V SAT GE. Potefiatcm - galeras, y vexells 3 ía Majeftat,

ca 3 galeras, y vexells 3 ía Majeftat,

XII. V SAT GE. Potefiatcm

4.1 Introduction

This chapter aims to set the scene for the empirical research by drawing on evidence from government-commissioned evaluations in the three countries. Section 4.2 considers the policy ‘problem’ representation and the evidence relating to why partnered women are outside the labour market. Section 4.3 considers the policy responses. In Britain, this predominantly includes the New Deal for Partners from 1999, but also Joint Claims for Jobseeker’s Allowance for couples without children and the Partners Outreach for Ethnic Minorities pilot, along with some consideration of the Welfare Reform Act 2009. In Australia the story begins with the 1994 Working Nation reforms to income support for partners and subsequent reforms to Parenting Payment for partnered and lone parents. Australians Working Together (from 2002) introduced activity requirements for recipients of this payment with teenaged children and Welfare to Work (from 2006) increased the obligations to take up paid work for parents with children aged over six. In Denmark since 2006 the 300 hours rule (subsequently 450 hours rule) has required married couples claiming social assistance to test their eligibility for payment by requiring them to have accrued 300 hours of paid work in a two-year period. This programme is considered in the context of Danish activation since 1994. Section 4.4 highlights relevant evaluation evidence concerning the effects of the programmes which, it is argued, are too narrowly focused on short-term measures of employability and decreased welfare caseloads. Section 4.5 concludes the chapter with a summary.

81 4.2 The policy ‘problem’

The focus on non-working partners in all three countries has been peripheral to activation policies. To some extent in Britain the labour market participation of non-working partnered women is only just starting to be recognised in terms of its potential impact on reducing child poverty (Campbell, 2008: 467). In Australia, McInnes (2002) has argued that ‚The research evidence indicates that the most effective policies supporting single mothers’ labour market participation are those which support married mothers’ labour market participation, because workforce attachments which are in place before separation, tend to endure after separation‛

(p.2). There is no explicit focus on lone parents in the Danish encompassing model and partnered women do not feature in Danish activation, except in the 300 hours rule.

Kennett (2004) argues that ‚It is vital to analyse the processes through which a phenomenon becomes defined as a problem‛ (p.292). As stated in Chapter Three, the backdrop to this study is the total employment rates for women compared with men and the number of workless households in each of the countries (see Tables 4.1 and 4.2 below). Australia’s family worklessness is the second highest of all OECD countries after Britain and Denmark is the lowest of the three.

Table 4.1: Employment rates for women and men of working age, 2006

Men Women Difference

Australia 78.8 65.5 13.3

Denmark 80.6 73.2 7.4

UK 78.4 66.8 11.6

Source: OECD, 2008

Table 4.2: Share of working age population living in jobless households⁵⁸, 2005

UK Australia Denmark

Jobless households 16.3 14.2 9.2

Jobless households with children 14.9 11.9 4.7

Source: Whiteford, 2009: 23

In Britain of a total of 17.1 million families, couple families constitute 71 per cent (National Statistics, 2007: 3).⁵⁹ There are 277,000 workless couple households with dependent children and 658,000 workless couple households without dependent children (National Statistics, 2008), with approximately 350,000 partners receiving support through the benefits system (Department for Work and Pensions, 2008: 126).

The majority (69 per cent) of non-working partners are women living with a male partner (Department for Work and Pensions, 2004).⁶⁰ Appendix 2 contains tables showing the different types of income support received by couples by the number and age of dependent children.

In Britain since New Labour’s first welfare reform Green Paper (Department for Social Security, 1998) there has been a focus on reducing long-term and youth unemployment. The policy objective of assisting partners into work was to reduce the number of workless households by helping one person into work, as well as to address the polarisation between ‘work-rich’ and ‘work-poor households’ (Department for Social Security, 1998: 27). One of the purposes of the New Deal for Partners of the Unemployed was to bring into the remit of the public employment service a group with whom it had had little previous contact. New Labour ideology emphasised that the primary site for the reduction of a range of social ills and for social inclusion⁶¹ was

58 Jobless (or workless) households are where no adult of working age is in paid work. Households can refer to one or more tax/benefit family units. For a discussion of family units and households see Millar, J. (2006b) How low-paid employees avoid poverty: an analysis by family type and household structure. Journal of Social Policy, 35(3):351-369.

59 The British benefit system treats cohabiting couples in the same way as married couples. With the introduction of the Civil Partnership Act 2004, partners may be of the opposite or same sex.

60 It should be noted that over 100,000 female claimants with partners also receive support through the benefits system (DWP data May 2008).

