Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit migration → Thread
Threat of revolt forces rethink of ‘catastrophic’ universal credit
The roll-out of the government’s flagship welfare programme is to be overhauled amid dire warnings about its impact on the vulnerable ...
Amber Rudd, work and pensions secretary, is to scrap plans for an imminent parliamentary vote allowing 3 million existing welfare claimants to be transferred to the controversial universal credit system. The move is expected to be part of a major rethink designed to quell concerns about the programme’s roll-out and avoid a damaging Tory rebellion.
Rudd will now seek approval from MPs only for a pilot scheme that transfers just 10,000 people from the old to the new system – a system that has been blamed for pushing some to the brink of destitution. Only after the pilot has been assessed will MPs be asked to approve the full roll-out.
and the beeb https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46772901
Does a ferret make a sound when it reverses?
I do.
I do.
Post of the year contender!
So reading through the propaganda mist; they’re ploughing ahead with the 10k trial cohort but have delayed the full vote on the new regs?
I suppose, now, the real question will be whether the SDP protection is laid as a separate SI.
So reading through the propaganda mist; they’re ploughing ahead with the 10k trial cohort but have delayed the full vote on the new regs?
I suppose, now, the real question will be whether the SDP protection is laid as a separate SI.
Surely they will have to lay the draft regs or something like them in order to authorise the “trial”?
I think you are all (except Dan) very sad reading RN on a Sunday!
The yet further delay would have nothing to do with parliament, government, Whitehall being almost paralysed by Brexit with no room to debate the full draft managed migration regs? Presumably the draft regs will now be split to provide only for the 10K migration, SDP transitional provision etc. as suggested by the Work & Pensions Ctte. etc?
Next job for Amber Rudd is to add parents of non-severely disabled children to the groups who cannot claim UC, or better still increase the element to match CTC as there is no logical or defensible reason for halving it.
Next job for Amber Rudd is to add parents of non-severely disabled children to the groups who cannot claim UC, or better still increase the element to match CTC as there is no logical or defensible reason for halving it.
Sage words but surely it’ll need the High Court to instruct her (again!)
Surely they will have to lay the draft regs or something like them in order to authorise the “trial”?
I’ll bet for a trial they won’t need half the debating time of the full migration; parliamentary time will be maxmised as with a succesful trial they will claim Quad Erat Demonstratum and plough on regardless.
And how much will DWP now learn from CA providing UC claim support from April? https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/13474/
Will the 10K be within specific geographic areas and inc the most complex cases / vulnerable claimants or spread thinly so DWP can argue the majority of the 10K have coped with managed migration so lets steam ahead?
I think you are all (except Dan) very sad reading RN on a Sunday!
The yet further delay would have nothing to do with parliament, government, Whitehall being almost paralysed by Brexit with no room to debate the full draft managed migration regs? Presumably the draft regs will now be split to provide only for the 10K migration, SDP transitional provision etc. as suggested by the Work & Pensions Ctte. etc?
Guilty as charged; even worse I was also on holiday. I plead provocation.
As everyone says, it remains to be seen if other important steps are taken, otherwise this isn’t much really.
I fear that what will happen is that 10,000 cases will be handled with painstaking care (‘failure will not be an option’ etc etc) , allowing DWP to go back to boasting total, brilliant success and then plunging ahead with the remaining 3m or so claims in the customary heedless pig’s-ear manner.
Is there anyway that test and learn, pilots, impact assessments etc…. to ensure what is known as so called “safe delivery” can be done by computer simulation, rather than tried out on real people?
Just asking…..
In the New Statesman, Anoosh Chakelian asks “how much difference will Rudd’s pause actually make?”
Is there anyway that test and learn, pilots, impact assessments etc…. to ensure what is known as so called “safe delivery” can be done by computer simulation, rather than tried out on real people?
Just asking…..
The trouble with any computer simulation is that it relies on somebody to set the rules. You could write a flight simulator and tell it that down is up.
Looking at how the DWP approaches its test and learn processes, they would probably tell their simulator that all UC applicants are single, working (but with plenty of spare time to do UC claims), IT literate, with one child, monthly rents, some savings, and possibly earning enough that they don’t qualify for UC. Should take about 30 seconds to run all the simulations. But it might take a few months to write the programme, and another couple of years to agree which way is up.
In the New Statesman, Anoosh Chakelian asks “how much difference will Rudd’s pause actually make?”
Even abolishment would not make the difference.
UC has become a blanket term for the problems with benefits.
There’s no investigations with reporting.