“One idea that warrants further investigation is a guaranteed annual income or negative income tax. This would replace our current welfare system and would ensure Canadians had a certain minimum income.…”
Paul Latimer, “An alternative to welfare may help Canadians,” Kelowna Capital News (British Columbia), May 23, 2013
Alberto Brugnoli and Alessandro Colombo (eds), Government, Governance and Welfare Reform: Structural Changes and Subsidiarity in Italy and Britain, Edward Elgar, 2012, 1 84844 477 5, hbk, xii + 183 pp, £65
Fundamental to the argument of this book are two different varieties of subsidiarity: what the authors call ‘vertical subsidiarity’: the idea that authority should be exercised at the lowest possible level in a hierarchy of authorities; and ‘horizontal subsidiarity’: the requirement that higher authorities should resource lower-level authorities to pursue the activity over which they have authority, including the resourcing of individuals and households to pursue their own chosen goals. ‘Network accountability and resourcing’, whilst being more of a mouthful, might be a more accurate expression of what the authors intend by ‘horizontal subsidiarity’: a multi-directional distribution of competences and resources across individuals, households, local communities, private sector companies, voluntary organisations, and public authorities.
The book’s first section is more theoretical in nature, and studies concepts relating to governance and subsidiarity; the second section charts the increasing relevance of regions within countries as opposed to nation states; and the third section studies recent changes in welfare state governance – and here UK readers will be particularly interested in Helen Haugh’s study of social enterprise involvement in health service delivery, and Martin Powell’s comparison of sometimes quite radical vertical and horizontal subsidiarity in Lombardy and the increasing involvement of private sector and voluntary sector organisations in welfare provision in the UK.
The fourth section of the book studies ways in which national governments have resourced households and individuals to take responsibility for their own welfare. Of particular interest will be Julian Le Grand’s chapter, in which he discusses the design of quasi-markets in welfare delivery, how to ensure equity of provision in a quasi-market context, and why such asset-based welfare instruments as child trust funds should be universal.
Tax and benefits were not on the agenda of the group of scholars convened by the Institute for Research, Statistics and Training in Lombardy to research and write this volume. If a further volume tackles this subject then a chapter might usefully be given to an impending experiment in the UK. Since the nineteenth century, social security benefits have been a nation state competence ( – as in most countries, although sometimes aspects of schemes will be devolved to the next layer down, as in the US). Policy and regulations are set at national level even when administration is managed locally, as with Housing Benefit. The UK government has now decided to localise Council Tax Benefit policy and regulations at the same time as it combines national in-work and out-of-work means-tested benefits in order to enhance employment incentives. It will be interesting, and perhaps painful, to watch the consequences of the interaction of a nationally regulated Universal Credit and a locally regulated Council Tax Benefit.
If the Institute does publish a volume on tax and benefits, then the editors might conclude that there are some aspects of welfare provision ripe for greater subsidiarity, and some that require policy and regulations to be determined at the highest possible level of authority. We have seen trade rules becoming more continental and global, and we are seeing calls for greater European involvement in such fields as food safety; and it might be that at the same time as the governance of such functions as social care and social housing become more local, taxation and benefits policy and regulation should become increasingly global. The editors might also decide that greater subsidiarity and increasing globalisation might in some circumstances benefit each other, and that in particular the best way to promote the ability of households and individuals to fulfil their own chosen goals might be a European or global universal Citizen’s Income.
Mateo Alaluf is a Professor of Sociology at the Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB) in Brussels, Belgium. In this opinion piece (in French), he focuses on the renewed interest in basic income throughout Europe, and insists on the fact that basic income is a neo-liberal idea. According to Alaluf, in a basic income society wages would be lower, and retrenchment in existing social programmes would be much easier. He rather advocates the reinforcement of existing programmes, and the introduction of a so-called “maximum income”.
The opinion piece can be found here (in French): https://www.rtbf.be/info/opinions/detail_l-allocation-universelle-contre-la-protection-sociale?id=8018227
Citizen’s Income and Welfare Regimes in Latin America
This book is a collection of essays by several authors assessing the need for and prospects of basic income in Latin America. It is edited by Ruben Lo Vuolo. According to the publisher, “Social protection systems in Latin America developed in a fragmented manner, offering varying access to benefits and benefit levels to population groups. In the context of widespread informal and precarious work, social insurance institutions could only provide limited coverage. In this context, progress toward a Citizen’s Income policy in Latin America depends on the possibility of reappraising its importance for an integrated institutional system which promotes the empowerment and economic independence of people. A Citizen’s Income policy is not only a cash transfer to alleviate poverty or a basic income for food. It is a basic right to improve democracy and encourage a more autonomous development of people living in profoundly unequal societies.”
Rubén M. Lo Vuolo is academic director and researcher at the Interdisciplinary Center for the Study of Public Policy (Centro Interdisciplinario para el Estudio de Políticas Públicas, Ciepp), Buenos Aires Argentina.
This book is part of Palgrave-Macmillan’s series “Exploring the Basic Income Guarantee.”
Lo Vuolo, Rubén. Citizen’s Income and Welfare Regimes in Latin America: From Cash Transfers to Rights. Palgrave Macmillan, January 2013. ISBN: 978-0-230-33821-0, ISBN10: 0-230-33821-6, 5.500 x 8.500 inches, 286 pages. $100.
The North Wind
[Aynur Bashirova – Bi News – May 2013]
Westrick, Brian. (2013). “Basic Income Guarantee Solution for Social Welfare.” The North Wind, Thursday, Apr 11 2013
Brian Westrick, in his article published in the North Wind, argues that the social safety nets in the US are inefficient and can be replaced by a more efficient system of the Basic Income Guarantee (BIG), which will supersede the desperation to find work with desire to work. According to Wesrick, BIG would give people the incentive to work with the principle of the more you work, the more you get and eradicate extreme poverty by making sure that no one stays without income. The author concludes that BIG is not perfect, but comparing its benefits to unemployment benefits, it makes more sense overall.