61For example, in a speech delivered at the Aylesbury Estate, Southwark, London on 2 June 1997 Tony Blair famously stated that ‗work is the best form of welfare‘. See Millar, J. (2006a) Better off in work? Work, security and welfare for lone mothers, in Glendinning, C. & Kemp, P. A. (Eds.) Cash and care: policy

participation in paid activities within the labour market and the goal of child poverty reduction has been an axis on which to place a number of benefit and tax-related policies. Britain has around one in five children living in relative poverty⁶² and 19 per cent of them are in workless couples (Harker, 2006: 7, 15). The Labour Government set a target of halving the number of children in poverty by 2010-11, as a step on the way to eradicating child poverty by 2020.⁶³

As Serrano Pascual (2007) argues, ‚The UK shares a belief with the Nordic countries in the key role of work as a means of achieving economic and social welfare‛ (p.288).

However, a key difference between Britain and Denmark is the extent of Britain’s in-work poverty and this primarily affects couple families (Harker 2006: 47); 40 per cent of children in poverty are living in couple households where someone is actually working (Harker, 2006: 15, 17).⁶⁴ Policy goals which elevate labour market participation as the route out of (or to avoid) social exclusion are undermined by the existence of in-work poverty and hardship in households with one adult in paid work (Lyon et al., 2008). Partnered women’s income from paid work is important in preventing low-income families from moving into poverty (Millar and Glendinning, 1992, Gardiner and Millar, 2006), but it is not usually sufficient if she is the sole, low-paid worker, even when this is supplemented by in-work benefits (Lyon et al., 2008).

challenges in the welfare state. Bristol, Policy Press, 171-185. The ideology informing New Labour‘s approach to welfare reform was informed by the Commission on Social Justice conducted whilst they were in opposition. Commission on Social Justice (1994) Social justice: strategies for national renewal, London, Vintage. See Bennett, F. & Millar, J. (2009) Social security: reforms and challenges, in Millar, J. (Ed.) Understanding social security. Issues for policy and practice (Second Edition). Bristol, Policy Press, 11-29.

62 Defined as living in a household with below 60 per cent median income before housing costs HARKER, L.

(2006) Delivering on child poverty: what would it take? , The Stationery Office.

63 This was pledged by Tony Blair in his Beveridge Speech in 1999 BLAIR, T. (1999) Beveridge revisited: a welfare state for the 21st century. IN WALKER, R. (Ed.) Ending child poverty. Bristol, Policy Press. These goals were enshrined in legislation in the Child Poverty Bill 2009, which came into force in 2010. The Labour government missed its interim target of reducing child poverty by a quarter between 1998-99 and 2004-05 (Harker, 2006: 7) and Harker suggests that achieving the 2010 child poverty target for couple households would involve increasing the percentage of dual-earner couple households from 57 to 65 per cent and decreasing the couple unemployment rate from five to four per cent (p.13).

64 The OECD states that in order to stay above the level of poverty (defined as 60 per cent of the median standard of living) in Europe, a couple requires one partner to work full-time at the national minimum wage and one to work part-time, whilst a single parent requires one full-time job and allowances OECD (2006b) Starting Strong II: early childhood education and care, Paris, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Despite around 70 per cent of poor children living in jobless families (Whiteford, 2009:

4) child poverty has not overtly been on the political agenda in Australia. In opening Labor's election campaign in 1987, Prime Minister Bob Hawke famously stated that

‚By 1990 no Australian child will be living in poverty‛ (Bessant et al., 2006: 106). This pledge was not met and was held over him; subsequent governments have attempted to distance themselves from the child poverty agenda. Australians Working Together (AWT) which increased the obligations for partnered and lone parents receiving Parenting Payment (see Section 4.3.2) was put forward as a poverty reduction measure, but this aspect was notably absent from Welfare to Work (Blaxland, 2008: 94, 212). In introducing Welfare to Work, the Howard government emphasised the financial benefits of working (similar to ‘making work pay’ in Britain), but did not mention ‘poverty’ (Blaxland, 2008: 211-2). One reason for the relative absence of the poverty agenda in Australia compared to Britain is ongoing debate about the measurement of poverty (interview with academic).⁶⁵ The discourse of joblessness is linked to concern about inter-generational poverty transmission (Whiteford, 2009).

However, Whiteford (2009) argues that in Australia in couples where one or both parents are in paid work, poverty rates are among the lowest in the OECD, thus ‚paid work provides effective protection against income poverty‛ (p.4). Tables A2.20 and A2.21 in Appendix 2 respectively show poverty rates for couple households with children and the distribution of child poverty in all three countries. For Australia and Britain there is a significant decrease in poverty for households where one or more adults are in work and the difference is greater in Australia. In Denmark there is less incidence of poverty across the board than in the other two countries and the distribution of child poverty is more equal.

