Work TV

The government has announced  that health and social care reform will be funded through a 1.25% increase in National Insurance, as well as an increase in taxes on share dividends.

Image: Neil Carberry, Chief Executive of the REC.

In response, Neil Carberry, Chief Executive of the REC (Recruitment and Employment Confederation) said:

“It’s vital that the social care system is properly funded – this has been a long time coming. But the 1.25% rise in National Insurance, the UK’s biggest business tax, is the wrong choice. As a tax on jobs, and a tax on activity rather than profits, rising National Insurance will fall more heavily on the labour intensive sectors most affected by the pandemic. It also disproportionately affects lower earners. The accompanying rise in taxes on dividends will also hit small limited company directors, who were denied any support during the pandemic. We all agree that social care needs more funding, but increasing labour taxes as we try to recover from the pandemic is not the fairest way to do it.”

ABC Note: Lots of company owners pay themselves via dividends rather than wages. The burden of paying more for social care thus largely falls on workers on PAYE rather than necessarily on Companies or Company directors. Company dividends are generally taxed at a lower rate than wages. The Health and Care Bill was published on 6 July 2021. The explanatory notes to Bill set out the case for a new legislative framework to facilitate greater collaboration within the NHS and between the NHS, local government and other partners, and to support the recovery from the pandemic.

ABC Comment, have your say below:

COMMENT - Working People to Pay A ‘Heath And Social Care Levy’ - Because The £350 Million A Week Never Existed,

Labour MP for Bermondsey & Old Southwark Neil Coyle MP pointed out  on Twitter. 

ABC Note: Very well put. 

Meanwhile from the BBC:

Boris Johnson outlines new 1.25% health and social care tax to pay for reforms

Boris Johnson said it would raise £12bn a year, designed to tackle the health backlog caused by the Covid pandemic and to bolster social care.

He accepted the tax broke a manifesto pledge, but said the "global pandemic was in no-one's manifesto".

However, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer said the plan was a "sticking plaster".

Leaders in social care also warned the money was "nowhere near enough" and would not address current problems.

The tax will begin as a 1.25 percentage point rise in National Insurance from April 2022, paid by both employers and workers, and will then become a separate tax on earned income from 2023 - calculated in the same way as National Insurance and appearing on an employee's payslip.

This will be paid by all working adults, including older workers, and the government says it will be "legally ring-fenced" to go only towards health and social care costs.

 ABC Comment, have your say below:

IMPORTANT UPDATE - A demo by Universal Credit claimants, members of Unite Community, due to take place outside parliament tomorrow (8  September) has been called off, after Labour's opposition debate on the government's decision to scrap the £20 a week income boost to UC was pulled. 
 
Labour’s opposition debate on the controversial cut, was earmarked for after Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) on Wednesday 8 September.

Holding banners up that read ‘Keep our families fed’ and ‘Food is not a luxury’, the activists are standing up for the six million people in Britain who rely on Universal Credit to get by – 40 per cent of whom of are in work. Charities estimate that one million households will lose 10 per cent of their income overnight when the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, snatches back the £20 a week with one in four children made poorer as a result.*

Pressure is mounting on the chancellor to rethink his decision to cut the £20 a week uplift to Universal Credit with the latest research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) showing that one in four of all families (with or without children) in 140 UK parliamentary constituencies will be affected, including 36 Conservative seats. 

Tory MPs including, Universal Credit architect, Iain Duncan-Smith, footballer, and anti-poverty campaigner Marcus Rashford, charities, landlords and debt organisations have all warned against what is the biggest overnight benefit cut since the Second World War.

Steve Turner, Unite assistant general secretary said: “Nearly six million people, 40 per cent of them in work, are about to lose £1,040 from their annual income, in what will be the biggest overnight cut to the basic rate of social security since the foundation of the modern welfare state.

“People, who rely on the benefit to get by, are telling us that this money is quite literally the difference between heating and eating.

“Our members have told us that the £20 isn’t paying for luxuries, but for food, children’s shoes, school uniforms and warm clothes.

“The chancellor must rethink his decision to cut the £20 a week income boost or he risks pushing six million people of which 2.2 million are already in jobs into poverty and debt overnight.

“Our Community members have been fighting tirelessly to highlight not just the pain this will cause families for whom this is their only source of income but for low waged workers too.  Many of them have worked right through the pandemic - in social care, in the NHS and as refuse collectors - and they deserve so much better from this government than this assault on their already poverty-level incomes. They will continue to target Tory MPs in the coming weeks."

