Re: The Welfare Reform 'Car Crash'

[jman]

The Press Association are covering the report from Scope released today on disabled people and the legal aid cuts. This is also covered on the Justice for All site. Links below

"Legal aid cuts 'will hurt disabled'
(UKPA) – 10 hours ago
Cutting legal aid could undermine the Government's own welfare reforms, a charity has said as it claimed the changes would leave thousands of disabled people receiving the wrong benefits or without any support at all.

The disability charity Scope said the plans to slash legal aid to disabled people appealing decisions against their benefits claims could ultimately drive people away from work.

The charity has published a report in which it followed five people as they navigated their way through the benefits appeal system without a solicitor paid for by legal aid. It found they were often unable to challenge incorrect decisions and make their way through the bureaucratic system.

The report - Legal Aid in welfare: the tool we can't afford to lose - comes ahead of the Government's Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill reaching committee stage in the House of Lords. It will be launched at a cross-party forum in the Lords at an event attended by Baroness Grey-Thompson and Lord Newton.

Scope says some 78,000 people, who make up 58% of those who receive legal aid for benefits cases, will be denied specialist legal advice.

Some 1.5 million people on incapacity benefit are currently being reassessed in a bid to create a more accurate system.

Richard Hawkes, chief executive of disability charity Scope said: "Legal advice is vital for disabled people if they fall foul of poor decision-making, red tape or administrative error, and this makes it crucial to the success of the Government's welfare reforms.

"The Government urgently needs to think again, and understand that cutting legal aid in this area will make it harder for disabled people to get the right support and ultimately could drive more people further away from work."..............."

Rest at link below :

www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5gffY0TCdb1Da-7OLB2uKF7cfFQQg?docId=N0618901321188821136A

Justice for All link to report

www.justice-for-all.org.uk/News/Scope-report-shows-cuts-will-undermine-welfare-reform

[jman]

LAG on the Scope report

" Monday, 14 November 2011
New report on impact of legal aid cuts on disabled people
LAG commissioned the disability charity Scope to research the impact of the proposed cuts in legal aid on benefits advice for disabled people. The report, Legal aid in welfare: the tool we can’t afford to lose, which is published today, demonstrates the serious consequences of the government’s proposals on disabled people and argues that taking benefits advice out of scope will undermine the government’s welfare reform programme.

In the report, Scope followed five typical claimants with disabilities as they negotiated red tape and bureaucracy to claim benefits, with and without legal aid. The final report, which is to be launched at an event in the House of Lords this afternoon, makes the following key points:

•Various reports in recent years show that the government has to make a quantum leap in order to improve the quality of decision-making in benefits cases.

•The government inaccurately portrays the benefits appeals system as easy to navigate.

•Removing benefits advice from the scope of legal aid at a time when major reforms are being implemented will have a 'knock-on impact on a tribunal system already stretched beyond breaking point'.

•The removal of legal aid 'will delay or even deny justice for many disabled people, and undermine the government’s ambitions to have a fairer benefit system that incentivises work'.

In his introduction to the report Richard Hawkes, chief executive of Scope, says that for the government’s welfare reforms to succeed and to make sure disabled people get the right support, legal aid for welfare benefits appeals is vital. The report highlights the government’s inconsistency in seemingly making the judgment that benefits are not sufficiently complex to merit legal aid while Iain Duncan Smith MP, the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, is justifying his planned reforms by arguing for the need to 'cut a swath through the massive complexity of the existing benefit system'...................................."

Rest at link below :

legalactiongroupnews.blogspot.com/2011/11/new-report-on-impact-of-legal-aid-cuts.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LagNewsBlog+%28LAG+News+Blog%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

[jman]

Guardian article on 30.11.11

"Mental health discrimination is coming from the top, not the public

A campaign to educate people about mental health stigma is all very well, argues Peter Beresford, but it's the government and tabloid media that need educating

The two faces of the coalition: David Cameron (left), the prime minister, and Nick Clegg, deputy prime minister, seem to be supporting an anti-discrimination campaign, but their policies are penalising ill and disabled people.

