Search results

The greatest myth of modern times is the suggestion that capitalism and corporations do better with less government. The global economic crisis has certainly put paid to this idea. But the massive emergency state bailouts and interventions put in place from 2008 were unique only in their size and scale. Government programmes, designed to meet the needs of business, are not just everyday, they are everywhere and they are essential. Just as social welfare protects citizens from the cradle to the grave, corporate welfare protects and benefits corporations throughout their life course. And yet, in most countries, corporate welfare is hidden and underresearched. Drawing on comparative data from OECD states, this book seeks to shed light on the size, uses and importance of corporate welfareacross variouswelfare regimes.

This groundbreaking book investigates and documents corporate influence on social policies at global/regional, national and local levels. It argues that we cannot understand the recent history and present direction of the welfare state unless we focus on the role that business has played in its development.

This article is an attempt to take stock and critically reflect on the UK's decade of austerity and social policy hostility over the past decade. It distinguishes between economic and political austerity and digs deeper into the data on expenditure in order to examine the impact of austerity on British public expenditure and politics. It argues that the decade of austerity was a hostile one for British social policy which not only undermined the financial base of key parts of the welfare state, it reshaped it and redefined its priorities, setting in train a series of subsequent events that would further change, not just British social policies, but British economics, polity and politics. And, as subsequent crises – notably Brexit and the Covid-19 pandemic – testify, crisis events tend to be linked, and each one shapes and influences the ability of the state to respond to the next.

Business people, business associations and individual firms have been enlisted in various ways by New Labour as part of their strategy to identify and resolve a number of problems within the British welfare state. Business has been important to New Labour's welfare strategies in at least three ways. First, New Labour has endeavoured to gear social policy more towards the needs of the profit making sector in the hope that this would increase competitiveness and help it to expand welfare expenditure in future. Second, by increasing the inputs of business people and firms into social policy, the government hoped to rescue services from their inefficient public sector strait-jackets. Third, the government has looked to private firms as important new sources of financing for welfare infrastructure. However, this embedding of business culture, business people and private enterprise into social policy has produced few real benefits to services, their employees or their users. This paper examines and evaluates New Labour's strategy of embedding business into social policy in order to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of welfare services.

The history of welfare states is marked by divisions between capital and labour and these divisions are replicated at the international level. At the heart of these divisions is enduring class interests which accord different priorities to social and economic factors. That these divisions exist is neither surprising, nor necessarily a problem; the problem, this paper argues, is the increasingly high priority given to business interests by ever more powerful international governmental organisations. This paper presents an analysis of power in the global economy before investigating the social policy preferences of key international capital and labour organisations. It argues that international class mobilisation has failed to produce very much of a compromise on the part of capital, and that, if anything, international social policy discourse is today even closer to business than it has ever been.

Abstract Occupational welfare has been a relatively neglected area in both theoretical and empirical studies of the welfare state despite its importance to overall levels of social provision. Surprisingly, there has not yet been a comprehensive examination of British occupational social provision, as opposed to non‐wage benefits more generally or specific provision such as pensions, housing or childcare. This neglect can be explained both by the perception that occupational welfare plays a relatively insignificant role in contemporary welfare states and by a general lack of clarity regarding its definition and scope, factors which have added to the difficulties surrounding its conceptualization and measurement. Despite the lack of attention it has received, however, recent pressures have propelled the issue higher up the social policy agenda, increasing the need for a clearer conception of what constitutes occupational social provision and a more comprehensive assessment of its contemporary significance. This paper seeks to shed some light on to these areas by drawing on comparative and UK data in order to carry out an audit of occupational social provision.