Rachel, a Universal Credit claimant from Morley West Yorkshire said: “It’s hard to live off Universal Credit. After the third week, the money starts to run out. If the £20 is cut, I will lose £1,000 a year.”
Unite is dedicated to advancing the jobs, pay and conditions of its members and will fight back against any efforts to diminish workers’ living standards.

ABC Comment, have your sayt below:

PENSIONS TRIPLE LOCK SUSPENDED FOR YEAR - DWP minister Thérèse Coffey has confirmed, in a statement to Parliament, that the pensions triple lock will be scrapped for a year - reverting to a double lock for 2022/23.

The triple lock promised state pensions would rise by whichever was the largest of three figures - annual inflation, average earnings rises or by 2.5%.

On those grounds, pensioners should have been in line for an 8% rise in their weekly payouts next year.

But rather than pay this, the Government has simply scrapped the earnings element of the triple lock - promising it will return next year. This will save them an estimated £4.5billion a year.

Coffey said she was taking the measure to stop pensioners “unfairly benefitting from a statistical anomaly,” where the rise in annual earnings this year was a result of millions of people seeing their wages fall 20% while they were on furlough last year.

She added: “We can and will apply the triple lock as usual from next year for the remainder of this Parliament, in line with our manifesto commitment.”

James Andrews, senior personal finance editor at money.co.uk, said: “On one level the decision to suspend a manifesto pledge makes economic sense, with a bumper payout coming just as the Government looks for any way it can to find money to cover the cost of COVID-19 payments and earnings still down on two years ago.

“But people are bound to ask why they made that decision today when suspending the triple lock was far from the only option on the table.

“For example, it would also have been possible to move the earning element to a three-year average rather than an annual figure.

“And whatever they say, more change is coming.

“It’s quite simply mathematically impossible to maintain the triple lock  indefinitely, with the promise guaranteeing pensions will cost the Government more and more every year regardless of what happens to the taxes coming in.

“A single year’s suspension might cover a statistical anomaly, but it does nothing to answer the bigger question.”

ABC Note: The UK already has the lowest state pension - as a proportion of pre-retirement wages - of all of our European neighbours. House of Commons Library research revealed that UK pensioners receive around a quarter (28%) of the average working wage when they retire. In stark contrast, pensioners in Luxembourg and Austria receive 90% of the average working wage.

ABC Comment, have your say below:

UNITE CALL TO ACTION - Universal Credit claimants to descend on parliament to urge Tory MPs to ‘keep our families fed’ ahead of Commons vote

A group of Universal Credit claimants, members of Unite Community, will stage a protest outside parliament on Wednesday 8 September from 10:30 to urge Tory MPs to back Labour’s push to cancel the £20 a week cut to Universal Credit, due at the end of September.

WHEN: 10:30, Wednesday 8 September 2021
WHERE: Old Palace Yard, Westminster, (opposite St Stephen’s gate)

Labour’s opposition debate on the controversial cut, is earmarked for after Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) on Wednesday 8 September.

Holding banners up that read ‘Keep our families fed’ and ‘Food is not a luxury’, the activists are standing up for the six million people in Britain who rely on Universal Credit to get by – 40 per cent of whom of are in work. Charities estimate that one million households will lose 10 per cent of their income overnight when the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, snatches back the £20 a week with one in four children made poorer as a result.*

Pressure is mounting on the chancellor to rethink his decision to cut the £20 a week uplift to Universal Credit with the latest research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) showing that one in four of all families (with or without children) in 140 UK parliamentary constituencies will be affected, including 36 Conservative seats.

Tory MPs including, Universal Credit architect, Iain Duncan-Smith, footballer, and anti-poverty campaigner Marcus Rashford, charities, landlords and debt organisations have all warned against what is the biggest overnight benefit cut since the Second World War.

Steve Turner, Unite assistant general secretary said: “Nearly six million people, 40 per cent of them in work, are about to lose £1,040 from their annual income, in what will be the biggest overnight cut to the basic rate of social security since the foundation of the modern welfare state.

“People, who rely on the benefit to get by, are telling us that this money is quite literally the difference between heating and eating.

“Our members have told us that the £20 isn’t paying for luxuries, but for food, children’s shoes, school uniforms and warm clothes.

“The chancellor must rethink his decision to cut the £20 a week income boost or he risks pushing six million people of which 2.2 million are already in jobs into poverty and debt overnight.

“Our Community members have been fighting tirelessly to highlight not just the pain this will cause families for whom this is their only source of income but for low waged workers too.  Many of them have worked right through the pandemic - in social care, in the NHS and as refuse collectors - and they deserve so much better from this government than this assault on their already poverty-level incomes. They will continue to target Tory MPs in the coming weeks.