The government, together with Comic Relief, has announced £20m further funding for the Time To Change campaign against mental health stigma and discrimination, extending it until 2015. But the big question is, why is the government supporting an anti-discrimination campaign when its rhetoric in relation to welfare reform is saying something very different?

Eighty per cent of people in the Time To Change campaign's own recent survey said they had experienced stigma and discrimination at some time; 60% say that the stigma people face is as bad as, or worse than, the symptoms, while nearly a third say that stigma has made them want to give up on life. The campaign's view is that it has "achieved a lot in the last four years". It says that its campaign is "based on robust evidence from other international campaigns to show what works to change public attitudes and behaviours; and it has been shown to be a cost-effective way of delivering behaviour change on a mass scale".

There is no reason to question this. But a larger point looms. Is a public education campaign really what is needed, when the principle shapers of negative public opinion actually seem to be the government and the tabloid media?

Speaking as a long-term user of mental health services myself (who has been fortunate to escape some of the extremes of stigma and discrimination), the point that seems important to make is that it may be less a matter of educating the public, than of the government educating itself and the tabloid media. A major lead in stigmatising this group of disabled people seems to have been coming from government and its stereotyping of mental health service users in its campaigns to get people off benefits. Mental health service users are particularly targeted and recent research highlights the negative role of the media and government policy in this.

As one mental health service user, anxious to maintain her anonymity, said to me recently: Institutionalised discrimination runs through the highest levels of government and their departments. People cannot access legal aid or Citizens Advice Bureaux through cutbacks for welfare representation at tribunals. That money could fund charity/human rights lawyers to contest what's happening to people in higher courts, or an entire advocacy service – but now, instead, it will fund this campaign..................."

Rest at link below :

www.guardian.co.uk/society/joepublic/2011/nov/30/mental-health-discrimination-campaign

[jman]

Guardian article on people ill with cancer and sickness reviews 7.12.11

"Cancer patients to face welfare tests during chemotherapy, charities warnReport to MPs recommends medical tests and 'back to work' interviews for thousands undergoing treatment

Randeep Ramesh, social affairs editor guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 6 December 2011 19.19 GMT Article history

Thousands of seriously ill cancer patients will be forced to take medical tests and face "back to work" interviews, despite assurances from ministers that they would not make it harder for the sick to get welfare, charities have warned.

Buried in a report to ministers by Prof Malcolm Harrington, the government adviser on testing welfare recipients, are proposals to force cancer patients who are undergoing intravenous chemotherapy to prove they are too ill to work.

At present, patients who are unable to work because of cancer and the side-effects of treatments are allowed to claim the highest rate of employment support allowance (ESA), worth up to £100 a week. More than 9,000 cancer patients were placed automatically on the welfare payment from October 2008 to June 2010. However, the expert report says this "automatic entitlement" has encouraged dependency on benefits, "encouraging wrong behaviours from employers and stigmatising cancer as something that can lead to unemployment or worklessness".

Instead, cancer patients on chemotherapy in hospitals will now have to prove that they are too sick to work, and take part in the controversial work capability assessment to determine whether someone is eligible for benefits. If cancer patients are found able to return to employment they may also be required to participate in work-related practice job interviews, as a condition of receiving their benefit.

Such assessments have been attacked by charities amid mounting evidence that people with serious illnesses are being judged fit for work when they are not..............."

Rest at link below :

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/dec/06/cancer-patients-welfare-work-tests

[jman]

Guardian article 7.12.11 on the affect of the housing benefit cuts

"Housing benefit caps force families out of townBenefit caps are pushing the poorest families out of inner-city areas into already overstretched boroughs

Kate Murray guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 6 December 2011 16.00 GMT Article history

Campaigners warn that the exodus of families from London and other cities will only get worse as more cuts hit.

Every time Hasina Ahmed tells her children the family may have to move, they cry. "They find it really upsetting, they don't want to leave. They are doing so well in school they want to stay where they are," she says. "Last night I didn't sleep the whole night because I was thinking if I have to move, where am I going to go? I am going to have to start from scratch.'

Ahmed (not her real name), is one of the first casualties of new rules that since April have capped housing benefit at a maximum of £400 a week for new claimants. Because she had to make a fresh claim when her abusive husband left, Ahmed's housing benefit now covers just over half of her £795 weekly rent and she now faces eviction with her five children aged between three and 14 from their rented home near Edgware Road in central London after racking up nearly £8,000 in arrears.

Ahmed's will be one of a flood of families forced to move out of privately rented homes in inner London to the outer boroughs or beyond once the government's new housing benefit rules start coming into effect for existing claimants in January.

London Councils' figures suggest there will be an exodus of 82,000 households. It says this could rise to 133,000 with the introduction of universal credit in 2013 that will cap the total benefits a family can claim.

Both changes will put immense pressure on services elsewhere, says charity the Zacchaeus 2000 Trust (Z2K). This week, it launched dedicated support for families in central London affected by the new rules and is campaigning for councils to plan strategically for the thousands of the capital's poorest families who are on the move.

"It is difficult to predict how tenants will react to not being able to pay their rent – some may stay at the risk of overcrowding, for example, or try to make up the rent shortfall themselves. But there is no doubt that there will be substantial migration and we are very worried about the strain on services," says Z2K chief executive Joanna Kennedy. "This will hit all kinds of services – schools, social services and all health services....................."

Rest at link below :

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/dec/06/housing-benefit-caps-force-families-out

[jman]

Guardian article on the welfare benefits cuts and how they are likely to end marriages and break up relationships.

" No alternative to cutting disabled and ill people's benefits. Really?Targeting people with terminal illness might be so awful as to be a tactical manoeuvre. It's hard for campaigners to tell

Zoe Williams guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 7 December 2011 20.30 GMT Article history

'That can't be right," Nadine Dorries said, when I asked her about the overall benefits cap in the autumn. Specifically, I wanted to know why a government so besotted with marriage would make changes to social security that essentially incentivised couples to split up. "I know Iain well," she continued. "He wouldn't do anything to make the family less secure." Sadly, it's not enough, in the business of protecting the institution of marriage, to just be Iain Duncan Smith; you also need to avoid policies that will make it financially impossible for some couples to stay together.

In policy circles they would call this a perverse consequence, while in normal life we would call it the screamingly obvious consequence: if you cap benefits by household – as the government has pledged to do by 2013, at around £500 a week – then those who are worst affected will find it cheaper to live in two households. And that is putting the best possible gloss on it. There are charities warning that this won't just be a case of some larger families opting to split up to gain a marginal income boost; rather, this is families who simply won't be able to afford to live together.

You think that's bad? You think that's a Ken Loach film waiting to happen? Consider the proposals in the welfare reform bill for employment support allowance (ESA) – the social security payment replacing incapacity benefit......................."

Rest at link below :

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/07/cutting-disabled-ill-people-benefits

[johnnybegood]

Can you please have a read of this Blog post - it's about the Motion the Lib Dem members voted unanimously for at Conference - regarding the Time-limiting of Employment Support Allowance for people who are sick and disabled.


diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.com/2011/12/time-limiting-esa-we-must-stop-it.html

In just a few weeks the Welfare reform bill will become law. This Motion looks like it will be ignored in the voting. Only the Liberal Democrat Lords can stop it now. Please do everything you can to spread the word about this and write to one of the Lib Dem Peers about it!

thank you!

[jman]

Guardian and Left Foot Forward blogs on Boris' attack on the DLA cuts. Can't understand why no-one has got him on board on social welfare law as well, particularly given the devastation for Londoners and London Advice Agencies, likely to be caused by the social welfare legal aid cuts.

"Boris Johnson attacks planned cuts to disability paymentsMayor of London says Disability Living Allowance proposals could push disadvantaged group into deeper poverty

Patrick Butler
guardian.co.uk, Friday 6 January 2012 14.27 GMT Article history

The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, has placed himself at loggerheads with the government over benefit changes after he formally objected to controversial cuts to disability payments.

Johnson's response to a consultation on changes to the Disability Living Allowance is critical of planned changes that will see hundreds of thousands of disabled people potentially lose benefits of up to £70 a week for care and mobility expenses.

Johnson is concerned that the changes could lead to financial hardship and social isolation, and push an already disadvantaged group into deeper poverty.

His submission states: "While some reform may be necessary … the mayor is concerned that, if the focus of this reform is solely efficiency driven, government may fail to ensure that the needs of disabled people are adequately met."

It adds that the changes could "potentially condemn the parents of disabled children and young people, and the children themselves, to a life of financial hardship rather than financial assistance".

His objections– which were submitted early last year but only came to light after disability activists requested to see all responses under the Freedom of Information Act – will increase pressure on the government before key debates on the welfare reform bill in the Lords over the next two weeks.

Up until now, Tory MPs and peers have, with one or two exceptions, held the line on welfare reform, and Johnson's apparent intervention could be seen as significant.

The government proposes to replace the Disability Living Allowance with a so-called Personal Independence Payment (PIP). This would focus payments on claimants deemed to be most in need as a way of reducing spending on this benefit by 20% by 2015-16.

The Disability Living Allowance is paid to around 3.2 million people, including children, with a wide range of illnesses and disabilities including cancer, spinal injury, mental health problems and learning disability. Campaigners say the payments are vital to enable disabled people to work.

The benefit is typically used to pay for equipment and mobility aids, travel costs and expenses related to specific medical conditions such as special diets.

Johnson's submission also makes it clear that he objects to the government's proposal to cut benefit to people currently receiving lower-end DLA payments of around £20 a week.

It states: "The mayor does not support this change, as those on the lower rate component … may lose their access to this benefit."

The mayor's objections were uncovered by a network of disability activists and bloggers, including Sue Marsh and Kaliya Franklin, loosely based around the Diary of a Benefit Scrounger and Broken of Britain blogs.

Their report analysing the proposed changes to the Disability Living Allowance, to be published on Monday, finds that Johnson's objections are shared by the "overwhelming majority" of respondents to the consultation.

The report claims the government has misrepresented the level of opposition in its formal response to the consultation, and has consistently used inaccurate figures to exaggerate the rise in claimants......................."

Rest at link below :

www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jan/06/boris-johnson-attacks-disability-payments-cuts?CMP=twt_gu

[jman]

Is Boris leaning to the left on welfare reform?





Or just trying to scoop up votes ahead of the Mayoral elections?


Here's a good article picked up from Left foot forward website

"Boris has slammed Coalition welfare reforms – from the left"


By Daniel Elton, January 6th 2012


On Monday, Responsible Reform will be published, an analysis of Iain Duncan Smith’s welfare reforms largely drawn from responses to the Government consulation on the policy, that the Coalition held back from the public gaze until disabled campaigners made Freedom of Information requests.

Most suprisingly, it includes the submission by London Mayor Boris Johnson, who seems to have put serious clear red water between himself and the Labour leadership – never mind the Coalition – on the issue.

He, for example, directly takes on the ‘benefit scrounger myth’ arguing that ministers should not impose penalties on those who have claimed incorrectly:

“The government proposes imposing penalties if disabled people do not inform the government in changes in their circumstances. However, the Department of Work and Pensions statistics give the overall fraud rate for Disability Living Allowance as being less than 0.5.

“For those with fluctuating conditions asking them to report every change to their condition would prove very stressful. Rather than penalties the government should issue very clear guidance about what constitutes change and in relation to which conditions.”

The mayor also worries that moving children from Disability Living Allowance to Personal Independent Payment:

“Could potentially condemn the parents of disabled children and young people, and the children themselves to a life of financial hardship rather than financial assistance.”

Johnson also argues that:

“The three-month benefit qualification period [for Disability Living Allowance] should be retained, rather than extending this to six months as proposed”

and is:

“concerned about the government suggestion to remove automatic entitlement [to Disability Living Allowance] for certain groups. Claims should be based on the needs and circumstances of the individual applying.”

The mayor refuses to support changing from a three-tier system of benefits to two, saying:

“as those on the lower rate care component may have additional costs as a result of their impairment but may lose their access to this benefit as part of the proposed removal under the reforms.”..........................."

For more on this see....

www.leftfootforward.org/2012/01/boris-has-slammed-coalition-welfare-reforms-from-the-left/


Comment by Nick

It looks like there's a fair few ministers getting increasingly twitchy about the welfare reforms. It may well be that Boris is just touting for potential voters; - but to be fair he's gone head to head with Government before on how their reforms could impact upon those who live in the poorer areas of London.

It could also be that more and more ministers are beginning to wake up to the reality that government's welfare reforms could go spectacularly pear shared; - they've tried to implement them on a less than clear understanding over how it will all work in practice, the IFS warned them from the outset that the devil would be in the detail. We're seeing more and more of the devil and far too little on the detail.


Well picked up Jman!

[nickd]

update

[nickd]

update

[predators]

Benefits account for a large fraction of government spending, so 0.8 per cent is a lot of cash: 1.2 billion. As a www.chinalawblog.org, I am shocked. www.chinalawfirms.cnThis means its certainly worth investing in anti-fraud measures, but equally, the fact that 99.2 per cent of spending is not on fraud is something that we should celebrate.

[nickd]

t

[nickd]

Lord Freud

Minister for Welfare Reform

Improving employment outcomes

Policy Exchange, London

[Check against delivery]

Welcome

Firstly I would like to thank Policy Exchange for hosting today’s event, and you all for coming.

I hope today can be an open forum about a new and exciting opportunity thrown up by the introduction of Universal Credit.

Today’s event brings together a group of people who are already thinking deeply about the UK’s welfare system or who we hope can offer fresh perspectives...

... perhaps bringing insights from the world of technology, industry or academia.

Reform

Last year marked major milestones in reforming Britain’s welfare system, and 2013 will be no different.

This year is about making reform a reality.

We are on track to do so:

Universal Credit, starting with a pathfinder in April
Personal Independence Payment also starting to roll out from April
the beginning of local council tax support schemes
the implementation of the Benefit Cap
To name just a few of the programmes the Government is implementing.

This change cannot come soon enough.

For it isn’t just about changing systems – it is about changing lives, and changing them for the better.

A complex system

For too long, those in need of state support have had to rely on an outdated and overburdened system.

The current mess of benefits and tax credits includes over 30 different out of work payments.

These are set alongside chaotic in work supplements – some paid at 16 hours, some 24 and some at 30...

... and each with separate rules and rates... some means-tested, others linked, many overlapping.

It is a system of byzantine complexity.

Work doesn’t pay

Worse still, the current system creates the clear perception that work simply does not pay.

Let me explain why.

When a person finds a job, the split between out of work benefits and in work tax credits means they find it impossible to calculate if they would be better off or not.

Some of their benefits are withdrawn at 40% as they progress in work, some at 65%, some at 100%...

…some net, some gross.

It is this factor which stops the person’s journey back to work in its tracks,

They cannot take that positive step for fear of losing out.

Progression doesn’t pay

Those already in employment, but who could work more, face a similar problem.

They have no obligations on them to increase their hours in work, and the system offers no incentives either.

Feed all the rates and disregards into a complicated computer system – because no normal person can calculate what it all means for their income – and something extremely damaging happens.

People on low wages lose up to 96 pence in every pound they earn as they increase their hours in work.

In other words for every extra pound they earn, 4 pence goes in their pocket and the rest goes back to government in tax and benefit withdrawals.

So suddenly you have a system that is incomprehensible to those that use it, except for one thing that seems clear – it’s not worth the risk of working, nor working more.

Waste of potential

As a result, employers tell us that people’s working patterns cluster around the hours at which they start to receive tax credits...

... meaning they can’t move onwards and upwards.

B&Q – a major national retailer – have even experienced people asking not to work more hours so that their benefits aren’t affected.

This isn’t just bad news for growth and productivity.

It’s also a real waste of people’s potential.

Skills

The introduction of Universal Credit is a real opportunity to focus interventions on progression in work, not just getting people into a job.

We know that training provided by employers rather than by government is more beneficial to the individual. That is why combining a focus on skills and training for in-work claimants with reforms including the removal of the 16 hour rule is an exciting opportunity for this group.

As a nation we are at a competitive disadvantage due to a weak medium level skills base, so this is something to really build on under Universal Credit.

Universal Credit

Changing this is what Universal Credit is all about.

Starting with the pathfinder in April this year, and rolling out gradually from October...

.... Universal Credit will replace all work-related benefits and tax credits with a single, simple, payment.

It provides work allowances that are up to 12 times more generous than the existing system, meaning people who move into work will see the rewards before their benefit is tapered away.

And it will be withdrawn at a single, constant rate, so that people know exactly how much better off they will be for each extra hour they work.

This rate will be significantly lower than the current average, meaning work will pay at each and every hour.

1.5 million people will keep more money as they increase their working hours, on average seeing an extra 14 pence in their pocket for every single pound earned.

More people in work

Once Universal Credit is fully rolled out, we estimate up to 300,000 more people will enter work...

.... and between 1 and 2.5 million extra hours will be worked by those already in employment.

All this, through improved financial incentives alone.

As my colleague, the Minister for Employment, will explain shortly, we are looking at how to build on these new incentives...

... doing more to encourage and support progression for those already in some work.

In steady-state, we expect there to be 11 million individuals on Universal Credit, of which 5 million are expected to be in work.

Unlike now, the majority of DWP’s claimants will already have a job.

This is a radically new context for delivering benefits.

It is right that we think radically about how what this means...

... including for our employment services, and the contact we have with a new group of claimants relying on our support.

To tell you more, I’ll now hand over to the Minister for Employment.

[nickd]

21 January 2013

Mark Hoban MP

Minister for Employment

Improving employment outcomes

Policy Exchange, London

Reform

This year marks the beginning of a radical overhaul of Britain’s welfare system.

The introduction of Universal Credit will make work pay, at each and every hour...

... allowing us to start dealing, once and for all, with a culture of entrenched worklessness and welfare dependency.

4.6 million people –12% of the working age population – on out of work benefits.

1 in every 5 households with no one working, and 2 million children living in workless families – a higher proportion than almost any country in Europe.

This level of ingrained worklessness cannot simply be put down to the present state of the economy.

It points towards the failings of broken system – as my colleague Lord Freud has explained, a system where people cannot move into or progress in work, for fear or losing out.

This Government is taking vital steps to reform the welfare state, reducing complexity and restoring work incentives.

This will be a huge cultural shift for claimants.

But it will also be a huge cultural shift in terms of the labour market, and how the Department works.

So as we reach crucial milestones for delivering these changes, it is right that our employment support keeps pace.

Employment figures

Even in an immensely tough economic climate, the latest labour market figures show that it is possible to make progress.

In recent months, we have seen more people and more women in work than ever before.

Unemployment and youth unemployment falling.

Over 470,000 unfilled vacancies at any one time.

And more than 1 million more jobs created in the private sector since the election.

So whilst we are not complacent, and do not underestimate the challenge...

... these are promising signs that the steps we are taking to tackle unemployment are having an effect.

Labour market interventions

I believe Jobcentre Plus does a fantastic job in helping people back to work.

I have been struck by the motivation and commitment of our advisers, and the headline results are well known.

Over 70 % of Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants leave benefit within the first 6 months.

The Jobcentre Plus offer is closely targeted at helping this group – people claiming JSA who are either out of work entirely, or working less than 16 hours.

This Government has increased and broadened the employment support available, moving from a one-size-fits-all approach to one increasingly focused on the barriers faced by individuals.

From the Work Programme, to the Youth Contract, and the Innovation Fund, all this is about more tailored, flexible support...

... harnessing the knowledge and expertise of those in the private and voluntary sector, as well as Jobcentre Plus advisers...

...in order to give claimants the best prospects of getting a job.

Universal Credit

Under Universal Credit, the number of claimants subject to this intensive jobsearch regime will be extended by up to 1 million...

... driven by increased take-up and a focus on each individual looking for work rather than just the main claimant in a household.

As in JSA now, those who can work but are unemployed or working very few hours will required to look and be available for work, with face-to-face fortnightly signing.

