Quote:
Originally Posted by Kizzy
Fantastic post joey! How much have the welfare reforms actually saved, that would be interesting to know, I wonder if it's as much as IDS has spent?
" The Department for Work and Pensions has spent £700 million on Universal Credit since the programme began in 2010. However, very little progress has been achieved on the front line. Fewer than 18,000 people were claiming Universal Credit by October 2014, out of around seven million expected in the longer term – just 0.3% of the eligible population.
http://www.parliament.uk/business/co...ogress-update/ |
Firstly thank you Livia, for your comments as to my post above,(sorry it was so long), well one of them anyway
I love how we can be on different sides yet hold massive respect for the others view without any sarcasm and unnecessary tit for tat.
You know too I hope, that although I don't agree with you as to the Conservatives now, I do respect your views and I also can take a lot on board that you say too.
So thank you again.
Now Kizzy, I have little doubt the welfare reforms are costing way more than anything saved.
I really also, unless they were even more heartless and stupid enough to do so,believe that it will stay that way unless they actually slashed benefit entitlements.
If they are not going to remove from the more well off pensioners for example,the winter fuel allowance and other extra benefits, then they will have to hit those relying on benefits.
They cannot possibly reduce the welfare bill any other way as pensions and the extra's to that, make up the greater bill for welfare anyway.
So I cannot see where the reforms are ever going to bring in anything worthwhile at all.
I also don't like the idea of Universal credit either, it is costing way too much too,it is behind schedule despite what Ian Duncan Smith would tell us, in most places it is operating only for new claimants.
There is the massive backlog of existing claimants, and all that will cost, to get through yet.
I hate its proposal that those claiming it will be paid every 4 weeks.these are benefits for goodness sake, not actual wages.
I also disagree strongly with for those on housing benefit and cpuncil tax rebate, that it will be paid directly to the claimant and not to the local authority or landlord.
That is going to cause really big problems in my view.
The old system, in my view, from what I have come across, just needed tightening up, not having payments of different benefits all paid on different days of the week.
Universal credit will do that but claimanats should have the option of being paid weekly, fortnightly or monthly, not have it forced on them.
In my recent work, I came across someone who got pension credit on a monday,their ESA on a thursday and their DLA paid monthly on a Wednesday.
Crazy,absolutely crazy.
These are badly thought out welfare reforms, that have caused massive confusion and distress to claimants.
Saving very little, in relation to the welfare bill overall in the long run but costing near the earth to do.
You are right to point out the slow progress of Universal credit, which means even more delays and problems due the ime involved in setting it up for people actually in need.
This is an area of funding that even Margaret Thatcher pulled back from, as to changing it too much.
After seeing the chaos from Ian Duncan Smith's reforms, it is easy to see why she largely left it be too.
Take in the costs too of those who have had their benefit cut or stopped altogether, who have then had to wait almost up to a year at times to get it sorted in court,with the ruling then that the cut or stopping them was wrong.
All the costs of putting that right must eat further into anything saved as benefits.
I also for the life of me, cannot see why we have to pay multi millions to an American company to re-assess our claimants,in order to in effect likely save a pittance as opposed to what it will all cost to do.
Far better take on more jobcentre staff and move more experienced staff up to do such re-assessments for the DWP.