THE SNP has said the Tories are actively and knowingly pushing people into poverty and destitution by failing to learn lessons, invest in social security and “doing the same things over and over again”.
In this week’s Work and Pensions Committee, Work and Pensions Secretary Therese Coffey confirmed the UK Government’s lack of action on policies that would put money in people’s pockets, prevent rising poverty and – according to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) – boost the economy.
The JRF said: “If the £20 [Universal Credit] lifeline were to be taken away, 60% of the people who would lose out from that are in the bottom third of the income distribution.”
Committee member and SNP MP Chris Stephens has criticised the department for “doing the same things over and over again” and expecting different results, despite a wealth of evidence showing it is not working.
He added: “That is exactly what the Tory government is doing. They have been told by the SNP, anti-poverty charities, and even the UN rapporteur on extreme poverty that their approach is not working and that they must invest in social security – but they continue to ignore it.
“The Tories are wilfully, actively and knowingly pushing people up and down the UK into poverty and destitution by sitting on their hands. It is shameful.
“After a decade of Tory austerity measures, Brexit and the coronavirus crisis there must be immediate action to put money in people’s pockets if we are to pull people back from the brink and avoid a worse situation down the line, which many have warned about. The Tories could start by confirming they will make the Universal Credit (UC) uplift permanent and extend it to legacy benefits.”
The SNP say Coffey failed to confirm the UC uplift would be made permanent and extended to legacy benefits, and also refused to acknowledge the higher costs for disabled people.
On the ongoing failure to act on the uplift and prevent cliff edge in April, Coffey said: “Discussions are still ongoing with other parts of Government and a decision has not yet been reached ... I’m afraid I cannot share any news yet for the committee ... Budget proposals are still being worked at and will go through the normal process.”
She also confirmed she was not supportive of the Chancellor’s proposed £1000 one-off payment to replace the UC uplift. She said: “That would not be one of the department’s preferred approaches on providing that financial support ... a steady sum of money would probably be more beneficial to claimants and customers to help with that budgeting process.”
When asked about the higher costs for disabled people during the pandemic and the 10 months without extra help for legacy benefit claimants, Coffey said: “I wouldn’t say they were treated so badly ... I’m not aware specifically of extra costs that would have been incurred.”
The SNP also say she failed to confirm if it would extend to Statutory Sick Pay (SSP).
Coffey said: “There was a consultation. We are still finalising our response to that consultation on SSP and I’m hopeful that that will be published reasonably soon.”
The party also mentioned she failed to confirm if the suspension of the Minimum Income Floor for self-employed people would be extended as it runs out in April, but she did confirm it is only a temporary measure. She said: “We do need to start to work to encourage people to think about whether they will be able to have a gainfully self-employed career in the future ... no decision has yet been taken ... of course there will be notice of this.”
Lastly, the SNP also say Coffey refused to acknowledge the damaging impact of the five-week wait, refused to scrap punitive sanctions and also failed to confirm when crucial reviews of the benefit cap and rules for terminally ill people will happen.
She refused to commission research on the links between the wait for the first UC payment and rent arrears, food bank use, psychological distress and continued to deny existence of wait for first payment, saying: “There’s no need for anyone to wait for financial support.”
Coffey refused to reinstate a suspension of sanctions, saying: “It’s a general principle we have with the benefits system that people get that under certain conditions.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel