Labour will have to do more than just win the ‘moral argument’ on universal credit if it is to protect the most vulnerable in society, writes Sheila Gilmore
In all the current media coverage of universal credit there is a danger that we lose sight of the fact that it is only (as yet) a very small part of the havoc wrought by the Tories on our social security system. Only 610,000 people in the whole of the United Kingdom are currently receiving universal credit, but everyone receiving tax credits, or out of work benefits has seen the value of their payments eroded by the fact that the link to inflation has been broken. Each time this happens the individual effects might seem quite small, but after seven years the cumulative effect is considerable. This change generates the biggest saving to the Treasury, much bigger than the high profile changes like the bedroom tax or the household benefit cap, but because its impact is ‘little by little’ it attracts much less attention.
It is a mark of the weakness of Theresa May’s government that they have given some ground on some of the details of the way universal credit works, and may make more concessions, but we should not allow these minor changes to be taken as having made right all of the policies wrongs.
When the Tory-Liberal Democrat coalition were in power, Labour achieved some political traction around the bedroom tax issue, but remember it is still there. We hear little now about its supposed assistance to the housing crisis by getting social housing tenants to give up larger homes to growing families. That was never going to work. So it just acts as a benefit cut, mitigated through discretionary housing payments in Scotland, and in part by some councils in other areas. The first iteration of the household benefit cap affected a relatively small number of households, mostly in London, although individual impacts were severe. Last November the cap was reduced and is now hitting far more people across the UK.
In recent days a lot has been said about private landlords not wanting to take tenants on universal credit – but much more has been happening with housing benefit. Under Labour the rate of housing benefit paid was capped at 50 per cent of local market rents. The coalition government reduced that to 30 per cent and the link to local rents has now been broken altogether. Universal credit is not the only thing stopping benefit recipients getting tenancies.
Successive changes to employment and support allowance leave people who have to stop work after illness or accident toppling down from ‘comfortable’ to ‘struggling’ quickly. I could go on and on.
The contrast with the Labour years is striking, which makes it particularly galling to hear the type of lazy comment that say ‘the Labour government was just about as bad’, coming even from within our own party.
For all the talk of the newness of universal credit we have to remember that it is just an amalgamation of existing benefits and the various conditions people have criticised attached to those benefits remain in force. The WCA will still be the gateway to employment and support allowance, sanctions will still be applied. And the reverse is also true. Even if universal credit is stopped tomorrow all the issues listed will remain.
Certainly universal credit has additional rules which tighten the screw still further, and the six week plus waiting period is only one of these. A lot of the press commentary has concentrated on the waiting period, often describing it as ‘the main problem’. If the government backs down on this will all the interest die away?
Stopping further rollout of universal credit is still possible, given the relatively low level of cover even now. But, unlike the impression being given by some of the comments and tweets, that will not stop the growth in foodbanks, or make it easier for housing benefit recipients to cover increasing rents.
Outbreaks of outrage can help bring about change, but Labour needs to follow this up with a sustained effort to win hearts and minds on why what the Tories have done since 2010 is so bad and further what we will do instead.
––––––––––––
Sheila Gilmore is a member of the Progress strategy board. She tweets at @SheilaGilmore49
––––––––––––
The Government could not even be bothered to reply to the Emergency Debate on Universal Credit. David Gauke ought to be sanctioned. I am serious. Answering to Parliament is his job. His pay ought to be docked. In spite of myself, I am more and more convinced of the need simply to pay everyone, say, one thousand pounds per month, with all income above that level taxable. At a flat rate, with no other exemptions or allowances? I didn’t used to think so, and I still don’t quite. But then, I didn’t used to believe the Universal Basic Income, either.