Rachel, a Universal Credit claimant from Morley West Yorkshire said: “It’s hard to live off Universal Credit. After the third week, the money starts to run out. If the £20 is cut, I will lose £1,000 a year.”

Unite is dedicated to advancing the jobs, pay and conditions of its members and will fight back against any efforts to diminish workers’ living standards.

ABC Comment, have your say below:

RESTART - The government’s Plan for Jobs is helping millions of people across the country who have been directly impacted by coronavirus (COVID-19). The DWP know that those who have been out of work for longer periods might need extra help to move back into employment.

At the 2020 Spending Review, the chancellor allocated £2.9 billion for the new Restart Scheme, which will give Universal Credit claimants who have been out of work for between 12 to 18 months enhanced support to find jobs. The Restart Scheme will break down employment barriers that could be holding them back from finding work. Providers will work with employers, local government and other partners to deliver tailored support for individuals.

Referrals will be made over a 3-year period and the Restart Scheme will benefit more than 1 million Universal Credit claimants who are expected to look for and be available for work but have no sustained earnings. The scheme will provide up to 12 months of tailored support for each participant. Early access can be considered on a case by case basis where conversations with a work coach suggest this is the most appropriate route for the individual.

Commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), the Restart Scheme will be delivered across England and Wales in 12 different Contract Package Areas (CPA). Providers on Tier 1 of DWP’s Commercial Agreement for Employment and Health Related Services framework (CAEHRS) were invited to bid. These providers were selected to join the framework in September 2020 following an open competition. The providers and their delivery partners, including specialist charities and small and medium-sized enterprises, will complement the vital work of Jobcentre Plus with extra expertise, investment, innovation and additional capacity for tailored support.

We have conducted a fair and transparent call off exercise to secure the delivery of the Restart Scheme. The programme will be delivered by the following providers across the 12 Contract Package Areas:

Bidders were required to show how they proposed to tailor their offer to local labour market conditions in the Contract Package Area, including their plans for close working with employers, local government and other service providers to identify skills gaps and growth sectors and complement the wider landscape of support.

In recognition of the differing conditions found in each CPA, each CPA had its own unique question assessing providers on the specific context in that CPA. These questions were developed in conjunction with local partners across England and Wales. The provider responses were evaluated by representatives from local partners to ensure local expertise was incorporated into the evaluation.

Through regular contact with all participants, providers will develop a strong understanding of individuals’ employment history, skills, aspirations and support needs to develop the right package of support to help each participant succeed.

For some this might be bespoke training to take advantage of opportunities in a growth sector or to succeed in a major recruitment exercise, for others it might be support to get the right certificates to take up a job in a different industry such as construction or transport or to update skills such as IT.

The DWP want to ensure all participants are given the best support to find employment. The Restart Scheme will be the first DWP employment programme procured with a customer satisfaction measure built in as an integral part of performance management. DWP has designed robust Customer Service Standards with contractual requirements which will ensure:

• regular contact with all participants using a variety of methods and channels
• a personalised offer for all participants, tailored to individual and local need

Alongside these protections to ensure that all participants receive regular, personalised support, the Restart Scheme will use a balanced Payment by Results model. Providers will be incentivised to help as many people as possible into sustained employment: the more people they help, the more outcome payments they will receive.

DWP has worked with providers to ensure the scheme is in place as quickly as possible while building on its long experience of successfully delivering large scale schemes. DWP have started conversations with claimants from 28 June 2021, with referrals to providers expected from 12 July 2021.

ABC Note: Despite this scheme unemployment is expected to rise. 

ABC Comment, have your say below:

Cut to Universal Credit would breach UK’s international human rights obligations

I am writing to urge you and your fellow Parliamentarians, on your return to the House of Commons on 6 September, to use your influence to help stop the proposed cut by the government on 6 October to social security support of £1040 per year (£20 per week) to Universal Credit (and Working Tax Credit).

If the government were to proceed with the proposed cut, it would be in violation of its international human rights obligations, in particular the binding International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, signed by the UK in 1968 and ratified in 1976, which sets out the rights to an adequate standard of living and to social security.

Cutting the basic rate of support to people living on low incomes, many of whom are already in work, by more than £1000 per year would leave many in a position where the government’s social security system cannot guarantee their human right to an adequate standard of living. In July, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation assessed this to be the UK’s “biggest overnight cut to the basic rate of social security since World War II.” Analysis the same month by the Institute for Fiscal Studies of recent government data has shown that for the average recipient of social security, this amount would represent 12 per cent of what they are paid as “entitlements,” and for about a quarter of all social security support claimants, it would be more than 20 per cent cut to entitlements.

