Five things the coalition won’t tell you about Universal Credit

The professed aim of the introduction of Universal Credit is to boost the personal responsibility of claimants, smooth the passage to work and prepare out-of-work claimants for their next job. There are a number of problems with Universal Credit, however - problems which haven't been given anywhere near the amount of coverage by the press that they warrant.

The Universal Credit scheme officially goes live today with a ‘Pathfinder’ version in the north of England – Ashton-under-Lyne – and the scheme is expected to be rolled out nationwide from October 2013.

Universal credit will merge several benefits and tax credits into one monthly payout.

The professed aim of the Universal Credit is to boost the personal responsibility of claimants, make work pay more than benefits and prepare out-of-work claimants for their next job.

There are a number of problems with Universal Credit, however – problems which haven’t been given anywhere near the amount of coverage by the press that they warrant.

  1. The benefit changes will “reinforce the traditional male breadwinner model”, in the words of the Women’s Budget Group. The new universal credit will mean that whereas previously certain benefits like tax credits were paid directly to mothers, the universal credit will be claimed and owned by couples jointly and usually paid in full to one partner. Incentives for second earners (usually women) will also be weakened according to independent evaluations; and even more worryingly, the government believes ‘that any such risk of decreased work incentives for women in couples is justified.’

  2. Households that earn £247 or less a week will see a fall in real income in 2015 because of the changes to benefits, and lone parents will be worse off, whatever their circumstances, according to the Chartered Institute of Housing.

  3. Research suggests that a monthly payment will make it harder for claimants to budget. A Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) survey asked benefit and tax credit recipients the following question: “If payments of benefits and tax credits are made monthly, would you find it easier or harder to budget, or would it make no difference at all?” Four in ten said it would be harder to budget after the changes and just one in ten said it would be easier. Four in ten said it would make no difference. The fear most commonly cited by claimants was that they would run out of money before the end of the month.

  4. The proposal that social tenants should have to manage their rental payments, as opposed to the money going direct to their social landlord, is overwhelmingly opposed by most social tenants. 86 per cent of social tenants believe “strongly” that it is better for housing benefit to be paid directly to the landlord. A third of claimants are not confident they will be able to keep up rental payments if they have to manage benefits paid to them for their rent.

  5. The reforms are bad for those who are in work and looking to work more, especially those who previously received Working Tax Credits. According to an analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), “Low earners who do have a working partner will tend to see their marginal effective tax rate (the fraction of a small rise in earnings lost to income tax, national insurance, withdrawn benefits or tax credits) increase, because Universal Credit will have a higher withdrawal rate than tax credits do.” (p4) The marginal tax rate for this group will be 76.2 per cent, up from 73 per cent as it is now.” As well as reducing incentives for second earners (see point one), so-called “strivers” will effectively be penalised for working harder.

39 Responses to “Five things the coalition won’t tell you about Universal Credit”

  1. Diane Charlton

    Making work pay? Better off in work than benefits? Yeah righto!!! Having struggled to keep our household afloat with a low paid job and a previously hard working spouse out of work for 3 years, through changed circumstance we both became unemployed and was forced to sign up to income based JSA. After short time I got a very part time job and in effect am now paying my own jobseekers allowance. Fair enough I am contributing to our “keep” BUT the job was solely dependant on a CRB check which was stopped out of my first months wages. Without the CRB check I would not have got the job and would not be saving the government money in payable benefits. BUT because I got the job and am contributing towards our benefits I have been penalised by the government as they have counted the cost of the CRB check as INCOME!!! So this month we are £44 BELOW what the law says we need to live on because I was stupid enough to work and make a contribution. How stupid is that??? What sort of encouragement or incentive is that to work when you are “fined” for making an effort??? As for Universal Job Match – out of 1406 “jobs” within a specific radius only 26 were full time and dependant on specific experienced skills. It is all one big con and we are being lied to as well as the poorest of the poor being robbed! I am so so thoroughly disgusted!

  2. Frances Leader

    RA!!! Totally supported, every word is priceless! Many thanks to the author for expressing my every concern so succinctly (it is a bit long, but there’s a lot to address with these Tory Terrorists! Delighted! Boodicca of the Icenii 2013 xx

  3. l

    Jesus Christ those calculations are so wrong

  4. NeilM639

    Does anyone still wonder why the Tories are, quite rightly, known as the Nasty Party?

  5. wayne

    Wow! Well, hope action developed from this, but i don’t think so, as this was written years ago and the situation has got worse, much worse

Comments are closed.