More trouble for IDS: how claimants are unprepared for Universal Credit

Ahead of Duncan Smith's grilling by MPs, a new study shows 92 per cent of claimants are unprepared for the new system in at least one area.

Iain Duncan Smith will be grilled by MPs on Wednesday about the progress (or lack of) in implementing Universal Credit and there's further evidence today of why so many across Whitehall are troubled by the Work and Pensions Secretary's grand projet

Three months before UC, which will replace six of the main means-tested benefits and tax credits with a single payment, is introduced nationally, the first independent survey of recipients by Citizens Advice has found that 92 per cent are unprepared for the new system in at least one area. Changes that will be introduced include monthly, rather than weekly or fortnightly, payments, a new online system for accessing benefits and the direct payment of housing benefit to claimants, rather than landlords. 

Previous research has found that claimants believe monthly payment will make it harder for them to budget and this concern is reinforced by the Citizens Advice study, with three-quarters saying they could not alone "keep track of my money on a monthly basis". In addition, two-thirds say they will need help to "get online and manage my universal credit account". One claimant, Derek Mallet, from Birmingham, said he was "concerned about having to use the internet in order to set up and get benefits. I have never been on a computer." This unpreparedness, Citizens Advice says, is "widespread across people of all backgrounds and ages".

In response, the charity is pushing for the government to allow claimants to request fortnightly rather than monthly payments and for their rent to be paid directly to their landlord for the first year of the new system. Gillian Guy said: "Our report shows that an overwhelming majority of people do not feel ready to deal with universal credit. Our findings must act as a wake-up call for government.

"The results demonstrate yet again how vital it is that implementing universal credit is not left to chance. There is clearly a breakdown in the system if 90% of potential claimants are not ready to deal with this major change to their payments, and ministers must act urgently to address this problem."

For now, the DWP insists that it is working with "councils, social landlords and community groups, including Citizens Advice, to offer support" to claimants. But if Universal Credit is not to become, in Labour's words, "universal chaos", it does look increasingly likely that Duncan Smith will have to accept the changes urged by Citizens Advice and others. 

Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith speaks at last year's Conservative conference in Birmingham. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Voters are turning against Brexit but the Lib Dems aren't benefiting

Labour's pro-Brexit stance is not preventing it from winning the support of Remainers. Will that change?

More than a year after the UK voted for Brexit, there has been little sign of buyer's remorse. The public, including around a third of Remainers, are largely of the view that the government should "get on with it".

But as real wages are squeezed (owing to the Brexit-linked inflationary spike) there are tentative signs that the mood is changing. In the event of a second referendum, an Opinium/Observer poll found, 47 per cent would vote Remain, compared to 44 per cent for Leave. Support for a repeat vote is also increasing. Forty one per cent of the public now favour a second referendum (with 48 per cent opposed), compared to 33 per cent last December. 

The Liberal Democrats have made halting Brexit their raison d'être. But as public opinion turns, there is no sign they are benefiting. Since the election, Vince Cable's party has yet to exceed single figures in the polls, scoring a lowly 6 per cent in the Opinium survey (down from 7.4 per cent at the election). 

What accounts for this disparity? After their near-extinction in 2015, the Lib Dems remain either toxic or irrelevant to many voters. Labour, by contrast, despite its pro-Brexit stance, has hoovered up Remainers (55 per cent back Jeremy Corbyn's party). 

In some cases, this reflects voters' other priorities. Remainers are prepared to support Labour on account of the party's stances on austerity, housing and education. Corbyn, meanwhile, is a eurosceptic whose internationalism and pro-migration reputation endear him to EU supporters. Other Remainers rewarded Labour MPs who voted against Article 50, rebelling against the leadership's stance. 

But the trend also partly reflects ignorance. By saying little on the subject of Brexit, Corbyn and Labour allowed Remainers to assume the best. Though there is little evidence that voters will abandon Corbyn over his EU stance, the potential exists.

For this reason, the proposal of a new party will continue to recur. By challenging Labour over Brexit, without the toxicity of Lib Dems, it would sharpen the choice before voters. Though it would not win an election, a new party could force Corbyn to soften his stance on Brexit or to offer a second referendum (mirroring Ukip's effect on the Conservatives).

The greatest problem for the project is that it lacks support where it counts: among MPs. For reasons of tribalism and strategy, there is no emergent "Gang of Four" ready to helm a new party. In the absence of a new convulsion, the UK may turn against Brexit without the anti-Brexiteers benefiting. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.