According to the latest official data, the number of people receiving Universal Credit doubled from 3 million in March 2020 to 6 million in March 2021, as the Covid-19 pandemic’s economic impact made itself felt. As of 8 July 2021 there were 5.9 million people (or 5 million households) receiving Universal Credit; almost half (44 per cent) are households with children. These data do not include Northern Ireland.

The Trussell Trust and Independent Food Aid Network have both warned of growing demand for food aid during the pandemic and set out concerns about the effect of the impending cut on demand for their services. Citizens Advice estimates that 75 per cent of people receiving an uplift would not have enough money to cover daily costs if the cut were to proceed, and projects an increase in the number of people on low incomes in debt.

The announcement of a £20 per week increase (to Universal Credit and Working Tax Credit) as a Covid-19 pandemic related “uplift” in April 2020 was a welcome relief for those surviving on inadequate levels of social security support, which had diminished in value for a decade. Human Rights Watch research published in May 2019, alongside the work of many others, has documented how the inadequacy of social security support, scaled back since 2009, had left increasing numbers of people in need of food banks.

For the approximately 3 million people already receiving Universal Credit prior to March 2020, the removal of the first increase in benefit levels in real terms in a decade would represent a cut to their social security support. For the approximately 3 million people receiving Universal Credit for the first time since the pandemic started, the current social security support level has been the status quo since their entry to the benefits system, and a removal of £1040 per year is a clear cut.

Recent constituency level analysis by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation projects that, in 413 parliamentary constituencies, at least one in three working-age families will be affected directly by the cut.

Cutting up to £1040 per year from social security support would be retrogressive. A policy debate centred on rights, fairness, and justice – whether that is about “levelling up” or “building back better” – should focus on the necessary steps to ensure a well-functioning and adequate social security support system that provides beneficiaries a level of resilience that permits them to withstand day-to-day economic pressures, as well as systemic shocks like the economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. The proposed cut in October 2021 would do precisely the opposite.

In fact, rather than cutting this support, greater priority should be given to ensuring the up to 2 million people yet to enter the Universal Credit system and still receiving “legacy” benefits, including people with disabilities and long-term health conditions, are guaranteed a commensurate increase to their level of social security support.

International human rights law makes clear that cuts, even where a government argues that they are unavoidable, should not proceed where they would cause violations of people’s human rights— including the rights to an adequate standard of living and social security. Any cuts must also satisfy a stringent six-part test set out by the UN’s Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. In any event a government deliberately choosing to significantly retrogress its protection of basic rights including the rights to an adequate standard of living and to social security will be violating those rights.

Evidence of the harm that will be done is copious, including in research produced by Child Poverty Action Group, Citizens Advice, Feeding Britain, Independent Food Aid Network, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Policy in Practice, Save the Children UK, Trussell Trust, Turn2Us, and Zacchaeus 2000 Trust, among others (see appendix). Many, if not most, of these documents have been communicated directly either to the relevant government departments at the time of their publication, or are submissions to or reports produced by parliamentary inquiries.

 Ignoring all this evidence and proceeding with the cut, with the justification that it is too “difficult to isolate the specific impact of one policy” on poverty is unacceptable. Reports that the government is not disclosing its internal impact assessment of the cut, in response to Freedom of Information Act requests, are equally worrying.

The six-part test requires that, when proceeding with cuts, a state: show a compelling state interest; demonstrate that it has exhausted all alternatives; ensure that the cuts are non-discriminatory; ensure the decision is temporary, necessary, reasonable and proportionate; give opportunity to those most likely to be affected by the policy to participate genuinely in the decision-making process; and ensure a minimum social protection floor.

The decision by the government to proceed with the planned cut will cause deep harm and does not satisfy all these criteria.

We urge you to use the period immediately following the resumption of Parliament to make the government think again. There is still time to act now to prevent the increase in poverty and queues for aid at food banks that will result from this retrogressive move.

Sincerely,

Yasmine Ahmed

UK Director

Human Rights Watch

Enc. Appendix of relevant documents

Appendix

The list below sets out some key recent documents setting out the case or making clear evidence-based recommendations against reducing Universal Credit to pre-pandemic levels. The documents listed underscore, from various policy perspectives, the potential harms (or failure by government to properly analyse potential harms) of the proposed cut, increasing public support for the government not to proceed as it plans. They also serve to document the many instances in which evidence about the potential impacts has been drawn to the attention of the government.

