Forum Home → Discussion → Access to justice and advice sector issues → Thread
2012 Reform Scorecard
In its second annual rating of central government reform, a centre-right thinktank Reform says it has applied “dispassionate” analysis to assess the impact of the government’s programme to cut the public sector deficit and reform public services. They claim that the experience of 2011 has major implications for all sides of the political debate, which shows that “Cuts are working. The big successes of the first 18 months lie in those services subject to real terms budget cuts.”
Looking at Work and Pensions specifically, they highlight the creation of Universal Credit to tackle disincentives to work, and state that the Government has made progress on an active labour market policy through the Work Programme. They say that receipt of income assistance has been made more conditional on behaviour and inability to work, and also note that some efforts have been made to scale back middle class welfare for families with children, and pension reforms have been proposed, including shifting forward proposed increases in the State Pension Age.
They feel that the approach taken to means-testing Child Benefit is unnecessarily complex and risks undermining the principle of means-testing, and note that benefits for pensioners remain universal. They say that elements of pension reforms, particularly changes to the way in which the State Pension will be indexed, will increase cost and undo much of the work taking place on fiscal consolidation
They feel that there is potential for improvements in the interaction between DWP and other agencies, such as the Treasury, and note that the Public Accounts Committee found in its review of means-testing “there is limited oversight of the interactions of benefits that are based on means testing with each other”.
They note positive steps to reduce fraud and error, highlighting initiatives such as mobile regional taskforce targeting fraud hot spots, tougher “three-strike” rules and the introduction of a new civil penalty for people who negligently give incorrect information or do not tell the Department of changes in circumstance (strangely, they don’t seem to pay any attention to how DWP itself could reduce errors).
They also feel that there is a risk that, under Universal Credit, the scale of the funds at stake and the greater use of electronic channels to assess and deliver entitlement will mean it becomes a major target for organised fraud. They also make the curious claim that “competition and payment by results have been shown to improve the quality of welfare to work services, but greater provider autonomy is needed to ensure the welfare support is tailored to personal needs and local conditions. This would, however, increase the importance of consistent oversight of the administration of means testing. - obviously, they didn’t pay attention to last week’s rightsnet news story about the Public Accounts Committee’s reported views on Work Programme contractors
They feel that there should be increased requirement for individuals to prepare for their own future, through the use of insurance or greater personal savings, and that further cuts should be made to “middle class welfare benefits” and that housing benefit caps were “necessary to signal that there is a limit to which accommodation costs can be covered by the state”. They state that the changes proposed for DLA/PIP are necessary as “an important step in ensuring that receipt of this support does not turn into a dead end”
Reform describe themselves as an independent, non-party think tank whose mission is to set out a better way to deliver public services and economic prosperity.