I'm seeing a surprising number (and by surprising I mean more than one, and more than just devout Labour supporters) of people supporting what are absolutely obscene benefit reform proposals, proposals we have just about zero chance of stopping unfortunately. Take, for example, supposedly Liberal Anders Hanson who thinks that no harm can come of it...

But regardless of your circumstances, I think everyone can do some form of voluntary community service whilst being unemployed. It keeps you in the habit of getting up and going to work (even if it is only once or twice a week that you do it) and it helps put something back in whilst you receive your benefit. This shouldn’t be seen as a punishment as the Government seem to be making it. It should simply be a way of contributing.

And what happens when that person refuses to "contribute"? They get no benefits, that's cool right? Except they aren't only not getting benefits under Labour's plans, they're also getting kicked out of council houses according to Caroline Flint. So now they have no home, no income, no means of support. Even if you're able to somehow believe that this is ok for those who are serial benefit cheats, what about all those that are genuinely unable to find work.

How is making them clean up graffiti and litter going to help them find more work? How is giving them the work that we give to criminals going to help their self-esteem, self-worth and aspirations? This is aside from the fact that making them do more than 10 hours a week community service would essentially be employment by the state for less than minimum wage of a person that has not committed any crime.

So we've taken their aspirations away, we've made them realise they're scum, on the level of petty thieves and anti-social yobs, and/or we've taken their money away and also potentially their accommodation. Where exactly do you think these people are going to turn next? To an employer in a suit as if they can suddenly decide to get employed? Or perhaps to crime, to petty theft themselves or worse?

No, I'm afraid that while the idea of actively encouraging people to do voluntary work OUTSIDE of the community service remit has legs, and even boosting benefits based on attendance and performance, simply telling people that they are no longer a part of society is not acceptable at all, especially not from a liberal perspective.

I've said before that I like in principle Cameron's ideas that this policy was born from, but I had a long internal debate over it. Simply removing money can only aid criminal behaviour, and without systems to only allow those that do the bare minimum on benefits to buy certain things and only those things (commodities, food, not much else) it's impossible to stop people being cheats completely.

The simple fact is that no choices are here to be made, people can either choose to do what the government tells them to do, whatever the government tells them to do, or they can go homeless and starve...regardless of how genuine their plight is. It's unacceptable that in this country anyone believes this kind of authoritarianism is acceptable. More on this subject is said much better by Septicisle.