WELFARE is an emotive issue, whichever side of the argument you support.
It certainly resonates here in South Dorset, especially with those in work, who are struggling to earn a living and pay the bills.
Many have commented to me that it simply is not right, or fair, for those on welfare to have more money than those in work.
After Labour’s respected Frank Field was told to think the unthinkable, and was then promptly sacked when he did, expenditure on the welfare state has risen to a staggering £231 billion a year.
Now it’s Iain Duncan Smith’s turn to tackle this unaffordable burden.
He, like many, believes that the benefits’ system actively discourages claimants from looking for work, or the low paid from increasing their hours.
One solution is to cap a family’s benefit at £26,000 per year after tax.
This, it’s hoped, will help redress the balance.
But will it?
In South Dorset, average earnings fall below the cap at £22,369, and that’s before tax!
Nationally, the figure is £26,123.
Many argue that the cap is far too high and, judging from the above figures, they have a good point.
Labour’s supported the cap in principle, while demanding changes, which wreck it.
For example, they want to raise the cap in London, to reflect the higher cost of housing.
However, that beacon of good sense, Mr Field, suggests that instead of being higher, perhaps the cap should be lower in less expensive areas.
Recent polls show that, while 92 per cent of voters back a welfare state, 72 per cent believe it must be cut back.
Last week, the Welfare Bill was thrown out by the House of Lords, indicating that some members appear oblivious of public opinion.
Rightly, Mr Duncan Smith has promised to bat the Bill straight back after it returns to the Commons.
In the interests of fairness and social justice, he must stick to his guns.