Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit administration → Thread
The beginning of the end….....
I switched on the TV this morning and was confronted by IDS answering questions about the disarray that UC seems to be in . The interviewer asked that, in the light of the problems, UC was going to be wrapped up. IDS replied that there was no chance of it being wrapped up.
I can’t help but compare this to the announcements made by Prime Ministers that they have ‘complete confidence in Minister X and they will continue to back him or her’ closely followed by Minister X stepping down to spend more time with his or her family….............
Fingers crossed….
With UC, PIP and ESA all in trouble it seems as if all IDS, flagships are sinking. How long can he last?
With UC, PIP and ESA all in trouble it seems as if all IDS, flagships are sinking. How long can he last?
Although following the recent example of cruise liner and ferry captains perhaps he will be the first off the ship (but not with the inprint of David’s boot up his backside)?
I predicted last year - completely incorrectly - that he would be kicked upstairs. But he’s not going anywhere. he is unsackable. Sack him and you admit that it really has all gone wrong. So blame the last government (as Mike Penning has, again, over WCA) blame the claimants and claim that all criticisms are ‘out of date’, redefine failure as success and go wibble-wibble-wibble until the election.
If they win, he will be SoS again. Wibble-wibble-wibble till 2020. Aaaaaarrrrrrg.
Did you get that, DWP lookers-in?
I predicted last year - completely incorrectly - that he would be kicked upstairs. But he’s not going anywhere. he is unsackable. Sack him and you admit that it really has all gone wrong. So blame the last government (as Mike Penning has, again, over WCA) blame the claimants and claim that all criticisms are ‘out of date’, redefine failure as success and go wibble-wibble-wibble until the election.
If they win, he will be SoS again. Wibble-wibble-wibble till 2020. Aaaaaarrrrrrg.
Did you get that, DWP lookers-in?
With reference to Mr Penning I saw him on TV last night saying that all the ATOS delays started with the last government- I’m not convinced , from my (admittedly not all that reliable) memory I seem to recall in the early days of ESA the assessments were in fact made fairly promptly and the actual decisions within a few days of the assessment.
Ah yes, that’s my recollection too. However we are recollecting “facts”, which these days carry no weight with politicians, who have “beliefs” which can negate any mere fact.
Seriously though, how long can they continue in denial when the whole catalogue of disasters is now in the public domain?
Penning is being as disingenueous as ever. The WCA process was introduced by a Conservative Govt. as the All Work Test in 1996. That process hasn’t changed since. Labour may have re-named it the Work Capability Assessment but they didn’t change the process.
Who would believe the Tories would try to blame Labour & Atos for a process they introduced and has been failling ever since? And why don’t journalists get that the process was a Tory invention, not Labour’s?
Oh, and that the CSA & IB & JSA & DLA (that apparently have failed) were introduced by the Tories. The list of their welfare reform failures is rather long and growing by the day! About the only thing they can pin on Labour is Tax Credits!
Penning is being as disingenueous as ever. The WCA process was introduced by a Conservative Govt. as the All Work Test in 1996. That process hasn’t changed since. Labour may have re-named it the Work Capability Assessment but they didn’t change the process.
Who would believe the Tories would try to blame Labour & Atos for a process they introduced and has been failling ever since? And why don’t journalists get that the process was a Tory invention, not Labour’s?
Oh, and that the CSA & IB & JSA & DLA (that apparently have failed) were introduced by the Tories. The list of their welfare reform failures is rather long and growing by the day! About the only thing they can pin on Labour is Tax Credits!
However the precursors to Tax Credits - Family Income Supplement and Family Credit - were introduced by the Conservatives. A friend of mine who worked in the Social Security offices at the time said that there was a mad rush of male staff married with children to make claims to FIS because their wages were so bad.
The delays at ATOS started when Chris Grayling decided to accelerate the IB migration.
I do so wish that they would sack IDS but my gut feeling is that they don’t care that the wheels are falling off Welfare Reform because the people who are affected won’t vote for them. IDS is one of the last hard right people in cabinet and keeping him there serves a political purpose.
I have been disgusted that this government can willingly treat the most vulnerable in society with such disdain.
You might find it difficult to find a willing successor as well.
Penning is being as disingenueous as ever. The WCA process was introduced by a Conservative Govt. as the All Work Test in 1996. That process hasn’t changed since. Labour may have re-named it the Work Capability Assessment but they didn’t change the process.
Who would believe the Tories would try to blame Labour & Atos for a process they introduced and has been failling ever since? And why don’t journalists get that the process was a Tory invention, not Labour’s?
Oh, and that the CSA & IB & JSA & DLA (that apparently have failed) were introduced by the Tories. The list of their welfare reform failures is rather long and growing by the day! About the only thing they can pin on Labour is Tax Credits!
Although the All Work Test established the principle of an arbitrary criteria for whether someone was fit for work, ESA was still a major change as the criteria was made much more difficult.
The criteria have been amended many times since 1996 (and it is arguable whether in practice the criteria have made it any harder to ‘pass’ the test - we are actually winning a higher % of appeals under the allegedly tougher criteria).
But the criteria are implemented by application of the process. In other words if the process is **** the decision is more likely to be **** whatever the current criteria.
The criteria have been amended many times since 1996 (and it is arguable whether in practice the criteria have made it any harder to ‘pass’ the test - we are actually winning a higher % of appeals under the allegedly tougher criteria).
But the criteria are implemented by application of the process. In other words if the process is **** the decision is more likely to be **** whatever the current criteria.
I fully accept that the conservatives introduced the concept of an arbitrary criteria. I also understand that this is flawed.