In Australia there are 2.3 million couple families with children and 1.9 million couple families without children (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2008). In 2005 there were

65 There is no official poverty line, but the measure used in Australia is the Henderson line created in 1973 Bessant, J., Watts, R., Dalton, T. & Smyth, S. (2006) Talking policy: how social policy is made, Crows Nest, NSW, Allen and Unwin..

163,800 couple families with non-working working age males, comprising eight per cent of the total (Baxter, 2005: 2). Partnered women were employed in 39 per cent of these couples, compared with 74 per cent of couples with an employed male (Baxter, 2005: 2). Appendix 2 contains tables showing Parenting Payment Partnered (PPp) recipients by sex, payment category of their partner, age, country of birth and payment duration. The majority (90 per cent) of PPp recipients are female and the majority of their partners (56,087 of a total of 167,272 PPp claims) are on Newstart Allowance (equivalent to Jobseeker’s Allowance), or employed and on a low income.

Over 35 per cent have been recipients for three or more years and over 21 per cent have claims of under six months. Most (43 per cent) are aged between 30 and 39, but 23 per cent are aged between 20 and 29. The majority (63 per cent) are Australian-born.

The first reform Working Nation (1994) followed an inquiry by the Committee on Employment Opportunities⁶⁶ and, in the context of deep recession, its overarching aim was to reduce unemployment (particularly long-term) through economic growth. At this time there was a focus on bringing dependent partners into the income support system in their own right, based on analysis that such a small number of wives of unemployed men were in work because the institutional structure did not recognise them as labour force participants; further, the joint benefit entitlement and income tests disincentivised second earners (interview with former government official).

Subsequent pilots targeted at disadvantaged groups, as well as the next reform Australians Working Together (2002) were a response to the recommendations of the McClure Report (2000a) in relation to reducing the number of jobless families and assisting single and partnered parents into work.⁶⁷ The objectives of Welfare to Work were to increase workforce participation and reduce welfare dependence amongst

66 Committee on Employment Opportunities (1993) Restoring full employment. A discussion paper, Canberra, ACT, Commonwealth of Australia, Australian Government (1994) Working Nation: policies and programs, Canberra, ACT, Commonwealth of Australia.

67 The other two targets were: (i) a significant reduction in the proportion of the working age population who need to rely heavily on income support and (ii) stronger communities that generate more opportunities for social and economic participation.

working age income support recipients (particularly groups outside the labour market, including parents),⁶⁸ whilst maintaining a strong safety net for those who needed it (Department for Education Employment and Workplace Relations, 2010: 3). This has some similarities with New Labour’s welfare reforms, emphasising ‘work for those who can, security for those who cannot’ (Department for Social Security, 1998: iii).

Over the three years following Welfare to Work, 109,000 people were expected to enter employment, 56,000 of these being parents⁶⁹ (Senate, 2005b).

In Denmark there are 1,332,382 couples (Statistics Denmark 2009)⁷⁰ and Table A2.15 in Appendix 2 shows the total number of married couples claiming social assistance: in 2008 there were 35,831 married couples with children and 12,633 without children receiving cash-benefits. It was estimated that around 6,000 couples would be affected by the 300 hours rule and that around 1,200 people would lose their cash-benefits.⁷¹ The focus of the 300 hours rule was immigrant married couples and in particular immigrant women in these couples, based on their comparatively lower employment rates. Table A2.16 in Appendix 2 shows the economic activity and employment rates for both Danish and immigrant women; notably, the employment rate for immigrant women has steadily increased from 27 per cent to 47 per cent between 1997 and 2007.

In Denmark policy goals for activation include assisting young people and long-term unemployed people into work. The policy goal of the 1994 labour market reforms was to reduce long-term unemployment and to reduce the duration for which unemployment benefit could be claimed, as well as to reduce the possibility of the

68 Other target groups were mature aged, long-term unemployed people and people with disability;

membership of these groups may overlap.

69 The rest were 20,000 people with disabilities, 15,000 very long-term unemployed, 11,000 mature age, plus 7,000 additional recipients due to the income support taper rate changes Senate (2005b) Inquiry into the Employment and Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Welfare to Work and other Measures) Bill 2005 and the Family and Community Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare to Work) Bill 2005, 23 November 2005. Department of Employment and Workplace Relations Questions on Notice, Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia.

70 Incorporating married couples, registered partnerships, couples living in consensual union and cohabiting couples.

71 Interview with government official.

‘carousel’ of benefits and work.⁷² Initiatives in the 2000s such as the 300 hours rule have been driven by the policy goal of increasing the workforce through the social integration of immigrants. Danish employment policy is underpinned by the requirement to promote labour market flexibility in relation to the ‘golden triangle’ of

‘flexicurity,’ comprising flexible employment protection,⁷³ encompassing social protection and activation. The Danish Government’s aim is that 25,000 more immigrants and descendants should be employed by 2010 (www.nyidanmark.dk).

