Existing problems with Universal credit risk being replicated unless you resolve them.
Existing problems with Universal credit risk being replicated unless you resolve them
Dear Iain,
At your party conference you announced your intention to “accelerate the delivery of Universal Credit … from the New Year, bringing forward the national roll-out through 2015/16 to every community across Great Britain”.
As 985,920 fewer people receiving are Universal Credit than you originally said would be claiming the new benefit by April 2014, acceleration is clearly necessary.
However, given the litany of problems with the delivery of this scheme to date, and the £130m of public money wasted on IT, it would be extremely worrying if even the limited expansion of the scheme you have announced was being driven more by a political timetable than by due concern for effective and efficient delivery.
Yesterday I visited the North West to find out first-hand how the Universal Credit pathfinders had been working in practice. I met with local authorities, the voluntary sector, housing providers and work programme contractors as well as staff and managers at the Jobcentre in Ashton-under-Lyne, which as you know has had the longest experience of handling Universal Credit claims. I would like to take this opportunity to record my gratitude and appreciation for the time they took to meet me and I am grateful also to you and officials at the DWP for helping to arrange this.
These meetings confirmed to me that the principle of Universal Credit is a good one that could bring real benefits to claimants, communities and taxpayers. It was also very clear that professionals across the public, private and voluntary sectors in these areas are working extremely hard to make Universal Credit a success.
However it was also clear that there remain a range of serious problems with the current operation of Universal Credit which risk being replicated and multiplied across the country on a far larger scale if Universal Credit unless they are resolved.
The serious problems that were raised with me included:
• the IT systems and related work processes around Universal Credit claims remain “clunky”, poor at handling complex or dynamic circumstances, and prone to delays and mistakes in processing claims and making payments.
• a significant level of system error which currently needs to be identified and corrected through costly manual checks.
• particular problems and high rates of error associated with the incorporation of the housing costs element of Universal Credit.
• concerns that claimants had not been informed of, or had difficulty in accessing, budgeting support, advance payments or alternative payment arrangements.
• an extremely high incidence of rent arrears that implied very substantial financial and administrative burdens for housing providers as caseloads increase.
• the meaning of “in-work conditionality” and how in-work support will be delivered by jobcentres remains extremely unclear despite the fact that numbers of Universal Credit claimants in work will increase as the caseload expands and matures and the integral importance of this element to the programme’s aim of providing a different set of incentives to progress in work and increase working hours
• joint-working between the DWP and relevant local partners is patchy and there is poor data-sharing between the two, with little automatic integration of information on claimants and their circumstances.
The problems which I was told about during my visit are leading to concerns about the risks to claimants and additional costs to the public purse when Universal Credit is rolled out in other parts of the country. Therefore I am writing today to ask that you give us clarity and assurance on the following key issues:
1. What guarantee can you give that the IT systems for Universal Credit will not increase levels of error and delays in processing claims, payments and changes of circumstances?
2. What is your estimate of the current cost of manual processes for identifying and rectifying system errors, and how will you prevent this increasing as the caseload expands?
3. Will you publish a full evaluation of the impact of including new claims with a housing cost element in current Pathfinder areas before introducing Universal Credit to new areas?
4. Will you guarantee that all Universal Credit claimants will be fully informed of their options for budgeting support, advance payments and alternative payment arrangements, and set strict and published limits for the time taken to process and deliver on requests made?
5. What are the current levels of awareness and take up of options for budgeting support, advance payments and alternative payment arrangements among current claimants?
6. What increases in levels of rent arrears and related proceedings do you anticipate with the increasing incorporation of housing cost elements into the Universal Credit caseload?
7. How has “in work conditionality” been delivered in practice so far? What are the outcomes and lessons of its implementation so far? How will it be rolled out nationally?
8. What information on claimants and the circumstances and their partners is currently shared automatically between the DWP and relevant partners, and what can only be shared manually? What information cannot be provided even on request?
9. What steps will you take to ensure that joint working between the DWP and relevant partners is improved before introducing Universal Credit in new areas?
