I've pinched the Waugh Zone headline because I don't think I can put it any better.
When politicians appear to defend the bureaucracy of a system rather than the needs of the public, they can sound tone deaf. When that defence involves matters of life and death, they risk coming across as robotic at best, callous at worst.
We have just seen the Government challenged, and thankfully six MPs have voted against plans to cut the Universal Credit £20 per week uplift. This is a non-binding vote but has, at least, shown some Tories have a conscience.
However, there still test and, 'if we've got time', trace. Dido Harding expects 90% of the massive £22bn budget would go on testing, not tracing. And the bulk of the new tests would be lateral flow tests and, we are told, that 900 staff from consultants Deloitte are working for Test and Trace, at an average cost of £1,000 a day.
As well as stopping the £20 a week uplift, which we now know makes even some Tory MPs uncomfortable, Sunak surely has to face the issue of people not self-isolating because of money worries.
Large numbers of low paid or self employed are not covered by the £500 payment and yet, knowing many of these people may then feel they have to work, no one has attempted to solve this - so the spreading continues for the want of £500. The horse shoe nail of the pandemic.
Dinahmo
None of us can know exactly how things will be in a few months, but certainly the businesses who reopen will need staff, and many pubs in particular, along with restaurants, will need to pick up more waiting staff.They lost many as they had to let them go,( and they will now be doing different sorts of work.)
Certainly by July ( if the £20 is extended to then) things will be looking very different to now.
One pundit speaking earlier said that, where the £20 is concerned, the best thing is to "keep it under review". If they simply let if roll into the UC then it becomes a precedent.
Alegrias1
OK, really sorry but I'm going to defend myself here. If people say we're the top of the table for infections or anything else, and we're not, then it is misrepresenting the way we are dealing with this pandemic and I will continue to call it out. I am very angry with the way that this whole thing has been handled by the government but I am not going to let exaggeration stand unchallenged.
Off topic of the thread but... the table showing the UK as having the highest number of deaths is deaths per capita over the last seven days, not in total since the start of the pandemic.
Would this be better on it's own thread? It does seem to be railroading the original OP.
I must admit there is a small but very spiteful part of me that almost relishes that those who may have disregarded the plight of the majority in receipt of benefits will get to see how it really when find themselves needing it due to current economic mess.
What I've never understood is why the payments to those unable to work (ie on furlough) have been so much higher than to those unable to work because of job losses for reasons other than the pandemic. Up to £2700 a month on furlough, compared to a pittance on UC. Furlough is not means tested either, and any earnings are not deducted if work elsewhere is found, unlike UC, which is not payable to those who have saved all their lives.
I can't help thinking that this is being done deliberately, so that those on furlough never get to experience what it's like to live in poverty, in case this reduces the government's support for keeping benefits so low. If people experienced life on UC (whether at first hand or by proxy via their children), maybe the vitriol poured onto claimants, and the insistence that parental help in the form of presents and general 'helping out' should be deducted and savings taken into account would diminish, and there would be calls to 'level up' more vigorously and speedily.
In my mind, there is no difference whatsoever between being unable to work for reason A or reason B. Both are beyond the control of the individual, and a personal tragedy for the people concerned and their families. Both claimants will have paid into a National Insurance scheme to cushion the blow of temporary unemployment. Both, IMO, should have decent support to keep ticking over until they can get back to work, whether in the job that has been kept open for them, or in a new one if theirs has been lost to redundancy or business closure.
A good point, well made Doodledog. In the short term it seemed odd but presumably presumptions were made that it would last a very short time. However, it now seems very odd as I think you actually have to show there is no work for those on furlough. I think we may see some very hard changes this year and more will see just how pitiful UC actually is and what owing your soul to the government feels like.
I agree with your comment "Both, IMO, should have decent support to keep ticking over until they can get back to work, whether in the job that has been kept open for them, or in a new one if theirs has been lost to redundancy or business closure.", but I can already hear the cry of "how will we repay it" I'm afraid. Some people never learn.