(Documents listed in date order, most recent first)

1. Joint letter from devolved governments to Work and Pensions Secretary, signed by Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government (Scotland), Minister for Social Justice (Wales) and Minister for Communities (Northern Ireland), 30 August 2021

1. Independent Food Aid Network, “Food poverty set to worsen as September’s Universal Credit cliff edge approaches,” (Blog), The BMJ, 26 August 2021

1. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, “Universal Credit Cut – impact by constituency,” (Briefing), 26 August 2021

1. Save the Children UK/Opinium, “Almost Half of Universal Credit Claimants Don’t Think They Can Live on £20 Less Each Week,” (Survey), 17 August 2021

1. Trades Union Congress, “Universal credit cut will hit millions of working families and key workers,” (Blog), 23 July 2021

1. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, “UK heading for the biggest overnight cut to the basic rate of social security since World War II,” (Press Release), 23 July 2021

1. Child Poverty Action Group, “Universal Credit: What Needs to Change to Make it Fit for Children and Families?,” (Report and Summary Briefing), 21 July 2021

1. Joint letter from Westminster, Holyrood, Senedd and Stormont Committees, signed by chairs/convenors of Social Justice and Social Security Committee (Holyrood), Work and Pensions Select Committee (Westminster), Committee for Communities (Stormont), and Equality and Social Justice Committee (Senedd), 20 July 2021

1. Letter from the Poverty Alliance to Secretary of State for Work and Pensions regarding a refusal by the DWP to respond to a request made under the Freedom of Information Act about the impact of the £20 Universal Credit cut, 19 July 2021

1. Policy in Practice, “Autumn of income shocks: the impact of removing Covid support,”

(Reports , see “Report 1: Impact of Covid on caseloads and costs” and “Report 2: Impact of removal of Covid support and rising housing costs”), July and August 2021

1. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, “Our social security lifeline: Is it strong enough?”, (Report), 16 July 2021

1. Institute for Fiscal Studies, “The expiry of the Universal Credit uplift: impacts and policy options,” (Research Note), 15 July 2021

1. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, “A Minimum Income Standard for the United Kingdom in 2021,” (Report, and related Summary Findings), 14 July 2021

1. Independent Food Aid Network, Feeding Britain, University of York and Living Wage, “Secure work and a secure safety net – a new role for the labour market and social security in preventing the need for charitable food aidv,” (Briefing), 8 July 2021

1. Fabian Society, “Going with the Grain: How to Increase Social Security with Public Support,” (Report/Survey), May 2021

1. Resolution Foundation, “In need of support?: Lessons from the Covid-19 crisis for our social security system,” (Report) 29 April 2021

1. Zacchaeus 2000 Trust (Z2K), “Z2K’s response to the Work and Pensions Committee’s inquiry into the DWP’s response to the Coronavirus outbreak,” (Briefing), 26 April 2021

1. Tory Reform Group & One Nation Conservatives, “Pathway to Reform,” (Policy Position) April 2021

1. Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, “RCPCH calls on Government to extend the £20 a week uplift to Universal Credit,” (Press Release; see also BMJ Opinion blogs by the RCPCH President and RCPCH Officer for Health Improvement), 18 January 2021
2. Zacchaeus 2000 Trust (Z2K), “Z2K’s response to the APPG on Poverty’s call for evidence into the impact on poverty of maintaining the £20 uplift in Universal Credit,” (Briefing), January 2021

1. All Party Parliamentary Group on Poverty, “The impact on poverty of not maintaining the £20 uplift in universal credit and working tax credits, and of not extending the uplift to legacy and related benefits,” (Inquiry Report), January 2021

1. Disability Benefits Consortium, “How the Government has continued to prop up a two-tier welfare system by ignoring 2 million people during this pandemic,” (Blog), 2 December 2020
2. Turn2Us, “Weathering the Storm: How Covid-19 is eroding financial resilience,” (Report) November 2020

1. Citizens Advice, “Life on Less than Zero,” (Report), October 2020

1. Independent Food Aid Network and Feeding Britain, “Hunger and the need for food banks between March and September 2020,” (Briefing), October 2020

1. Trussell Trust, “Long Haul Ahead: The impact of Covid-19 on food banks in the Trussell Trust network,” (Report; see also related policy paper by NIESR for the Trussell Trust projecting demand for food banks, and key survey findings), September 2020

1. Turn2Us, “Submission to the Comprehensive Spending Review”, (Briefing), September 2020

1. House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee, “Universal Credit isn’t working: proposals for reform,” 2nd Report of Session 2019–21, HL Paper 105, July 2020, Conclusions and Recommendations 26-27

1. House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee, “Universal Credit: the wait for a first payment,” Third Report of Session 2019-21, HC 204, October 2020, Paragraph 122
2. Disability Benefits Consortium, “DBC letter to Secretary of State on emergency Covid-19 measures,” (Open letter), 27 March 2020

The above is not intended as an exhaustive list. Inclusion in this appendix should not be taken to constitute endorsement by Human Rights Watch of the entirety of a document’s contents or all aspects of its policy position.

