Universal Credit New Thread.complete Disaster.

[spyguy]

Yes,and you can have your benefits stopped if you fail to apply for it if a workfare provider added it to your account as suitable.Almost all the "jobs" on the Universal Jobmatch site are fake in some way.10 million+ people will be on there under conditions if UC comes in.

Again, UC will be a disaster. It will be a distraction as the tax credits are adjusted.

Expect work requirement to be 35h single/70h couple.

Plus the money being reduced to give you only about £100/month on top of the money earned.

[durhamborn]

Again, UC will be a disaster. It will be a distraction as the tax credits are adjusted.

Expect work requirement to be 35h single/70h couple.

Plus the money being reduced to give you only about £100/month on top of the money earned.

Its already 35/70 hours once the youngest child is 12 under UC.51 hours for a couple with child 5-12.

I cant see any move on tax credits at all apart from the 1% increase per year.The big one they want is a 2 child limit.That wont come in unless the Tories win the next election.

The problem they have with UC is it doesn't save anything and due to its structure it will be very hard to reduce once in.Like tax credits the huge problem is the way extra children quickly push up payments past what most people can ever earn.

You could even argue that tax credits based on 1 child is a very good system where tax credits based on 3 children is a disaster.

That is why IDS like those before him have and will fail on welfare reform.Until they limit payments at a certain low level instead of basing per person in household it will always fail.

UC does nothing to change benefits apart from introducing conditionality to part time tax credit claims.Instead of that (it wont work) they should of limited tax credits to 1 child by changind child tax credit to family tax credit,,ie a once only payment.

Of course it doesn't really matter as UC will never come in for families.Its already dead in the water.

[Ulfar]

Universal credit will was doomed to failure from the start, it is a bureaucratic nightmare.

What we should have done is gone for a citizens income, that won't happen as TPTB don't want to loose control of the people's lives.

[Ulfar]

The Bureaucracy.

For every £ dispensed in unemployment benefit, what is the cost?

What is the total cost of all the benefits and the cost to administer: HMRC, unemployment benefit, housing benefit, social housing etc etc, even the TV license fee which is really just a Poll Tax by any other name.

I did work it out a while ago, for DWP its about a third. That doesn't factor in HMRC or any other departments.

[@contradevian]

I did work it out a while ago, for DWP its about a third. That doesn't factor in HMRC or any other departments.

Would find it hard to believe that administering Job Seekers Allowance came in at a third of £5-6BN, not with all the Jobcentres and staff, and then all the cronies like A4E on the bandwagon.

Close down the jobcentres. Only the most motivated will get a job in todays environment. If you have to make claimants jump through hoops to appease the Daily mail crowd, then set online hoops or tasks to perform to maintain benefit eligibility.

Edited August 5, 2013 by aSecureTenant

[Hectors House]

The ironic thing is it does nothing to encourage work.In fact its likely it will put more people off work as the only claims likely to be right are unemployed ones.

Its already affecting temporary work, those who have been unemployed for sometime have stopped accepting temp jobs as they will go straight onto UC when they sign back on, part of the conditions of which means that claimants have to sign to say they will spend 35 hours a week looking for a job. This is total cuckoo land, anyone with a computer and internet connection can hit all the job sites and job adverts online several times a week, even in good times a job seeker would be hard pushed to spend hours and hours fruitlessly looking. If the jobs aren't there then they aren't there! It matters not how many jobs you apply for or interviewed only that you spend 35 hours looking.

I think IDS is living in the past

[Hectors House]

Would find it hard to believe that administering Job Seekers Allowance came in at a third of £5-6BN, not with all the Jobcentres and staff, and then all the cronies like A4E on the bandwagon.

Close down the jobcentres. Only the most motivated will get a job in todays environment. If you have to make claimants jump through hoops to appease the Daily mail crowd, then set online hoops or tasks to perform to maintain benefit eligibility.

The closet Tory speaks

Edited August 5, 2013 by Hectors House

[SuperChimp]

Would find it hard to believe that administering Job Seekers Allowance came in at a third of £5-6BN, not with all the Jobcentres and staff, and then all the cronies like A4E on the bandwagon.

The administration prevents fraud and therefore keeps the overall bill for benefits down. If Jobcentres were closed down and administrative staff let go you would find that the welfare bill would increase as basic eligibility checks would be missed.

[SuperChimp]

Just as an update. The following article was posted 2 days ago. It is not very in-depth but the rumours are interesting in themselves.

http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/editors-blog/2013/08/unhappy-universal-credit-staff.html

Recently a blogger who regularly writes on Twitter about welfare and benefits issues, made a series of claims - unverified, admittedly - that £300m of IT work on Universal Credit is not fit for purpose and has been scrapped.

It will be interesting to see what happens in October.

[@contradevian]

IDS hands out £44M in bonuses to DWP staff

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/iain-duncan-smiths-department-hands-2145814

[durhamborn]

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/aug/07/universal-credit-benefit-access

Timms is playing a clever card here.Hes asking what happens to passported benefits when "UC goes nationwide in October",,the reason he isn't getting any replies from the DWPs is because they have no idea how to integrate them into UC PLUS of course they also know it doesn't matter anyway as no family with children (where 99% of these passported benefits are) will be on UC in October,or indeed any October.