Well said Doodledog.
lemongrove
Dinahmo
None of us can know exactly how things will be in a few months, but certainly the businesses who reopen will need staff, and many pubs in particular, along with restaurants, will need to pick up more waiting staff.They lost many as they had to let them go,( and they will now be doing different sorts of work.)
Certainly by July ( if the £20 is extended to then) things will be looking very different to now.
Why "certainly"? It's not looking that way at all.
This country is more divided now than it has ever been particularly between wealth and poverty.
If Sunak is serious in addressing the economic fragility, he would put the money into those who we know will spend it and help the economy recover, that is the most poor and those who have been most affected by the Brexit effect and the covid downturn.
This means providing an economic boost to the poor. No amount of tax cuts etc will have any affect on the economy because the rich simply don’t spend it they just squirrel it’s away.
Cutting benefits and thereby cutting economic stimulus makes absolutely no sense.
We are hearing this morning that the reason so many people are falling through the gaps when it comes to Covid related payments is that tax systems are out of date. MPs have given HMRC six weeks to set out steps to fix the problems.
I feel that the government will simply not be brave enough when we eventually start to rebuild our economy as they spend their time looking over their shoulder at who will vote for them. They have no morality when it comes to what is best for the country. I do wish they would look at a simple universal income for all, taxing it back (plus, where appropriate) from those who do not need it.
This would allow people to set up new businesses in areas we never thought of before, retrain where they feel the need and take up caring responsibilities if that is what they wish to prioritise. Fast growth back to a thriving economy that suits people rather than governments could be rolled out much quicker using this mechanism.
PippaZ Do you mean with reference to the self-employed? If so, it's an excuse and attempt to blame HMRC. I'm one of the people who didn't receive any Covid-related payment and eventually had to apply for Universal Credit. Those with partners or more savings than I have can't even apply for that. It's not the systems which are wrong, but the government's own policy. It can't claim ignorance of the problems because it's been told a number of times and has just turned a blind eye. Meanwhile, those people who qualify for furlough haven't been means-tested and some have other jobs in addition to their payment for their usual job.
Doodle,that was a chilling thought. I would like to think they are not that forward thinking but their hostility towards the poor and vulnerable seems to be the one of the few things they are world beating at.
Sadly the £20 UC is just the tip of the iceberg. The safety net in all areas is hanging on a very thin thread.
A Universal income would at least give people a baseline of dignity.
Sorry Growstuff, I forgot to put the reference in. It's here: www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55722549
But despite this, a report from the MPs says "quirks in the tax system" have meant that groups of workers - including freelancers and self-employed people who recently moved onto company payrolls or work on a series of short-term employment contracts with gaps in between - have been ineligible for furlough payments.
"As public spending balloons to unprecedented levels in response to the pandemic, out-of-date tax systems are one of the barriers to getting help to a significant number of struggling taxpayers who should be entitled to support," said MP Meg Hillier, chair of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
I think the biggest issue is that the systems have not kept up with a changing world. This is yet another example of where years of cuts while the rich contributed proportionally smaller and smaller amounts has unwound the systems that help govern this country and the extreme views of the far right (just as those of the far left) end up damaging the country for the communities, families and individuals in it.
I found the article after I'd posted. It's spin and an attempt to deflect. There is a group which went to Parliament to lobby and various MPs, including Caroline Lucas, have brought it up in the HoC. Sunak said nothing about problems with HMRC when making his excuses. The bottom line is that they think the self-employed are fiddling their taxes, so don't deserve anything. All he did was go on about the people who had been helped and how proud the government was of its record blah blah. In my case I've fallen foul of the 50/50 rule - nothing to do with HMRC. The biggest industry which has been affected is performing arts, which Sunak has repeatedly refused to help, despite handing loadsa dost to the fishing industry. Performing artists have suffered a double whammy with Brexit.
I don't think this has anything to do with systems. It's to do with a government which doesn't have a clue how precarious some people's existences are. Losing a few thousand might seem like pocket money to them, but to the low paid it's a fortune.
"loadsa dosh"
Many aspects of HMRC's systems are working too efficiently. Since October they have sent tens of thousands of letters relating to 2018/19 tax returns advising tax payers that their tax returns are being checked.
