Full rollout of universal credit delayed to September 2024
Latest news - Neil Couling to be knighted as Sir Neil de Cartes de Remerciements
There’s an urgent question on the delay in the Commons today at 12.30 from SNP MP Neil Gray
I am a bit bemused. Fair enough implementing UC was always going to be problematic, but if customers are still scared 7 years after the launch, there has to be something wrong with the communication strategy or the product.
Letter dated 3 February 2020 - deposited in House of Commons Library - from Work and Pensions Secretary Therese Coffey to Work and Pensions Committee Chair Stephen Timms confirms that -
‘Our planning for Universal Credit relies on assumptions about the number of people whose circumstances will change each day, thereby naturally migrating. Our forecasts to date have relied on 50,000 households experiencing a change incircumstances each month. Based on this, we had predicted the process of natural migration across to Universal Credit would be completed by December 2023.
However, information collected on changes to people’s circumstances suggests that natural migration is happening less frequently than we expected. This suggests broad stability in people’s lives and can be attributed to a number of reasons, including the robustness of the labour market.
We now estimate that 900,000 fewer households will naturally migrate between now and December 2023 than we had forecasted. Given that we expect to manage around 100,000 households to Universal Credit each month, it necessarily follows that it will take a further nine months to complete the implementation of Universal Credit.’
Plain as a pikestaff from the goings-on in Parliament that HMG is not listening and keen to blame ‘scaremongering’.
Who comes up with these numbers for DWP!?
900 000 between now and Dec 2023 is nearly 20 000 fewer per month than forecasted.
I’ll look forward to watching (with dread) DWP manage 100 000 per month.
Here’s today’s Urgent Question in the Commons for your viewing pleasure:
Apparently everything is fine, the Jobcentres love UC (no mention of what claimants think), it’s all tickety-boo, people are only frightened because of naughty scaremongering, food banks are Labour’s fault, as is everything else bad, ever.
A propaganda whitewash.
Does anyone know if JCPs employ more security staff after the roll out of UC? Might be an interesting metric
So they’re only migrating 30,000 against a planned 50,000 per month. And this will leave them with 900,000 remaining at the end of 2023. Then they’re somehow going to be able to migrate 100,000 per month after that (on top of any completely new claims)? To my mind, this seems naïve/optimistic/deluded. Or are they expecting to be just getting into their stride by then? Ten years warm up for a nine month sprint?
Describing the extra £500 million cost:
“This is additional money that will go into the pockets of our claimants, some of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged in our country. About 900,000 people could now receive transitional protection who would not have been able to receive it through natural migration.’”
Doesn’t this simply highlight how unfair natural migration is to claimants.
I am also intrigued by “This relates to the back end of the timetable, which concerns people moving to universal credit in 2024-2025” as part of an announcement that the process will now end in 2024. Presumably it relates to the financial year - but it doesn’t read very well!
‘Doesn’t this simply highlight how unfair natural migration is to claimants.’
Yep - and how does it sit with government claims that there would be no cash losers???
[“There will be no losers”
Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith, House of Commons, 11 November 2010]
But it’s OK - it’s all somebody else’s fault. Hang your heads in shame, scaremongers![ Edited: 5 Feb 2020 at 01:36 pm by Andrew Dutton ]
So 900,000 who were never going to be worse off under UC (because nobody is and its all wonderful) won’t be worse off after all.
It gets more like The Goon Show everyday!
So the £500m is the amount that current legacy benefit claimants will continue getting as a result of their stubbornly unchanged circumstances, plus transitional protection when they have to undergo managed migration later. 900,000 more managed migrations that originally anticipated, right?
I am still not convinced by this. Some people will fit that profile, but they are mainly SDP claimants who wouldn’t be allowed to claim UC before managed migration anyway - they should have been factored into the transitional protection estimates. Most of the other stable long term legacy benefit claimants will either break even on UC or gain a bit (ESA support group with no SDP), so they wouldn’t have been needing any transitional protection. Not sure how all this relates to labour market robustness either.
thinking aloud - would the figure also depend on how DWP implement managed migration?
For example, if they manage migrate legacy claimants at random or concentrate of recipients of particular legacy benefits, or in particular geographic areas first? What about tax credit recipients with capital over £16K who might now retain TC and then UC with TP for longer than originally planned?