The prime minister's attack on the under-25s receiving benefits struck an emotive chord. It polarised opinion and made us all appear to be at one of the two extreme ends of the political spectrum. I have a simple question for the prime minister: will these arguments help change the culture of the country and reduce the welfare bill, or are they based on myths that have demonstrably failed?
We all want to get people into work, to take personal responsibility for their futures and to reduce reliance on the state. Those of us that challenge the cuts to the poorest are assumed not to have signed up to this agenda, but we have: work is good for health and happiness.
The safety net of welfare should be a trampoline, not the trap that it currently is. We need to adjust the safety net, not remove it. Removing welfare payments will motivate a small minority, but the majority won't manage on their own and are more likely to increase the burden on other budgets and cost us all more.
To really save money, the government needs to link welfare with housing, education and health agendas – but none of these departments are working towards a common goal. In social housing, for example, the government is increasing rents yet doesn't think that it will increase the housing benefit bill. It also fails to understand that higher rents worsen the poverty trap, thus putting people off work.
Step one should be getting rid of silo government and joining up strategies across departments. The culture of government needs to change if it wants to change the culture of the country.
The cost of welfare is one of the largest in government. Cuts to its budget have already been made, but the government is learning that it can't grasp this particular budget easily. The answer isn't cuts in individual payments; it is in producing more jobs, improving employability and providing the odd kick to get people moving. A rising welfare bill reflects more on failed economic policies than the culture of those out of work. Do not blame the poor for not creating jobs.
At Family Mosaic, where we work with the poorest within our communities, we are trying to break down the silos and show how housing associations are one of the agents that can get people into work and reduce government expenditure.
We have set ourselves the ambitious target of getting 1,000 residents into work in the next three years. We can make a big difference to our communities, but we need the help of other agencies to make this work. We are creating strong links with health authorities, job agencies, other employers and youth initiatives. We believe our model will save the country money, and other organisations are making similar links to help make their communities work.
So, prime minster, don't divide us; unite us and come out and see what can be done. Get re-elected because you have reduced the need for public expenditure and made us a more independent, entrepreneurial nation, not because of tired polemical battle cries.
Brendan Sarsfield is chief executive of Family Mosaic
This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. Join the housing network for more news, analysis and best practice direct to you