View the full post and comments here:
https://dpac.uk.net/2021/09/human-rights-watch-letter-to-uk-parliamentarians-regarding-impending-cut-to-social-security-support-by-hrw/

ABC Comment, have your say below:

UNIVERSAL CREDIT CUTS - Policy in Practice supports the growing calls for the government not to cut Universal Credit’s £20 uplift, saying that by removing the pandemic’s protective measures too early the government is introducing an Autumn of income shocks to families who depend on the support.

Deven Ghelani, director and founder of Policy in Practice, spoke to Julie Etchingham on LBC radio about the cut to Universal Credit, saying ” The £20 uplift has been a real lifeline and taking that away is going to feel like the shock of the last seven years of benefit cuts all happening at once.” He said that the cut makes very little economic sense as the £20 uplift has no impact on work incentives, and growing the economy right now is far more important than saving a few billion pounds here or there, as acknowledged by the generosity of the furlough scheme.

Deven has spoken before about why the government should maintain the £20 uplift to Universal Credit. Policy in Practice’s data-led evidence shows the £20-a-week cut to Universal Credit will result in a significant income shock for some. Policy in Practice analysis shows the impact of this on families across the UK.

Our data-led evidence shows the £20-a-week cut to Universal Credit will result in a significant income shock for some. Our analysis shows the impact of this on families across the UK.

• We find that 683,000 households across Britain who receive Universal Credit (including 824,000 children) will be unable to meet all their essential costs if the uplift is dropped
• If the uplift is retained, this total is lower with 458,000 households unable to meet their essential costs. Whilst this is still too high, the £20 uplift does shield a large proportion of households from extreme hardship
• The impact will be exacerbated by families switching from furlough support to Universal Credit. The difference could be as much as £2,304 a month for a couple who had both been furloughed
• Changes are also being made to Universal Credit that will affect people who are self-employed. The reintroduction of the Minimum Income Floor could see some households lose £771 a month
• The cut to the £20-a-week Universal Credit uplift will be devastating to families and compounded by other Covid support scheme changes that are axed or phased out around the same time

Some of our analysis recently featured in The Observer.

Our evidence to the All Party Parliamentary Group for Poverty gave three reasons to keep the £20 uplift to Universal Credit:

1. 1 in 8 UC households can’t meet essential costs without it
2. Other welfare cuts compound the loss to families
3. The uplift gives support to the most in need

Open letter to the Prime Minister not to cut Universal Credit

The largest coalition of organisations to date on this issue has signed a joint open letter to the Prime Minister calling on him not to go ahead with the planned £20-a-week cut to Universal Credit and Working Tax Credit, due to come into effect on 6 October.

The joint letter, coordinated by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, is signed by a wide range of 100 organisations that operate at a national level as well as in communities across the UK. Among the signatories are leading voices on health, education, children, housing, poverty, the economy and other aspects of public policy.

The Rt Hon Boris Johnson MP
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
London
SW1A 2AA
2 September 2021

Dear Prime Minister,

We are writing to collectively urge you not to go ahead with the planned £20-a-week cut to Universal Credit and Working Tax Credit at the beginning of October.

Many of us provide frontline support in communities up and down our country and see first-hand the importance of our social security system. Life is full of crises that we cannot plan for, such as job loss or illness, and periods of lower earnings or caring responsibilities. We all need the security and stability of a strong lifeline, not just during a national crisis, but every day.

Imposing what is effectively the biggest overnight cut to the basic rate of social security since World War II will pile unnecessary financial pressure on around 5.5 million families, both in and out of work.

At the start of the pandemic, the Chancellor rightly said that he was introducing the £20 increase to “strengthen the safety net” – a tacit admission that a decade of cuts and freezes had left it unfit to provide the support families need. We all strongly supported this crucial improvement in support.

We are at risk of repeating the same mistakes that were made after the last economic crisis, where our country’s recovery was too often not felt by people on the lowest incomes. The erosion of social security support was one of the main drivers of the rise in in-work and child poverty, and contributed to a soaring need for food banks, rising debt and worsening health inequalities.

