Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit administration → Thread
Universal credit in trouble?
Two papers, the Telegraph and the Mirror, are carrying articles that report that Francis Maude, the Cabinet Office minister, has said that the implementation of universal credit is proving “difficult”.
The Telegraph reports that in a BBC Radio 4 interview, Maude admitted that the scheme was extremely complex and difficult to put in place.
The report him as saying“All of this is a challenge. None of this is straightforward – doing something as difficult as this will have a lot of challenges along the way. This is under way, there are lots of challenges. We are working with Iain Duncan Smith and others to meet those challenges. Are we there yet? Am I absolutely confident we are there yet? No. We need to press ahead with it and make it work.”
They also say that an aide to Mr Duncan Smith insisted that the project will be delivered according to plan: “It’s a big, ambitious project and it is difficult. That’s why Iain stayed to see it through. But there’s no question of this slipping, we are on time and on budget.”
This follows reports that Duncan Smith resisted an attempt by Prime Minister David Cameron to move him over to the Ministry of Justice in the cabinet reshuffle earlier on this week.
Telegraph Iain Duncan Smith benefits shake–up proving a challenge, minister warns
Mirror Iain Duncan Smith battles to save his universal credit scheme
The Guardian has just discovered that claimants are deliberately made to wait long time on the phone queue to ‘encourage’ them to use the Internet instead:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/sep/16/unemployed-call-centre-website?INTCMP=SRCH
It seems that Universal Credit can only be implemented if a good 80% of all claimants can deal with their claims online, and that without this ‘collaboration’ UC is in trouble!
I am very worried that one day the payment of people’s benefits will depend on such flimsy and uncontrollable conditions. I am also saddened by the cruel and stressful strategy adopted by the government to achieve this result (and I wonder how much of my working time I have already wasted, as I help claimants with phone calls).
I am now going to create a similar topic in the JSA/ESA sections of this forum, as it is important that we share our experience with phone contacts and hopefully discuss what we can do.
Josephina
Would it be mischevious if advisers refused to help with on line claims, but provided a free phone line for people to make telephone claims?
The problem is that we have to try to make UC work or it’s the clients who will suffer. That’s been the dilemma for a long time.
If online is the only way that it will work then advisers will have to help with that process.
There will be opportunities, unless they really tidy up not just the regs but the logic, to help many people put themselves in a better position than the rules intend. I have over two pages of one line flaws and ‘positioning’ suggestions already and more appear as you think about the detail and implications so we should keep the department busy anyway.
Would it be mischevious if advisers refused to help with on line claims, but provided a free phone line for people to make telephone claims?
It looks like your folks will be hanging on a long time, if they do.
Personally speaking, I think the idea of getting folks to do stuff on line aint a bad one. If its better for them and better for the DWP, its a win win.
Whats wrong is the process of forcing them to go online, to ease inmplementation of UC, by atrtificially inflating telephone waiting times.
Whats wrong with your counter suggestion Chris, is you are forcing folks to do exactly the opposite…...use only the phone…..
So is it Mischevious?
Yep…..
It is an important principle of public law and good administration to provide a service which is readily accessible to the public. The Claims and Payments regulations have evolved to do just this. Claimants have options of requesting claim forms, to make claims by phone and to deliver completed claim forms to a variety of outlets. This is good.
Expanding the system to allow online claiming is also a good thing. However, it is important that the system remains flexible to suit a wide variety of individual needs and circumstances. One size does not fit all as people’s circumstances are different. As long as the Claims and Payments Regulations allow for different methods of claiming then it is insidious of the DWP to mislead claimants into thinking that they don’t.
To narrow the scope of the regulations would be short sighted. To be sure public services should be designed for ease of administration by the administrators. That is good sense and benefits everyone. What is not permissible is to deliver a service that is slanted towards administrative convenience to the detriment of claimants. And leaning on claimants, or lying to them, about their options, including the sin of omission is inexcusable.
I’m very sceptical about the online issue.
As well as providing benefits advice we also publish information sheets on the web about local services. Financially it would be a huge advantage to us for users to download the info sheets (or view them online), thus releasing us from the postage/printing costs. When we get enquiries where an info sheet is needed we often ask people if they have web access. Ther answer is frequently no for many different reasons. For example today I’ve just asked someone that very question and the answer was ‘very slow computer’. We can offer to email info sheets, but again, there are varying responses in the negative. Now it would be fair comment to say that some people simply want us to bear the costs and don’t wish to use their own resources, but I don’t think that applies to many. I also know from practical experience that a huge number of our clients simply rely on pay-as-you-go a mobile phones and do not have for a landline facilitating broadband. Some people will possess smartphones (fiddly but possible for a claim), but many will have only basic mobile handsets.
DWP probaly expect ‘partner’ agencies to allow access to PCs (aside from the ones planned for JCP offices), but I can tell you that that approach will produce another raft of problems. My wife works in a public library with time-limited public access terminals and I am regularly regaled with tales of how much staff time is spent trying to help people to get online, and that’s before you get to the costs or practicalties of actually providing such facilities. Is the DWP going to reimburse an agency when an angry claimant chucks the PC out of your interview room window?
Advisers live in the real world and while it is certainly fine to go down the online claim route (I would use it myself), I’m afraid that its going to be difficult. The DWP are paid for by taxpayers to provide a service. Streamlined cost savings must be balanced with providing a service to all sections of the community without disadvantaging anyone.