10. Will local authorities and voluntary sector partners in every area receive the same level of additional funding and support from the DWP for supporting the introduction of Universal Credit as has been available to Pathfinders? What has been the cost of this, and what will be the cost of extending it to all areas of the country?
And following your written ministerial statement of 13 October:
11. What IT system will underpin the full national roll-out, if, as you have stated, testing of the “enhanced digital service” is to start “later this year” in a “limited local area?
12. What exactly has been “assured by the Major Projects Authority and signed off by HM Treasury”, especially give the statement that “we will keep all longer-term plans under review.
13. When will a long-term plan for the full-implementation of Universal Credit be published?
14. How many people will be on universal credit by 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018?
15. By what date will universal credit be rolled out entirely across the country?
16. By what date will the migration of all legacy benefits have been completed?
I look forward to hearing from you.
Rachel Reeves MP is shadow secretary of state for work and pensions
63 Responses to “Exclusive: An open letter to Iain Duncan Smith: Universal Credit questions that need answering”
GO
Really?
I mean, you *could* have a safety-net ‘welfare state’ (of a sort), in which the state provides basic, key services and benefits only to people who can’t afford to make suitable private provision. But the UK model has never looked remotely like that. Rather, it has been based around *universal* state provision of a comprehensive range of very expensive services and benefits – most obviously education, healthcare and a state pension. The means-tested ‘safety net’ elements of the UK welfare state – e.g. out-of-work benefits – are only a small part of the picture.
If we moved to a ‘safety net’ model, with only poor people entitled to free schooling and healthcare, a state pension, etc., the consequences for most households not on a six-figure salary would be disastrous. They might save a few thousand pounds a year if the tax burden fell steeply from, say, 40% to 30%, but it wouldn’t begin to cover the private cost of schooling their children, insuring their health, and providing for a basic income in old age.
The_Average_Joe_UK
Thats exactly what we need. Complacency, keep it up. Heywood and Middleton 640 votes.
clivegsd
Oh come on, really? A man (?) who dismisses statistics in favour of his beliefs? A man who has wasted millions of pounds unnecessarily on his vanity project? A man that has systematically set about taking away support from the poorest and most vulnerable in society? A politician that has caused many deaths and suicides thanks to his attacks on disability benefits.He has ZERO experience of poverty and ZERO talent for his job.
Reeves couldn’t be any worse or any more stupid than IDS if she tried, and so you know, I cant stand her either
The_Average_Joe_UK
Unemployment is falling, that is a fact. Youth unemployment is down by 20% from a million to 800k. I’d rather see people in low paid jobs than on benefits as ultimately we get productivity, then growth then better wages and conditions. The left have no answers, just poverty for all. The last time I looked 99.9999992% of large employers who pay tax and fund your benefits were started by the private sector. Your policies keep the private sector down, which means less jobs, more poverty and debt. this is categorically proven. FWIW I believe in state control of monopolies and rail.
A decent government can balance good welfare provision with free enterprise. All the left can do is froth at the mouth preaching classwar and jealousy. They are dangerous to the health of ordinary people. Ask a lefty if he’ll start a company employing 100k people on the living wage. Keep asking them again and again. Apparently that’s the job of Tories who they despise. There is no bigger a hole than a lefty.
“Reeves couldn’t be any worse or any more stupid than IDS if she tried” I beg to differ. Every PPE educated politician should be fired immediately. Detached liberal pratts with no clue.
clivegsd
No it isn’t, figures are being fiddled to hide the true number of unemployed, it’s what all parties do.
Your comment “I’d rather see people in low paid jobs than on benefits” is either naïve or inane, low paid jobs are topped up with benefits!
Sorry, my policies? I didn’t know I was a politician, and all from some comments in newspaper articles! Also I’m no leftie, I hate Labour slightly less than I hate the Tories.
I have to admit I’ve never come across someone that defends Herr Shmitt, it is a novelty I’ll admit, though it’s pretty sickening to see someone defend a politician that has the deaths of many disabled people on his hands.
Your constant ‘barb’ that I’m a leftie doesn’t work I’m afraid, when a party comes about that truly does want social equality and a more moral way of dealing with things then you can brand me as whatever they were to be called, until then I have no political allegiances