
The Swedish pension system which aims to lift pensioners out of poverty, the pension system is based on a flat rate pension covering the entire population financed through taxes and is supplemented by occupational pension schemes for the active part of the population. There are three tiers to the pension, the first is the guaranteed pension, this is flat rate state basic pension, which can be claimed by all citizens at age 65. The second tier is an income based pension, based on your working years, this is a mandatory pension scheme which all employees and employers must contribute to. The third tier is the premium pension and is a small portion, the other 2.5 from earning contributions, which is invested as premium funds. This Swedish system is reliant on high levels of unemployment, rather than being heavily reliant on state welfare as in the UK.
The power that any welfare system holds can be overwhelming, in that, how it can manifest itself in an oppressive or an emancipatory sense, oppressive -lack of resources, access to full participation for older people within society, emancipatory – can contribute to full participation within society. For example, the Swedish welfare system is more inclusive, as it goes further than the UK in it’s commitment, involves participation of females who are encouraged and supported within the workforce, with equal earnings as males and are equally entitled to benefits and pensions, this is in contrast with the UK welfare system, women are not treated as equals, they are discriminated against, for example women work part time, paid less than males, time rearing children and early retirement therefore have substantially less NI contributions as noted in the pension policy institute;
“there will always be disadvantage with the pension system the UK has,
which assumes people are employed throughout working life on a good income… women, disabled… are all disadvantaged. The current system produces significant underpensions.”
(PPI 27 Nov 2003)
In addition strict eligibility restrictions formerly meant that only 60% of women had access to job protection and wage replacement. (Sainsbury, D. 1996).
In conclusion, older peoples income determines their health and social living conditions this is why work history for income in later life is important, because it is during working life that entitlements to state, occupational and personal pensions are built together. Income is also an important and necessary resource for participation, especially in the domain of consumption, social networks and culture. Although Sweden as a social democratic state appears to retain more positive aspects compared to the UK’s liberal model one must remember that it also has it’s weaknesses, as a highly egalitarian welfare system can be too expensive and thus increasingly vulnerable in a global environment which seems to be forcing welfare retrenchment. In recent years Sweden has made enormous efforts to adjust their welfare systems to cope with different global economic and domestic pressure, without compromising their social corporate character. More emphasis has been placed on active labour market policies to ensure high levels of employment, benefits have been reduced a little, some privatisation of service delivery has taken place, and the Swedish pension reform has been quite far reaching and has moved towards the residual model of welfare which is also subject to a ‘pension crisis’.
Wordcount 3340
Bibliography
Adair Turner in Philip Inman What Can You Do To Avoid Pension Crisis? The Guardian 16th October 2004
Alcock, P. Erskine, A. May, M. 2003 Social Policy Blackwell Oxford
Lister, R 1997 Citizenship, Feminist Perspective Macmillan Basingstoke Hampshire
OECD .
Pension Policy Institute
Sainsbury, D. 1996 Gender Equality and The Welfare State Cambridge University Press Cambridge
Swedens Policy
Sweden Government 2004