Grauniad today - McVey has claimed that UC’s ‘strategic outline business case’ has been approved until the end of this Parliament. Turns out it has not. The Teasury has not signed it off. Although there is apparently no contradiction between the two statements. So that’s all right then.
FT too -
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7fb955b6-05ed-11e4-8b94-00144feab7de.html#axzz36rdKVgRJ
[ Edited: 8 Jul 2014 at 09:35 am by Andrew Dutton ]from the Committee questioning - for general enjoyment:
Q32 Chair: Have you signed off the business case? Have you signed it off yet?
Sir Jeremy Heywood: On universal credit at the start of last year, the MPA, with support from the Treasury and with a lot of technical help from the Government Digital Service, played a very clear role in bringing to the Secretary of State’s attention that the project was way off track. That was a very important intervention from the centre. It then followed up with the next technique that the centre has got, which was to provide support. Having provided assurance that things were not on track, it then provided considerable support in the form of seconding the then head of the MPA, David Pitchford, to help reprogramme the project. There was a lot of support from Mike Bracken and his team at GDS to help the digital underpinnings of it, but also some help on the commercial renegotiations on the contracts from Bill Crothers and his team. That is a very good example of where the assurance role, which the Treasury and the Cabinet Office exercised jointly in that case, was followed by a support role, and that continues.
Q33 Chair: Is it on track now, Sir Jeremy?
Sir Jeremy Heywood: In its current form, I believe it is.
Q34 Chair: What do you mean, “In its current form”?
Sir Jeremy Heywood: That is something we look at very carefully.
Chair: What does that mean?
Mr Bacon: It is going at the speed that the driver wants it to go at, which I think, personally, is very sensible.
Can I go back a stage earlier?
Q35 Chair: I just want to get one answer to the question. Have you signed off the business case, Sir Nick?
Sir Nicholas Macpherson: On universal credit? I think the Treasury—Sharon White and I, and Bob—have discussed this quite frequently. I believe that at each key milestone of the reset programme there is a Treasury decision to take.
Q36 Chair: Have you signed it off?
Sir Nicholas Macpherson: It is signed up, up to a point; up to the point—
Q37 Mr Bacon: Did you say, “Signed up”?
Sir Nicholas Macpherson: Up to the milestones.
Mr Bacon: Actually, Sir Jeremy, you have said that we do not want to spend the whole time talking about universal credit.
Chair: I want to get an answer on that.
Mr Bacon: You won’t get one.
Q38 Chair: I do want an answer. I want just a yes or no. Has it been signed off or not?
Sir Jeremy Heywood: I cannot speak to the Treasury.
Chair: No.
Q39 Mr Bacon: The great unscripted pauses on this subject are going to form part of parliamentary history, Sir Nick.
Sir Bob Kerslake: I think we should not beat about the bush. It has not been signed off.
Q40 Chair: It hasn’t been signed off.
Sir Bob Kerslake: We have had a set of conditional assurances about progress and the Treasury has released money accordingly. That is one of the key controls they have.
[ Edited: 8 Jul 2014 at 02:58 pm by Andrew Dutton ]here’s a link to today’s rightsnet news story -
and the public accounts committee evidence session itself -
from the Committee questioning - for general enjoyment:
Q32 Chair: Have you signed off the business case? Have you signed it off yet?
Sir Jeremy Heywood: On universal credit at the start of last year, the MPA, with support from the Treasury and with a lot of technical help from the Government Digital Service, played a very clear role in bringing to the Secretary of State’s attention that the project was way off track. That was a very important intervention from the centre. It then followed up with the next technique that the centre has got, which was to provide support. Having provided assurance that things were not on track, it then provided considerable support in the form of seconding the then head of the MPA, David Pitchford, to help reprogramme the project. There was a lot of support from Mike Bracken and his team at GDS to help the digital underpinnings of it, but also some help on the commercial renegotiations on the contracts from Bill Crothers and his team. That is a very good example of where the assurance role, which the Treasury and the Cabinet Office exercised jointly in that case, was followed by a support role, and that continues.
Q33 Chair: Is it on track now, Sir Jeremy?
Sir Jeremy Heywood: In its current form, I believe it is.
Q34 Chair: What do you mean, “In its current form”?
Sir Jeremy Heywood: That is something we look at very carefully.
Chair: What does that mean?
Mr Bacon: It is going at the speed that the driver wants it to go at, which I think, personally, is very sensible.
Can I go back a stage earlier?
Q35 Chair: I just want to get one answer to the question. Have you signed off the business case, Sir Nick?
Sir Nicholas Macpherson: On universal credit? I think the Treasury—Sharon White and I, and Bob—have discussed this quite frequently. I believe that at each key milestone of the reset programme there is a Treasury decision to take.
Q36 Chair: Have you signed it off?
Sir Nicholas Macpherson: It is signed up, up to a point; up to the point—
Q37 Mr Bacon: Did you say, “Signed up”?
Sir Nicholas Macpherson: Up to the milestones.
Mr Bacon: Actually, Sir Jeremy, you have said that we do not want to spend the whole time talking about universal credit.
Chair: I want to get an answer on that.
Mr Bacon: You won’t get one.
Q38 Chair: I do want an answer. I want just a yes or no. Has it been signed off or not?
Sir Jeremy Heywood: I cannot speak to the Treasury.
Chair: No.
Q39 Mr Bacon: The great unscripted pauses on this subject are going to form part of parliamentary history, Sir Nick.
Sir Bob Kerslake: I think we should not beat about the bush. It has not been signed off.
Q40 Chair: It hasn’t been signed off.
Sir Bob Kerslake: We have had a set of conditional assurances about progress and the Treasury has released money accordingly. That is one of the key controls they have.
Priceless! Particularly love the ‘great unscripted pauses’ bit.