Timms is a very poor shadow works and pensions,but he knows very well UC wont come in and has an open goal.

The battle is IDS will say UC is being rolled out but it will still be single unemployed people only,ie done by hand on paper each month ,and Timms needs to expose the fact no families are and the government are simply trying to get to the election before scrapping UC.

[durhamborn]

Just as an update. The following article was posted 2 days ago. It is not very in-depth but the rumours are interesting in themselves.

http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/editors-blog/2013/08/unhappy-universal-credit-staff.html

It will be interesting to see what happens in October.

I can tell you what will happen in October.They will roll UC out but keep it to single unemployed only so they can do those by hand or with a simple program.

No families or anyone else will go onto UC,not in October or anytime.

They might at some point have to put a few families onto it to keep covering up its going to be scrapped and say they are doing it slow to make sure it goes well.

[@contradevian]

I can tell you what will happen in October.They will roll UC out but keep it to single unemployed only so they can do those by hand or with a simple program.

No families or anyone else will go onto UC,not in October or anytime.

They might at some point have to put a few families onto it to keep covering up its going to be scrapped and say they are doing it slow to make sure it goes well.

What happens when the unemployed singletons become tax credit funded "entrepreneurs?" Would have thought that was a contradiction. I guess UC stops like JSA does now.

[durhamborn]

What happens when the unemployed singletons become tax credit funded "entrepreneurs?" Would have thought that was a contradiction. I guess UC stops like JSA does now.

UC gives you a year of whatever you say you are earning when self employed,then it assumes the minimum your getting is NMW x 35 hours.

In affect it removes UC from all self employed single people unless they have a lot of housing costs after a year.

UC does close the door for single people down the self employed route,and curtails slightly for families as well.

Tax credits were used by people to escape from the horrors of JSA and conditions/workfare,and at £20 less a week than JSA for many worth it,as it got them away from workfare and they could at least try to get a bit of work as well without getting means tested (tax credits have a £120 a week allowable earnings before means test).

Although yes it was abused,i do think that part of tax credits was quite usefull as it did help a lot of people set up in small business.Though again its pretty fair in UC as well giving a years grace to get up to NMWx35,

[@contradevian]

Coalitions dramatic retreat on Universal Credit:

http://www.newstates...niversal-credit

Iain Duncan Smith's welfare masterplan Universal Credit was originally due to apply to all new claimants of out of work benefits from this October but with the project now regarded as doomed in Whitehall, the government has made a dramatic (and under-reported) retreat. It announced today that UC would be introduced in just six "hub jobcentres" - Hammersmith, Rugby, Inverness, Harrogate, Bath and Shotton, alongside the existing four "pathfinders".

This means that a project that has so far cost £420m will now apply to just ten job centres, less than 1.5 per cent of the total. In addition, the only group of claimants included will be single people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance. As Glenda Jackson noted at today's work and pensions select committee hearing, "The people you are actually testing are a small number, the simplest of cases. How an earth are you going to achieve the evidence that you keep telling us you are going to learn from when the cohort is so narrow and so simple?"

Not only that, but numerous blogs are reporting that IDS even claimed for underwear during the time of `Betysgate` when we were paying for his wife to do nothing.

Edited August 11, 2013 by aSecureTenant

[SuperChimp]

Coalitions dramatic retreat on Universal Credit:

http://www.newstates...niversal-credit

Not only that, but numerous blogs are reporting that IDS even claimed for underwear during the time of `Betysgate` when we were paying for his wife to do nothing.

Underwear for himself or his missus?

I bet IDS wears Y-Fronts.

[durhamborn]

Coalitions dramatic retreat on Universal Credit:

http://www.newstates...niversal-credit

Not only that, but numerous blogs are reporting that IDS even claimed for underwear during the time of `Betysgate` when we were paying for his wife to do nothing.

There you go.Single unemployed only.The ones you can do easily every month on paper.New claims only as well.So no families at all being done.In other words UC doesn't exist in anything but name.The systems don't work at all.There is no hope of UC ever coming in where it is worked out monthly for families.Its all over.

IDS will need all that free underwear as hel be soiling his.

I could of saved him a few billion and told him it would never work.Welfare cant be micro-managed in that way.The tax credit disaster should of showed them that.

[wonderpup]

Maybe if they tried to make work pay by making work pay instead of just trying to create a byzantine welfare system in the hope of shaking loose some claimants they might actually get somewhere.

The problem with virtually every policy designed to deal with the problem is that the people in control can never decide if they actually want to help people or just piss on them- so they fall between the twin stools of the stick and carrot.

[@contradevian]

Maybe if they tried to make work pay by making work pay instead of just trying to create a byzantine welfare system in the hope of shaking loose some claimants they might actually get somewhere.

The problem with virtually every policy designed to deal with the problem is that the people in control can never decide if they actually want to help people or just piss on them- so they fall between the twin stools of the stick and carrot.

With the Tories its all stick and no carrot.