We deeply regret that the Department for Work & Pensions has not published its assessment on the impact of cutting Universal Credit and Working Tax Credit. However, the latest independent analysis from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) shows it risks plunging 500,000 people into poverty, including 200,000 children. It will take the main rate of out-of-work support down to its lowest levels in real terms since around 1990.

This is not a question of having to choose between a recovery based on getting people into jobs or investing in social security, in fact most families impacted by this cut to Universal Credit and Working Tax Credit are already in work. The reality of the UK labour market means that to improve living standards, we need to both improve job quality and strengthen the social security system. We also must never lose sight of the need to provide adequate support to families who are not able to work so they can meet their needs with dignity.

Six former Conservative Work & Pensions Secretaries believe previous cuts to social security spending went too far and oppose this cut, and your own Conservative MPs are warning that it will have deep and far-reaching effects in their constituencies.

Recent analysis from JRF shows that 413 parliamentary constituencies across Great Britain will see over a third of working-age families with children hit by the planned cut to Universal Credit and Working Tax Credit on 6 October 2021. Of these 413 constituencies, 191 are Conservative – 53 of which were newly won at the last general election or in a subsequent by-election.

This looming cut would fundamentally undermine the Government’s mission to level up. Citizens Advice has identified that people are one and a half times more likely to claim Universal Credit in places the Government has prioritised for levelling up investment. They also found for every £1 that could be invested from the Levelling Up Fund in England, £1.80 would be taken from these local economies if the Government presses ahead.

Furthermore, it is unacceptable that legacy benefits, such as Employment and Support Allowance, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Income Support, continue to be excluded from this crucial improvement in support, mostly impacting people who are sick, disabled or carers.

We are rapidly approaching a national crossroads which will reveal the true depth of the Government’s commitment to improving the lives of families on the lowest incomes.

We all want a social security system that supports families to escape poverty rather than pulling them deeper into it. However, this cut risks causing immense, immediate, and avoidable hardship. A strong social security system is a crucial first step to building back better. We strongly urge you to make the right decision.

Yours sincerely,

Action For Children, Advice NI, APLE Collective, The Association of Charitable Organisations, Become, Bevan Foundation, The Big Issue, Bright Blue, The British Association of Social Workers, British Psychological Society, Business in the Community, Carers UK, Caritas Social Action Network, Centre for Cities, Centrepoint, Child Poverty Action Group, Children England, Christians Against Poverty, Church Action on Poverty, Citizens Advice, Citizens Advice Scotland, Citizens UK, Communities that Work, Crisis, Disability Benefits Consortium (a network of over 100 disability organisations), Employment Related Services Association (ERSA), End Child Poverty Coalition, End Furniture Poverty, The Equality Trust, The Faculty of Public Health, Family Fund, Feeding Britain, The Food Foundation, Generation Rent, Gingerbread, the charity for single parent families, Greater Manchester Poverty Action, The Health Foundation, Homeless Link, The Hygiene Bank, Independent Food Aid Network, Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Jubilee Debt Campaign, Learning and Work Institute, Little Village, Lloyds Bank Foundation for England & Wales, Macmillan Cancer Support, Mental Health Foundation, Mind, Money Advice Trust, The MS Society, National AIDS Trust, National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT), National Children’s Bureau, National Education Union, National Housing Federation, National Residential Landlords Association, National Survivor User Network, Neighbourly, New Economics Foundation, North East Child Poverty Commission, Northern Housing Consortium, Octavia, One Parent Families Scotland, Oxfam GB, PlaceShapers, Policy in Practice, The Poverty Alliance, The Poverty Truth Community, Rethink Mental Illness, RNIB (Royal National Institute of Blind People), RNID, The Robertson Trust, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, Royal College of Psychiatrists, Royal Society for Public Health, The Runnymede Trust, The Salvation Army, Save the Children, Scope, Scottish Out of School Care Network, Shelter, St Mungo’s, Standard Life Foundation, StepChange, Sustain: the alliance for better food and farming, SVP Northern Ireland, Transforming Lives for Good (TLG), The Trussell Trust, Trust for London, TUC (Trades Union Congress), Turn2us, UCL Institute of Health Equity, UK Women’s Budget Group, Women’s Regional Consortium Northern Ireland, Working Families, Young Lives vs Cancer, Young Women’s Trust, Z2K, 4in10 London’s Child Poverty Network

ABC Note: Policy in Practice’s mission is to reduce poverty. Policy in Practice’s believe the welfare system can work more effectively, and help people toward greater independence, if it is simple for people and organisations to understand. The organisations software helps people on low incomes to understand how changes in welfare policy affects them, so that they can make better decisions and lead more fulfilling lives. Policy in Practice’s engine models how the policies of four government departments affect thousand of individual households on low incomes. They use a scientific approach to data visualisation that can drill down to individual households and help people to take control.

