The Bill has been announced and, from the summary, it seems more far-reaching than expected. Hence, more complex for us.


“The tax and benefits system will be made fairer and simpler.”

The purpose of the Bill is to:

* Simplify the benefits system in order to improve work incentives.

The main benefits of the Bill would be:

* Making the benefits system less complex.
* Improving work incentives.
* Getting the five million plus people languishing on benefits into work and out of poverty.
* Reducing the scope for fraud and error.

The main elements of the Bill are:

* Removing the confusing complexity of the benefits system, which too often leaves people afraid to make any change to their circumstances and can be a barrier to moving from benefits to work.
* Making people see a gain when entering work through simplifying the benefits system.
* Reducing the scope for fraud and error by making the benefits system simpler.
* Reducing unnecessary administration of benefits. Currently people can have overlapping entitlements or switch between different benefits – around 200,000 people a year cycle between Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) and Incapacity Benefit (IB/ Employment and Support Allowance (ESA).

Related documents:

* Building Britain’s recovery – achieving full employment Feb 2010 – http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/building-britains-recovery.pdf
* Raising expectations and increasing support Dec 2009 – http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/fullversion.pdf
* No-one written off – reforming welfare to reward responsibility – July 2008 – http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/noonewrittenoff-complete.pdf
* Benefit Simplification Guide 2009 – http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/simplification-guide-best-practice.pdf
* Simplification and the customer – http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/simplification-and-the-customer.pdf

Well, they aren't going to get that into statute in less than a year and I doubt they could implement it in less than two, not after all the admin cuts in DWP...

"around 200,000 people a year cycle between Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) and Incapacity Benefit (IB/ Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)."

Does this mean that we are going to have to clean the rust off our bikes from the 1980's, and get on them to look for work?

DWP are cutting 16,000 temporary staff (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/82803dac-6766-11df-a932-00144feab49a.html).

They aren't coping with the workload now, how are they going to cope when any changes are brought in plus the 10,000 per week IB-ESA claimants?

I thought legislation was already in place to shift the IB/IS claimants over by 2013, on the basis that they didn't expect to be able to do it any faster.
And if you look at all the bills announced in the Queen's Speech, none of which has been proposed before - I don't think Parliamentary Counsel could clear the drafting of that lot in two years, as there won't be anything to go on yet. You can't draft a Bill without knowing exactly what your instructions are.

Isn't it called 'enabling' legislation.

An Act to give the SoS powers to make regulations to open workhouses, operate galleys, appoint outsourced flagellation specialists and to ensure that those who are reduced to begging, mustn't.

From The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/26/coalition-welfare-reforms-duncan-smith

"Change would come, the CSJ report said, at the expense of some middle-income families on £30,000 a year who would lose their child tax credit."

A middle-income family earning £30,000 a year? £15,000 each. So if you earned more than this you wouldn't get Tax Credits?

"Admitting that both Tory and Labour governments have used incapacity benefit to keep jobless figures down, Duncan Smith promises to press ahead in the autumn with a review of the work capability of all 2.5 million people claiming the benefit."

Again with the re-assessing of ICB claimants?

"Duncan Smith also promises to be tougher on claimants who refuse job opportunities. "The jobseeker's allowance has a sanction at present. It just has not been used. If you simply are not going to play ball, then the taxpayer has a right to say: 'You need to know there is a limit to the amount of support we are going to give you.' The sanction comes into play.""

Anyone know of this sanction Jobcentre Plus haven't been using?

Maybe he means "the ultimate sanction".

Would you trust this man?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/26/iain-duncan-smith-interview-welfare

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/26/coalition-welfare-reforms-duncan-smith

What I find most amusing is the fact that the way they are going to tackle poverty in the UK is to change the definition of "poverty".

So really its just the same old stuff repackaged and re-spun.

Isn't there a golden rule of politics that the SofS (from any party) as head of the biggest spending dept. has to announce 'the biggest reform since Beveridge' on assuming office / at every other party conference?

The net result is the same old stuff re-cycled (i.e change the name of everything, change the rules a bit and cut/increase the rate of benefit a bit) with no reference to whether it can actually be administered effectively and efficiently in practice - for example the mess that is ESA with its unfit for purpose Atoshealthcare medical opinions (ESA85) at its heart.

Its far too much to hope that IDS might actually listen to the people who have to experince / deliver any changes on the ground - front line benefit staff, claimants, advice workers etc - before he implements the next 'big idea'.

When our local MP was the Sof S we used to delight in placing the pile of Sweet & Maxwell volumes in front of him each year to show by how much he had 'simplified' the benefits system by making the regulatory pile bigger. How long will it be before we need to buy a sixth volume each year?

But hey I've been in this game too long ......

Thu 27-May-10 12:53 PM by Gareth Morgan

"The former Tory leader highlighted the fact that people were better off claiming dole rather than working in a job paying £15,000 a year or less, risking trapping them and their families in poverty for years. "

So will he increase Tax Credit or reduce benefits?

Answers on a postcard please.

ps.

"Speaking to welfare experts from the voluntary, private and public sectors on Thursday"; anybody here, there IFYSM?

Gareth, anyone - your starter for ten

Think up a new name for supplementary benefit and justify its introduction as a solution to the current problems with MTBs (and the Social Fund), 95% withdrawl rates etc.

On the Q of a 'universal' means tested benefit - wasn't that introduced by a previous Tory administration - I think it was called Income Support - and you could apply the calculation to Housing Benefit and Rate Rebate. It wasn't perfect - but you could train people to do the calculations during a one day training course using on only 2 sides of A4 calc sheet (1 for IS).

But then Supp Ben only needed half a side of the DHSS A14 calc. sheet!

Nice words from IDS but.......hold on to your scepticism!

Peter's description of successive governments' approaches to the benefits system is like the history of my childhood stamp collection.

Built up piecemeal over many years, as a young teenager I got bored with it and wished for greater things in life. So I gave it to my younger sister. In a burst of enthusiasm she attempted to reform the collection by sticking various stamps on new pages. Some of the stamps she added were already in the collection while others were damaged and no good to begin with. While adding stamps she messed up some of the ones already there and they no longer fitted on the pages. It became an ever bigger mess.

She in turn got bored with it and moved on.

A few years ago I found the tattered collection and every so often I announce that I am going to comprehensively reform and modernise the disorganised and complex mess that the collection has got into.

This invariably means that I spend money on various new albums and suchlike and I research the Stanley Gibbons catalogue marvelling at how it could be.

In practice, after a bit of tinkering I realise that putting it all into some sort of order and simplification is far too complicated and time consuming so I go off and do something else until the next moment of enthusiasm.

"Think up a new name for supplementary benefit"

Hmm, it's going to be available to everybody in the country and it's going to help them....
... how about National Assistance?

Welfare? As in, I'm on welfare! I'm on welfare! I'm on welfare! I'm Spartacus! (Sorry, wrong movie).

The general rule is - shave off some entitlement, make claiming more difficult and make the name of the benefit (oops I mean allowance) much longer. So - Taking Full Responsibility Not to be Work Shy and a Drain on Society for Longer than Two Years Allowance - sounds about right. Or is 2 years too generous? Applies everyone - Noone is to sick not to take responsibility..............