As the recession bites and public spending cuts loom there have been calls, on both sides of the political debate, for a re-moralisation of welfare. Some say that the entitlement culture has gone too far, others that the hard-working poor should not be footing the bill for those who choose not to take a job. When did the language change and what does a change in vocabulary really mean?

And even if desirable can distinctions between welfare recipients be made in practice? If there are time limits on the receipt of welfare will more people end up better-off in work or worse-off unable to work?

Analysis will look at what history can teach us about making moral distinctions between the poor - both when the economy is booming & when it's contracting. And what of those, such as the children of welfare recipients, caught up in the debate : can it ever right to reduce the money which may give them a better future?

Contributors :

Will Hutton

Executive vice-chair The Work Foundation

Author Them & Us

Mark Harrison

Professor of Economics, Warwick University

Tim Montgomerie

Co-founder Centre for Social Justice

Editor, ConservativeHome

Hazel Forsyth

senior curator, Museum of London

Jose Harris

Emeritus Professor of Modern History, Oxford University

Alison Park

Co-editor British Social Attitudes Survey

Philip Booth

Editorial & Programme Director, Institute of Economic Affairs

Gordon Lewis

Community Project Manager, Salvation Army

Rod Nutten

Volunteer, Salvation Army

Wolfie

Client, Salvation Army

Major Ivor Telfer

Assistant Secretary for Programmes, Salvation Army UK & Republic of Ireland

Presenter : Chris Bowlby

Producer : Rosamund Jones.