ABC Comment, have your say below:

CHALLENGING SANCTIONS - Here is some useful information: 

1. When a sanction is imposed the DWP should inform the individual of the details of the sanction(s) in a letter uploaded to the UC journal, along with the option to claim hardship payments. If the individual thinks the sanction is wrong, they can request a mandatory reconsideration from the DWP. If that is unsuccessful, the claimant can appeal the DWP’s sanction decision to the tribunal. There is guidance on challenging a sanction from Citizens Advice and Mental Health & Money Advice.
2. A claimant that receives a sanction can apply for hardship payments by calling the UC helpline. On the call, the DWP official will ask about the individuals’ living costs, so the individual should make a note of these in advance. The individual will need to explain why the sanction has made it hard for them to meet their basic needs (such as food or utilities costs) and what they have done to find other sources of financial support. Citizens Advice have published useful guidance on getting a hardship payment.
3. Hardship payments are recoverable (meaning the DWP can ask for them to be repaid), and when a claimant applies for a hardship payment the DWP official will ask them to agree a ‘declaration’ that they will repay it once their sanctions are lifted. If a claimant’s application for hardship payments is refused, this decision can be challenged by making a mandatory reconsideration request to the DWP.
4. Once the claimant’s sanction has ended the DWP will take steps to recover the hardship payment by making deductions from the individual’s UC. However, importantly, DWP does have a choice not to recover hardship payments. This choice applies in all cases, including where the individual’s sanction has been subsequently overturned, for example following mandatory reconsideration or a tribunal appeal.
5. If the claimant cannot afford to repay the hardship payment they can ask DWP for the deductions to be reduced and / or request that the hardship payment be waived in full. This is not affected by the fact that the claimant has agreed a declaration that they will repay the hardship payment.

ABC Comment, have your say below:

DISABLED LEADERS - The National Leadership Centre has launched the Catalyst Programme which aims to support and develop senior leaders with a disability, in public sector roles.

A new programme to support and develop senior leaders with a disability has been launched today by the government.

The new scheme, called the Catalyst Programme, will bring senior leaders with a disability together from across the public sector, with the aim of developing them to CEO level in their respective fields.

Over 12 months, it will provide delegates with intensive residential courses, coaching, a diverse range of speakers from different backgrounds, and a network of peers to learn from and grow with.

The programme will be run by the National Leadership Centre (NLC), which was launched by the government in 2019 to support public sector leadership. This will be the third such programme to support leaders with a disability or long-term health condition.

Pamela Dow, Executive Director of the Government Skills and Curriculum Unit said: > > The National Leadership Centre helps the country’s most senior public service leaders develop the skills, knowledge and networks required to address society’s most complex strategic challenges. > > We are proud to be expanding our programmes to further support leaders with broad and varied experience to continue rising through the ranks.

14.7% of the economically active working age population of UK adults have a disability or long-term health condition.

Government best serves the public when it draws on the talents of all its citizens and understands their needs deeply. That’s why the NLC has created the Catalyst Programme, which will bring together 20 public service leaders from across the country.

Steve McGuirk, Advisory Board member for the NLC, added:

The diversity challenge is complex and, in many respects, the work to understand and support the problems facing disabled leaders is much more limited and even less well understood.

The Catalyst programme seeks to help those leaders with a bespoke programme designed to empower disabled people to push for - and break through - the highest levels of public leadership in the same ways as non-disabled leaders. Catalyst will create a network of people to sustain peer support and peer mentoring and create the opportunity for people to share their experiences about what works and what doesn’t.

It will encompass similar content to the other NLC programmes, as well as exposing delegates to inspiring case studies and inspiring people. Most of all, I believe it will be, as the name suggests, a catalyst for liberating a pool of enormously talented leaders who will make a huge difference to the way public services are delivered in the next few years.

Recruitment for both the Accelerate and Catalyst Programmes is now open and will close on 24th September. To find out more and to apply, head to the NLC’s website: NationalLeadership.gov.uk.

The National Leadership Centre is a team within the Government Skills and Curriculum Unit in the Cabinet Office. It supports the most senior leaders of the public sector to develop the skills, knowledge and networks required to address society’s most complex strategic challenges.

Both the Catalyst and Accelerate Programmes deliver on the Declaration on Government Reform commitment to make sure ethnic minority and disabled citizens “flourish in public service”, and were trailed by the Parliamentary Secretary at the Cabinet Office, Julia Lopez MP, in the Public Leaders Report 2021.

ABC Comment, have your say below: