Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing particularly against any individual Tory. I confess I don’t like the fact Citizen Dave, the people’s toff talks about addressing inequalities in this country, whilst stashing away over £30m in personal wealth, but that’s another issue.
No, let’s look today at this supposed desire to address inequalities and make Britain more efficient. According to the Public Accounts Committee, the government has "no clear plan" of action for tackling errors and fraud in the welfare system.
.
More than £2bn is being spent on benefit overpayments and no progress has been made in reducing it and it is also claimed officials had not got to grips with £1.3bn in under-payments, despite the hardship these cause. All this is despite the fact that the Tories have set a target of a 25% reduction in the cost of fraud and error by 2015. With these kinds of results, they have a long way to go.
Meanwhile, the popular media like to ‘carry on’ about social security scroungers but forget that tax evasion costs this country 15-times more than welfare fraud. Tax evasion is around 3% of total tax liabilities, while benefit fraud accounts for 0.8% of total benefit expenditure.
George Osborne made political capital out of saving £4bn on the benefits bill, and was happy for those making the claims he targeted to be called lifestyle choice fraudsters and layabouts – all, supposedly, because of the need to tackle the hole in the government's deficit. But he wouldn't have needed to make these cuts if he tackled the biggest category of fraud in the UK economy – that of tax evasion.
But of course we should not expect the Tories to attack business people, or the toffs when they try and save a little bit of tax. After all, for them it is all a bit of a game – can we dodge paying the taxman by not declaring all our income?
Meanwhile, John is a carer looking after his wife with chronic epilepsy. They live in social housing and would like to move, but they can’t get a transfer. John wants to work, but needs to be around his wife 24-hours a day. He doesn’t smoke, rarely drinks and his weekly treat is buying his family a small bag of donuts from the local supermarket – a treat they all look forward to as it is the only family event they can afford.
If John were to employ a professional carer 40 hours a week to look after his wife and charge the government, it would cost between £240 and £300 per week. Unfortunately, the rules don’t allow John to do this, so he had to claim Carer’s allowance – and how much the government gives him as a ‘thank you’ for doing the job? I meagre £53 per week – paltry by any stretch of the imagination.
But do the red tops cause an outcry about John’s allowance? Do they scream and shout when an unmarried mother’s benefit fails to turn up and she has to go to court because she stole a loaf of bread to feed her young child? No, she is another one of those state scroungers that want it all on a plate.
Let this blog send out a clear message to any Tory reader. Yes there are a small number of people who rip off the system – and they should be punished. But the vast majority of claimants are decent law-abiding people who just want a chance in life. Tory plans to bring about Universal Credits will not help them today (if at all) and the Work Programme is nothing more than a repeat of Labour’s mistakes. The DWP's own research has stated that "one quarter (27%) of claimants who leave unemployment to obtain a job return to claim unemployment benefits within 13 weeks, whilst two out of five (40%) return within six months". In addition: "just over half (53%) of workers return to JSA within 3 months of taking a permanent job either because they resigned or were sacked".
It is time the government opened their eyes and saw there are very clear injustices happening in this country and they are doing nothing to resolve it.
NO, NO - it is tax avoidance, encouraged by Gordon Brown, rater than tax evasion, that costs more than problems in the benefit system.
ReplyDeleteTax evasion is a crime and I think (as I hope that you do) that the culprits should be prosecuted as in any other case of fraud (although I do not understand why Mr Tchenguiz should be arrested for LOSING £1bn when Kaupthing went bust - maybe you know better than I).
Back to basics - two-thirds of the wrong/erroneous/mistaken payments by DWP are identifiably the fault of Gordon Brown who set up systems so complex that the civil servants cannot cope with them - hell, I* had problems and if I had charged for the hours I spent while temporarily unemployed correcting the errors by HMRC and DWP I should have invoiced for far more than twice the original amount of the claim.
*it is generally accepted that I have a higher IQ than the average DWP clerk; there is also enough evidence to convince anyone who is not a Labour party propagandist (e.g.the Secretary of my university's Communist Club) that I am more intelligent than G. Brown.
Yes "there are very clear injustices happening in this country" but it will take YEARS to sort these out. We made great strides in the 50's but it may, and probably will, take 20 years to clean up the mess left by 13 years of New Labour.
Having slightly calmed down - I sympathise with John and in the nearest version of similar circumstances I should also be tied to our house, but (i) I have a computer 5 yards from our/my wife's bed so I can/could do some work from home and (ii)
ReplyDeleteThe idea behind Universal Credit is to provide an adequate income to those who need it. Only Tory-phobes can object to a programme that was supported by departmental civil servants and ministers but was irrationally blocked by someone described as the "Prime Mentalist". You do not appear stupid enough to object to universal credit - of course it will cost m (and possibly you) money - but even if the economic side-effects from helping the poor do not provide any net fiscal benefit in my lifetime we should still support it.
You may also like to proofread your posts: are you aware that 53% is a lot larger than 27%?
Don't get me wrong, I am no great fan of Gordon Brown, though I think history will probably cast him in a different light once the blood from the sabres of the red-tops has been allowed to dry. There is much blame that can be cast on his shoulders for much of the repsent demise of the Labour Party (although I would hope even the strongest of his critics would add Tony Blair to the blame list).
ReplyDeleteHaving said this, I am unconvinced by the notion that all the world's ills should be laid at the doorstep of New Labour. trhey had many faults sure, but broad accusations like those above are pretty meaningless rhetoric.
I tend to prefer a balanced view where history will show aspects of the administration between 1997 and 2010 proved to be of some value, whilst others were ultimately harmful.
Equally, the concept of Universal Credit could go down as one of the great advances in welfare reform. Indeed, I said in a previous posting that I believe IDS genuinely cares for those who are unemployed. However there are currently flaws in the bill and these need addressing before it becomes legislation. I hold the view IDS has the courage to consider those changes, but I am less convinced about his ministerial team.
As for the 53% and 27% differences. I would simply refer you to the report - I quoted directly.