But for others...because Universal Credit reworks the boundary between out of work and in work benefits... their responsibilities can no longer be set simply according to which benefit people are claiming.

Instead, individuals will face a set of responsibilities appropriate to their capability, circumstances and work potential.

Self-employed

Take self-employed claimants.

The tax credit system as it stands allows people to exploit a hobby, by claiming to be self employed, and top up their income through tax credits.

They can earn nothing, subsidise their income through state support...

... without any expectation that they increase their earnings and move towards self-sufficiency.

This flies in the face of a principled welfare system.

Under Universal Credit, we are closing the loophole.

To stop individuals from under-reporting their earnings or living off benefits whilst making little or nothing from self-employment...

... we will expect people to earn a minimum level of income from self-employment when assessing their Universal Credit award.

The system will also better support those entrepreneurs who are taking steps to make a living from their business.

All newly self-employed claimants will receive a Universal Credit award based on their actual earnings...

... with appropriate conditionality so that they can devote their time and resources to developing their businesses, incentivising them to make it a success.

From dependence to independence

From 2014, we will establish Universal Credit as the primary means of support for those who are in work, as well as those out of work.... replacing working tax credits altogether by the end of 2017.

Until now, this group have had no work-related expectations placed on them at all.

There is no encouragement for people in low paid work to increase their hours or earnings.

Once people move into some work they are largely forgotten – with little or nothing in the way of labour market interventions to help them progress.

Yet once Universal Credit is fully implemented, we estimate that there could be around a million people who are working but could do more.

It is my belief is that where they are able, those in the welfare system should be on a journey.

A journey which helps them move from dependence to independence.

On this basis, it is right that we consider how conditionality might help people...

… move up the earnings scale...

... reap the rewards from improved work incentives...

... and become more self-reliant.

Universal Jobmatch

This is ground-breaking territory, with real scope to develop innovative solutions.

Universal Jobmatch, for example, is already transforming the way claimants access our services – with online job searching through DWP on a scale never seen before.

The system can already be used by people in employment, to find a better job or more work – and there is an exciting opportunity to develop this further.

Automatic job matching means the system works 24/7 to find jobs that fit with people’s skills set or supplement their existing employment...

... so their CV is working for them even whilst they sleep, a revolution from the old way of noting down vacancies in newspapers, or coming into jobcentres and using “jobpoint” machines.

Universal Jobmatch also provides information on individuals’ job search activity, including their CV and application history...

... enabling us to segment different claimant groups, in work as much as out of work – identifying those who are highly self-motivated to find work, and those who are not.

This, in turn, will revolutionise the way Jobcentre Plus interacts with claimants – with scope to move much more of our contact online especially valuable for those who are in work but we think could earn more.

Exciting prospects

Once Universal Credit is rolled out, part-time workers could also receive monthly statements telling them how much better off they would be if they increased their hours...

... or texts telling them how progressing in work would mean more money in their pocket.

An online calculator could also allow claimants to find out within seconds how much better off they would be from boosting their hours.

These are just some of the ideas we are considering.

We know there are many more possible options.

But as DWP moves increasingly towards digital by default, the rapid pace of technological change presents a real opportunity...

... both to radically alter the way we interact with people, and transform the services we offer.

Call for ideas

At present, even across the globe, there are almost no examples of existing practice...

... no evidence about what works in terms of supporting people in work to progress.

Yet employers already use training very successfully to improve their employee’s skills and earnings and grow their business as a result.

Behavioural economists and social psychologists are already expert in understanding people’s behaviours, and encouraging a positive response.

So the question for us is we harness this knowledge, as well as that of others in the field...

... from think tanks, welfare to work providers, academics, charities, application designers and those at the sharp end of delivering existing services.

We need an opportunity and a forum to answer some challenging questions:

How best can we support employed claimants to progress in work?

How best can we work with employers to promote training, development and progression opportunities?

How best can we monitor and evaluate any new interventions, testing that they have the desired effect?

Today we are sending out a call for ideas – the more innovative and radical the better.

I urge you, and the others beyond this room, to bring your ideas and answers to the table now.

Your input is vital.

We look forward to hearing from you.