One of my clients received such a letter. It asked for details of any properties let by my client. I telephoned the office in question and explained that he didn't have any such properties. The answer was that their checking systems had shown that this client had two mortgages overlapping. This wasn't the case but he had ported his mortgage on the first property to the second property, the first house being sold before the second was purchased.
The systems aren't working quite well enough.
However, it is the govt that sets the policies as regards the covid handouts and they could have amended their instructions to HMRC at any time.
It would be interesting to know whether the cronies who have benefited from govt handouts have registered their companies off shore.
growstuff
I don't think this has anything to do with systems. It's to do with a government which doesn't have a clue how precarious some people's existences are. Losing a few thousand might seem like pocket money to them, but to the low paid it's a fortune.
It is quite possible that it is both, surely?
PippaZ
growstuff
I don't think this has anything to do with systems. It's to do with a government which doesn't have a clue how precarious some people's existences are. Losing a few thousand might seem like pocket money to them, but to the low paid it's a fortune.
It is quite possible that it is both, surely?
Maybe, but the article doesn't mention that the government doesn't actually want to do anything about the situation and lays all the blame on HMRC systems.
lemongrove
Alegrias1
OK, really sorry but I'm going to defend myself here. If people say we're the top of the table for infections or anything else, and we're not, then it is misrepresenting the way we are dealing with this pandemic and I will continue to call it out. I am very angry with the way that this whole thing has been handled by the government but I am not going to let exaggeration stand unchallenged.
I don’t think you should have to defend yourself for telling the truth!
On the continuation of the £20 top up for the duration of Covid, perhaps by April things will have changed for jobs and the economy and won’t be quite as needed, or perhaps Sunak will be unveiling something else at the Spring Budget.
Totally agree lemongrove. Sensible post.
Tge Whitehall bean counters are still putting together the measures that Rishi Sunak will announce on Budget Day, in March and the Government is loath to be forced into an early policy announcement by an Opposition Day motion.
That’s why Boris Johnson ordered MPs to abstain.
The Opposition has every right - and indeed a duty - to remind the government that people need the extra £20. The Office of Budget Responsibility is forecasting £7.5 million unemployed in early summer before a possible recovery.
Where did the £ sign come from? 
People need to be able to plan now, not in April. £20 is a 27% increase in Jobseeker's Allowance, so it's a significant amount.
The budget is 3 March. There is speculation that the increase will continue but be gradually tailed off to coincide with cessation by the end of lockdown when people can once again, go out job hunting.
I do wish they would look at a simple universal income for all, taxing it back (plus, where appropriate) from those who do not need it.
I would support the idea of a UBI, but I am not in favour of it being taxed back from those who 'do not need it'. I loathe means testing, as it keeps people just above destitution 'in their place'. The better off can afford to save, to plan for the future, to have dreams to aim for, but those who know that every pound they earn above an arbitrary threshold will be taken back may as well just spend it as they get it.
I get tired of hearing that 'Mr X doesn't 'need' a free TV licence', or that 'My neighbour drives a Ferrari, so can't 'need' her state pension at 60', or whatever it is - basically moral judgements on other people's 'needs'. These do not take into account that people have different priorities (and to be fair, the best of us judge others on the basis of how we would spend our money).
The hypothetical neighbour may be eating potato peelings to afford her Ferrari. Mr X may be supporting 4 great grandchildren, or spending his money on providing wells to drought-stricken villages somewhere. Or he may have an expensive 30 year old girlfriend who makes his life worth living. If they have worked for his money and paid taxes, it is not for us to judge what others 'need' or why they might need it.
The poor are badly provided for, but their situation doesn't change with means testing until they get out of poverty, when they realise that they are trapped. The situation of the rich doesn't change with means testing either - they will always be ok, as nobody interferes with their spending.
It is the people just above the threshold who suffer every time, and it's not just about the ££, it is about the lost dreams, the lack of incentive, the sheer petty-minded meanness of deciding what other people 'need'.
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »Get our top conversations, latest advice, fantastic competitions, and more, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter here.
