Small charities accuse anti-workfare protesters of bullying, intimidation and harassment. Can this be justified?
Are anti-workfare campaigners justified in using intimidation tactics?
Three small charities helping vulnerable clients have accused anti-workfare campaigners of bullying them into abandoning involvement in the UK government’s workfare schemes.
Campaigners say the tactics are justified because the schemes make people work for benefits and sanctions them if they refuse – plunging them into destitution.
However, the charities say they have achieved overwhelmingly positive outcomes for those on the schemes with up to 70% of placements going onto employment, further training or education.
Who’s right…are the charities justified in using the scheme to achieve positive outcomes? Or are anti-workfare campaigners justified in using these tactics to force them to drop involvement?