Observing them on Twitter its obvious why they are down to 100,000 members. They no longer represent real people, just mouth pieces for rentiers and corporations. The next step will be to allow corporations to vote, which I think is how it works in the City of London.

[OnionTerror]

IDS in the Wail...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2389539/For-eyeballing-benefits-way-ticket-easy-street-I-wake-days-Says-IAIN-DUNCAN-SMITH.html

Our advisers have the power to sanction people who don’t uphold their part of the bargain. No longer can people just turn up to claim benefits with no onus on them to better their situation.

...or vindictive "advisors" can cut off someone's money for two or three months at a time more like...

Universal credit has started and the benefits cap roll-out is in its final stages. Together they will build a welfare state we can all, once again, be proud of.

Err, no it wont be...

[betterToDo]

I know someone who's been working on this. It is in a far worse mess than I've seen mentioned here, we are talking complete disarray. You Do Not Want To Know how much money they've really spunked on a broken IT system.

[durhamborn]

I know someone who's been working on this. It is in a far worse mess than I've seen mentioned here, we are talking complete disarray. You Do Not Want To Know how much money they've really spunked on a broken IT system.

Yes complete meltdown.The truth is it cant work unless real time earnings data can be captured monthly with no mistakes.Even then it would be very unlikely to work due to change of circumstance etc.

It might work if done like tax credits now,,but that would not be UC.

Notice IDS is saying they are introducing the claimant commitments now.No doubt they will remain once UC is scrapped and perhaps tax credits will come under them.

Im not sure where they go from here but the first step is to stop UC now before it costs anymore.It is never coming in for families and its doing real damage to welfare reform.

Its certain though they will cover it up by spreading slowly to single unemployed across a few extra job centres and maybe even families in 1.

The aim of UC now is to get to the election without scrapping it.It will be scrapped after that,100% certain of that.

[durhamborn]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/06/universal-credit-doomed-benefits

Most of the time The Guardians articles on welfare are simply attacks on the right and offer nothing sensible.However the above by Penny Anderson is in fact very very good and explains very well why UC was always doomed.

"There is a lesson here for IDS, but also for Labour, which supports the philosophy of these so-called reforms. While the notion of one, simple, universal benefit is appealing, remember this – effective, systematic simplicity is, in reality extremely complicated."

That is very true.Its about time the left started to engage on welfare reform.UC is dead but welfare reform isn't.The left simply need to accept welfare can and does reward poor behaviour too often and it must be limited again.

The answer isn't UC,nor tax credits that increase per child,.The answer is lower payments that stop at two children (or even one).The left need to accept to save welfare they need to be much more harsh.Start from there and create a system that doesn't pay employers workers for them.

UC is finished,but what comes next could be very interesting.

[alexw]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/06/universal-credit-doomed-benefits

Most of the time The Guardians articles on welfare are simply attacks on the right and offer nothing sensible.However the above by Penny Anderson is in fact very very good and explains very well why UC was always doomed.

"There is a lesson here for IDS, but also for Labour, which supports the philosophy of these so-called reforms. While the notion of one, simple, universal benefit is appealing, remember this – effective, systematic simplicity is, in reality extremely complicated."

That is very true.Its about time the left started to engage on welfare reform.UC is dead but welfare reform isn't.The left simply need to accept welfare can and does reward poor behaviour too often and it must be limited again.

The answer isn't UC,nor tax credits that increase per child,.The answer is lower payments that stop at two children (or even one).The left need to accept to save welfare they need to be much more harsh.Start from there and create a system that doesn't pay employers workers for them.

UC is finished,but what comes next could be very interesting.

Agreed. The way i would do it would be lower benefits for those with children, with a full lower payment for the first two, half payment for a third, and zero thereafter. So that it roughly falls inline with population replacement rates.

BUT this would need to be coupled with getting work to pay at the lower end of society. That basically means the government forcing employers to pay a viable wage to ALL uk workers either directly (not preferred), or by putting in place policies that enable workers to bargain themselves higher pay. Needless to say we'd need to pretty much stop all inward migration for this to be able to happen.

How likely is it?

Not a hope in hell with all the corporatists that infest parliament and our nations positions of power.

Edited August 12, 2013 by alexw

[wonderpup]

There seems to be genuine contradictions between differing subsets of the Tory mindset. As a result we get a slogan - 'Make work pay' combined with an ongoing commitment to lower wages via a 'flexible labor' mantra.

So what is it they want- lower pay to increase international competitiveness?- or higher pay to reduce the state's role in propping up incomes?

Also there's the additional layer of confusion introduced with 'Help to Buy' a policy that not only fails completely the 'safeguarding taxpayers money' test-( It actually puts that money at extreme risk) but seems designed to keep the cost of living high by supporting high house prices.

But if we want to 'make work pay' then keeping the cost of housing and by extension rents high is not the way to do this- it just makes housing benefit more attractive-and necessary- to those who cannot earn enough via their 'flexible labor' to pay the real cost of keeping a roof over their heads.

There is no joined up thinking here at all- just a loose assemblage of slogans and half baked pseudo solutions.

Edited August 12, 2013 by wonderpup