VICTIM BLAMING: Former health secretary Alan Milburn speaks to the media on the publication of the interim Milburn Report into Young People and Work, at West Library Youth Employment Hub, north LondonThe Milburn review presents itself as a plan to help young people into work, but Dr DYLAN MURPHY argues it is laying the groundwork for a harsher benefits regime
THE publication of the interim report of the Milburn review into young people and work represents a sinister milestone in the ongoing neoliberal assault on the British welfare state.
Framed as a “discovery phase” to address the rising numbers of young people who are not in education, employment, or training (Neet), the report is a highly ideological document. It does not seek to understand or alleviate the profound, systemic barriers that keep sick and disabled young people out of the labor market. Instead, it serves as the vanguard for a punitive campaign of benefit cuts, increased conditionality, and state-sponsored coercion.
As a disabled person who has first-hand experience of the relentless hostility of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) towards disabled people claiming benefits, I find the contents of this report both terrifying and entirely predictable.
Rather than addressing the catastrophic collapse of the National Health Service, the sparsity of youth mental health services, or the structural refusal of employers to accommodate disabled workers, Alan Milburn has chosen to blame the victims. The report is a masterclass in political distraction, designed to prepare the public for a brutal tightening of the screws on some of the most vulnerable members of our society.
Redefining PIP: disability support as labour market discipline
One of the most alarming aspects of the Milburn review is its aggressive attempt to redefine the purpose of the personal independence payment (PIP). Since its inception as the replacement for the disability living allowance (DLA), PIP has been understood as a non-means-tested benefit designed to help disabled people meet the extra costs of living with a long-term health condition or disability.
It was never intended as an out-of-work benefit; it is paid regardless of employment status, because disabled people face additional costs whether they work or not.
Yet, Milburn laments this design as a systemic failure. He complains bitterly:
“At no point in a young person’s application or journey on PIP are they asked about, or supported to, work. This is not an accident of delivery. It is how PIP is designed.”
By framing the lack of work-focus in PIP as a “design flaw,” Milburn is paving the way for the benefit to be subjected to conditionality. If the state begins to demand “work-focused” outcomes as a condition for receiving PIP, it will destroy the benefit’s role as a financial safety net, leaving millions of disabled youth in poverty.
The concept of PIP as an “investment” for which there must be a “return” is a recurring theme throughout the report. Milburn complains that the state spends £8 billion a year on PIP and universal credit (UC) for young people, yet “for that investment, claimants are getting worse outcomes.”
This is the barbaric language of venture capitalism applied to human survival. To demand a financial “return” on the money spent to keep disabled people alive is the height of neoliberal depravity.
…
Original, long article continues at https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/class-war-other-means-milburn-review-and-neoliberal-assault-disabled-youth
