How is Iain Duncan Smith still in his job?

If the doctrine of ministerial responsibility means anything, the Work and Pensions Secretary should have resigned over the failure of Universal Credit long ago.

It’s going to be another uncomfortable day for Iain Duncan Smith. Today’s Public Accounts Committee report on Universal Credit is one of the most excoriating anyone can remember. Margaret Hodge and her colleagues warn that most of the £425m of public money so far spent on the programme is likely to be written off, that management of the project has been “alarmingly weak”, that the DWP has consistently failed to “grasp the nature and enormity of the task”, and that it missed early “warning signs”, refusing to “intervene promptly”.

The committee adds that Duncan Smith will not meet his current target of enrolling 184,000 claimants (a fraction of the original number) by April 2014 and that the department will have to “speed up the later stages of the programme” if it is to meet the 2017 completion date. This, it warns, poses “new risks”.

The Universal Credit pilot, which is confined to just five jobcentres and to single people claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance, is rightly derided as “not a proper pilot”. The MPs note: “It lacks the security components needed to prevent fraudulent claims and protect individuals’ personal information. It does not deal with the key issues that Universal Credit must address: the volume of claims; their complexity; change in claimants’ circumstances; and the need for claimants to meet conditions for continuing entitlement to benefit. The Department needs a revised pilot that is capable of properly informing the full roll-out of Universal Credit.”

As on previous occasions, there appears to have been a concerted attempt by Duncan Smith and his allies to pin the blame on DWP Permanent Secretary Robert Devereux. The Times reports that at least three Tory MPs on the committee were approached and asked to ensure that the report “heaped blame on to the Permanent Secretary” and that “Robert Devereux was to be associated with the key failings”. This despite parliamentary rules stating that ministers are not allowed to influence Commons committee reports. One opposition MP tells the paper: "It was obvious there was some kind of coordinated effort going on. Some of the Conservative members wanted us to be much tougher on the Permanent Secretary than the rest of us were comfortable with”.

In the resultant report, Devereux is not mentioned by name, with only two references to the “accounting officer”, suggesting that Labour members prevailed over their Tory counterparts. A spokesperson for Duncan Smith says today: "Iain was clear back in the summer about how he and the permanent secretary took action to fix those problems. He has every confidence with the team now in place, and that team includes Robert Devereux." But the Tories are simultaneously briefing that his resignation will be accepted if offered, with one commenting: “Once again officials have been named and ministers have not, and that will make uncomfortable reading.”

But if the doctrine of ministerial responsibility means anything it’s worth asking: how is Duncan Smith still in his job? He was warned from the start by multiple groups that he had underestimated the scale of the task and that Universal Credit would be delivered neither on time or on budget. Back in October 2010, the Chartered Institute of Taxation noted in its response to the government's consultation: “The document suggests that the IT changes required would not constitute a major project, and this was repeated by the Secretary of State [Iain Duncan Smith] when he gave evidence to the Work and Pensions Select Committee. We are sceptical about this.”

That Duncan Smith remains in his post owes much to the weakness of David Cameron and George Osborne. When attempts were made to move him to Justice in the September 2012 reshuffle, the Work and Pensions Secretary refused point blank, making it clear that there was only one job in government he wanted. Rather than allowing this eurosceptic right-winger to emerge as a rival centre of power on the backbenches, Cameron and Osborne chose to keep him in the tent. Given the failure of Universal Credit, they may well have concluded that the best option lies in him remaining in post and soaking up the abuse. 

Labour, meanwhile, has focused its criticism on Cameron, not IDS. In her response to today's report, Rachel Reeves said: "Today’s report from the Public Accounts Committee is a shocking confirmation of David Cameron’s failure and another nail in the coffin of his Government’s promise to deliver Universal Credit on time and on budget.

"Families facing a cost of living crisis need welfare reform they can trust. Instead they’ve got an out of touch Prime Minister who has presided over chaos and waste." Forget the enfeebled Duncan Smith, Labour has bigger fish to fry. 

Thus it seems, defying all convention, that Duncan Smith will survive. But his original ambition to transform the welfare system in one parliament is dead. Whether Labour or the Tories win in 2015, don't bet on them picking up the baton. 

Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith speaks at the Conservative conference in Manchester last month. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

Rarely has it mattered so little if Manchester United won; rarely has it been so special they did

Team's Europa League victory offers chance for sorely needed celebration of a city's spirit.

Carlo Ancelotti, the Bayern Munich manager, memorably once said that football is “the most important of the least important things”, but he was only partly right. While it is absolutely the case that a bunch of people chasing around a field is insignificant, a bunch of people chasing around a field is not really what football is about.

At a football match can you set aside the strictures that govern real life and freely scream, shout and cuddle strangers. Football tracks life with such unfailing omnipresence, garnishing the mundane with regular doses of drama and suspense; football is amazing, and even when it isn’t there’s always the possibility that it’s about to be.

Football bestows primal paroxysms of intense, transcendent ecstasy, shared both with people who mean everything and people who mean nothing. Football carves out time for people it's important to see and delivers people it becomes important to see. Football is a structure with folklore, mythology, language and symbols; being part of football is being part of something big, special, and eternal. Football is the best thing in the world when things go well, and still the best thing in the world when they don’t. There is nothing remotely like it. Nothing.

Football is about community and identity, friends and family; football is about expression and abandon, laughter and song; football is about love and pride. Football is about all the beauty in the world.

And the world is a beautiful place, even though it doesn’t always seem that way – now especially. But in the horror of terror we’ve seen amazing kindness, uplifting unity and awesome dignity which is the absolute point of everything.

In Stockholm last night, 50,000 or so people gathered for a football match, trying to find a way of celebrating all of these things. Around town before the game the atmosphere was not as boisterous as usual, but in the ground the old conviction gradually returned. The PA played Bob Marley’s Three Little Birds, an Ajax staple with lyrics not entirely appropriate: there is plenty about which to worry, and for some every little thing is never going to be alright.

But somehow the sentiment felt right and the Mancunian contingent joined in with gusto, following it up with “We’ll never die,” – a song of defiance born from the ashes of the Munich air disaster and generally aired at the end of games, often when defeat is imminent. Last night it was needed from the outset, though this time its final line – “we’ll keep the red flag flying high, coz Man United will never die" – was not about a football team but a city, a spirit, and a way of life. 

Over the course of the night, every burst of song and even the minute's silence chorused with that theme: “Manchester, Manchester, Manchester”; “Manchester la la la”; “Oh Manchester is wonderful”. Sparse and simple words, layered and complex meanings.

The match itself was a curious affair. Rarely has it mattered so little whether or not United won; rarely has it been so special that they did. Manchester United do not represent or appeal to everyone in Manchester but they epitomise a similar brilliance to Manchester, brilliance which they take to the world. Brilliance like youthfulness, toughness, swagger and zest; brilliance which has been to the fore these last three days, despite it all.

Last night they drew upon their most prosaic aspects, outfighting and outrunning a willing but callow opponent to win the only trophy to have eluded them. They did not make things better, but they did bring happiness and positivity at a time when happiness and positivity needed to be brought; football is not “the most important of the least important things,” it is the least important of the most important things.

0800 7318496