Decades of efforts by mainstream politicians to roll back welfare programmes have given rise to an \u201cextremely dangerous\u201d discourse that has helped fuel the rise of the far right and rightwing populists in countries around the world, a top UN expert has told the Guardian.<\/p>\n
From London to Lisbon, politicians from centre-right and centre-left parties alike had steadily eroded social programmes, fostering a sense of scarcity and creating fertile ground for the stirring up of anti-migrant sentiment, said Olivier De Schutter, the UN special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf we were doing more, people would not feel threatened, they would not fear falling behind,\u201d he said. \u201cThey would be reassured that the digital and ecological transitions and globalisation will be painless because they are protected by a state that cares for them.\u201d<\/p>\n
He pointed to the UK, where Nigel Farage\u2019s Reform party is outflanking the Conservatives from the right on migration, as an example. \u201cIt\u2019s completely terrifying,\u201d he said. \u201cReform UK is higher in the polls than ever and you have these anti-migrant demonstrations<\/a> in various parts of the UK \u2026 And the reason is that we\u2019ve not been investing enough in the welfare state.\u201d<\/p>\n De Schutter will present a report to the UN general assembly on Wednesday that lays out his belief in the value of investing in universal, rights-based social protection. At the heart of his argument is the need for governments to rethink the welfare state \u2013 from food assistance to healthcare and unemployment benefits \u2013 as an essential tool to maintain the social fabric of society, rather than a cost to be reduced.<\/p>\n Olivier De Schutter. Photograph: Mohamed Azakir\/Reuters<\/p>\n Special rapporteurs are independent experts appointed by the UN to advise or report on specific situations.<\/p>\n De Schutter said mainstream politicians around the world had for decades made it increasingly difficult to obtain benefits, increasing surveillance and stigmatising claimants. \u201cAnd the message was: it\u2019s a cost to society, it\u2019s a burden, rather than an investment in the future.\u201d<\/p>\n What emerged was a sense that access to such resources must be stringently limited, De Schutter said. \u201cThe message is: it is us against them. And what goes to one group must be denied to others, because there\u2019s not enough for everyone,\u201d he said. \u201cIt\u2019s a discourse that sets people against one another. And that\u2019s extremely dangerous, and I do think that is what the far right is now reaping.\u201d<\/p>\n His view is backed by a 2021 study<\/a> that looked at 14 countries across Europe and found that a one-point increase in income inequality corresponded to a one-point increase in support for populist parties. Higher pension levels, minimum wage legislation and increases to child allowances have also been shown to diminish the likelihood<\/a> of people voting for the far right.<\/p>\n Populist parties often argued that societies were unable to afford migration because it would put pressure on social services, De Schutter said. Their stance is countered by a wealth of evidence showing that migrants in member states of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development contribute more to income tax and social contributions<\/a> than they receive in individual benefits.<\/p>\n