The policy responses to partnered women outside the labour market in all three countries share similar policy goals: of increasing the labour market participation of this group, or a particular sub-group of partners and also to reduce the numbers receiving benefits. However, in Britain and Australia the policy goal was initially to target partnered women not engaged with the benefits system or employment assistance. In Denmark partnered women, whether parents or carers of adults, had been subject to the same activation rules as other benefit recipients. As we will see in this thesis, this is a crucial variation between Denmark and the other two countries.

Each country has a flexible labour market but although each experienced recession in the 1980s, only Denmark has had a labour shortage. All countries share the policy goals of reducing long-term unemployment by targeting particular groups, such as young people, ethnic minorities (and in Australia Indigenous people) and of assisting sick and disabled people into work. However, in Denmark such targeting is in the context of encompassing activation. The next section examines evidence relating to

72 The scope of leave programmes was also curtailed, along with job rotation. See Goul Andersen, J. &

Pedersen, J. J. (2007) Continuity and change in Danish active labour market policy: 1990-2007. The battlefield between activation and workfare. CCWS Working Paper No. 2007-54, Aalborg, Centre for Comparative Welfare Studies, Aalborg University, Etherington, D. & Jones, M. (2004a) Welfare-through-work and the re-regulation of labour markets in Denmark. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 22:129-148.

73 There is no Dismissal Protection Act, but the right to give notice is a central concern of union collective agreements Kvist, J., Pedersen, L. & Köhler, P. A. (2008) Making all persons work: modern Danish labour market policies, in Eichhorst, W., Kaufmann, O. & Konle-Seidl, R. (Eds.) Bringing the jobless into work?

Experiences with activation schemes in Europe and the US. Berlin, Springer, 221-256.

why partnered women are not in the labour market in each country, to highlight the similarities and differences amongst the groups.

4.2.1 Why are partnered women outside the labour market?

Examining the range of possible reasons for couple worklessness is important for two reasons. Firstly, to compare the Australian and Danish cases with that of Britain and, secondly, because suggested reasons for a policy ‘problem’ should in theory inform the policy response. If we do not fully understand the reasons why someone is not in work, the policy response may be rendered ineffective. So, the policy response should be informed by what we know about ‘what is not working,’ rather than merely focusing on ‘what works’ in active labour market policies.

Drawing on Hakim’s Preference Theory⁷⁴ (Hakim, 2000), McRae (2003: 329) argues that constraints affecting women’s decisions regarding work and family are in two categories: structural and normative. Structural constraints include (i) job availability, (ii) cost and availability of childcare and (iii) outcomes of different social origins, manifested in poor educational qualifications, early pregnancy, poor health, or culture.

To this can be added disincentives to work created by the interaction of the tax and benefits systems. Normative constraints include (i) women’s own identities (their

‘inner voices’), (ii) gender relations in the family and (iii) their partner’s attitudes towards work and care (McRae, 2003: 329). The following two sections consider evidence relating to partnered women’s constraints on working as reflections of McRae’s concepts.

74Hakim argues that women in Britain and the US can be divided into three groups according to their preferences for work-life patterns: home-centred women, adaptive and work-centred women.

89 4.2.2 Structural constraints

Table 4.3 shows the barriers to work for partnered women in Britain.⁷⁵ The majority of New Deal for Partners (NDP) participants have worked at some point (Hasluck and Green, 2007: 93), however the majority (46 per cent) had not worked for five or more years (and 47 per cent of main claimant partners had also not worked during this period) (Coleman and Seeds, 2007: 17). Those who have never worked tend to have learning difficulties or basic skill requirements, or are young parents with young children (Thomas and Griffiths, 2005: 19). For those who have worked, it is important to note the reasons for labour market exit. In Coleman et al’s (2006: 24) sample, 42 per cent of partners said they had spent a great deal of their adult life looking after the family or home. Long periods of absence from the labour market are associated with weak work histories and lack of up-to-date skills, which make it difficult to enter the labour market without lengthy preparation (Thomas and Griffiths, 2006: 50). Many partnered women lack skills, qualifications or recent work experience and this is further compounded by a lack of confidence (Aston et al., 2009a, Thomas and Griffiths,

In document Constitutions y altres drets de Cathalunya|b : compilats en virtut del cap. de cort XXIIII. de les Corts per la S.C. y Reyal Maiestat del Rey Don Philip nostre senyor celebradas en la vila de Montso any MDLXXXV ; volum primer [- volum tercer] (página 89-130)