ON YOUR BIKE!...You First, Iain

So we've already had the massacre of the budget out of the way, we know the big stories behind it and what is facing the cuts. I don't think we need to go over already well-trodden ground. But IDS, the artist formerly known as the Quiet Man, has eschewed his right to silence by announcing what could be the most idiotic move since the Budget.

The Telegraph writes:

'Iain Duncan Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, discloses the move in an interview with The Sunday Telegraph in which he outlines proposals to make the workforce “more mobile”.

..Mr Duncan Smith, the MP for Lord Tebbit’s former parliamentary seat of Chingford, disclosed that ministers were drawing up plans to encourage jobless people living in council houses to move out of unemployment black spots to homes in other areas, perhaps hundreds of miles away.

The former Conservative Party leader said millions of people were “trapped in estates where there is no work” and could not move because they would lose their accommodation'

Now, let's ignore the human cost of thousands if not millions of people upping sticks to move hundreds of miles to places they have no links or roots, no common familial or historical ties. Let's ignore the idea that the people living in these 'economic hotspots' might take exception to these large numbers of newcomers arriving in their town or city and increasing competition for housing and pay. Let's ignore the idea that people like living in certain areas because they have a history and family in the area. Let's also ignore the fact that the Tories are treating the unemployed simply as a faceless economic statistic without any intrinsic humanity. Let's deal with the economics of this idea, the flaws in simply getting people to move to area where the employment situation is much healthier.

Firstly, if this is really applied on a big enough scale, all it will do is hurry along the deaths of already struggling towns and cities. It's common to see and hear about the unemployment in 'the great Northern cities.' Indeed, what IDS is proposing is very similar to a report released 2 years ago by the Policy Exchange, whereby

'Cities in northern England such as Liverpool, Sunderland and Bradford are "beyond revival" and residents should move south, a think tank has argued.'

The problem with this is that with a large departure of people, the increase of ghost towns up and down the country is all but inevitable - the fear of creating 'economic blackspots' becomes a self-full-filling prophecy.

The second problem with this idea is that it is a cripplingly short-sighted one. Who's to say that those areas which are thriving currently will always stay that way? When there is an economic downturn, no one is sheltered from it barring the very rich. And as long as capitalism continues to exist these crises will be a common fact of life, the never-ending cycle of boom and bust. There is no assurance that areas will remain forever-prosperous, and should a future economic disaster hit these areas while this scheme is in place, you can bet there WILL be tensions between the old community and the new arrivals.

There is also an issue with how this policy would actually be implemented. It is implied that this is a strictly voluntary exercise for people in order to get them out of deprivation, to 'incentivise' leaving for better opportunities. But what if people refuse this offer? What if they choose to remain in the blackspots? If nothing was to happen to them, then there is really no point in having the policy. If the benefits of these people were to be cut, you exacerbate the problem you had in addition to undermining how 'voluntary' this scheme really is.

The policy is extremely 'abandon hope all ye who enter', (longstanding Tory motto since 1979) the solution being to simply move somewhere better. It wouldn't be an easy thing to accomplish, but what's wrong with attempting to fix these areas of economic disadvantage? Would it not be possible, ney, preferable to rebuild some form of productive industry in these failing areas? Could we not embark on a major public works programme, or create more of these green jobs we were promised in 1997? Is this not a worthy thing to aim for to save communities from destruction, early death and high rates of both drug addiction and violent crime? ...No, best move to Oxford, the proles will learn their place very easily there!