Anti-poverty campaigners warn Universal Credit is failing to keep pace with the cost of living

As hunger remains a reality for millions of people across the UK, anti-poverty campaigners are warning that social security payments are failing to cover the cost of even the most basic essentials.

Figures released earlier this year by food bank charity Trussell showed more than 2.6 million emergency food parcels were provided to people facing hunger and hardship across the UK in 2025. That’s 45% more than before the pandemic, confirming the scale of the challenge facing households struggling to make ends meet.

While some people have managed to get back on their feet, Trussell warned that many continue to feel “overlooked and left behind,” as incomes from social security and wages fail to keep pace with the cost of essentials such as food, energy and toiletries.

The charity is calling on the government to ensure Universal Credit reflects the real cost of living, rather than relying on annual inflation-linked increases that may still leave people unable to afford the basics.

In a recent social media post, Trussell highlighted the disconnect between benefit payments and the actual cost of everyday essentials.

“Universal Credit doesn’t know the price of a pint of milk. Or your heating bill. Or a weekly food shop.

“In fact, it doesn’t know the cost of any essentials because it’s never been set based on how much things cost.

“Leaving millions of people without enough money to get by and forced to use a food bank.

“But it doesn’t have to be like this…

“We’re calling on the UK Government to set an independent process for Universal Credit, one that looks at what life actually costs and makes sure the support people receive matches up.”

The post prompted a response from people concerned about the inadequacy of benefit payments, with some arguing that housing costs leave claimants with little money for anything else.

One commenter wrote: “Yeah, as much as the government and media love blasting benefit claimants as living the life of Riley; truth of it is, almost all the payment is essentially just basic rent and council tax.

“If the government wants to save money on the benefits bill, that is where it needs to start – cap rent while people are reliant on benefits or bring back social housing and put benefit claimants in that.

“Essentially, benefits are just funding greedy landlords at this point and everyone is blaming the claimant for simply needing a roof over their head.”

Universal Credit’s standard allowances increase annually in line with inflation. However, critics argue that uprating payments in this way does not necessarily ensure they cover the actual cost of living, particularly when households are already struggling to meet essential expenses.

Trussell’s warnings echo earlier research by the New Economics Foundation (NEF), which found that Universal Credit was falling far short of what people needed to live on.

Analysis published by the think tank in 2023 estimated Universal Credit payments for single people aged over 25 were £890 a month below the cost of living. The research highlighted a fundamental problem with the system, that benefit rates are not based on an independent assessment of how much people need to afford a basic standard of living.

“The underlying inadequacy of support means that the 10.1% April 2023 inflation-increase to Universal Credit and cost of living payments fails to compensate for a 10% increase in the costs people face, and so the gap between the two grows,” the NEF said.

Like Trussell, the NEF argues that income support must do more to protect people from poverty. But it advocates for a more radical approach: a national Living Income that would establish a minimum income sufficient to cover life’s essentials, regardless of whether someone is in or out of work.

The proposals differ, but both charities point to the same underlying problem: a benefits system that does not adequately reflect the cost-of-living risks leaving millions without enough money to meet their basic needs.