MHAIRI Black is absolutely correct in saying that the £20 uplift to Universal Credit (UC) around the start of the pandemic is “the greatest proof” that the UK Government knew they had left many worse off as a result of the rollout of the benefit (Scots Tories show their true colours in benefit uplift vote, January 23). Indeed, I had a letter in The National in spring of last year making the point that the £20 increase was an admission, if ever there was one, that the existing level of UC was not enough to live on.
READ MORE: £1000 benefits boost is surely an admission that levels are too low
It’s worth adding that Tory-led governments have also left many millions of people throughout the UK worse off as a result of the £37-£39 billion they’ve cut from social security overall the past ten years, including via the benefit cap, the two-child cap aka the rape clause, the under-occupation penalty aka the bedroom tax, cuts to disability benefits, benefit sanctions, and in particular the four-year benefit freeze from 2016-20 which amounted to a cut of around £16bn and was one of the most harmful measures according to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation et al.
As well as calling for the UC uplift to continue beyond the end of March, it’s therefore vital that we don’t forget about the millions of people still receiving the “legacy benefits” UC is to replace, who haven’t received the £20 uplift. This includes people on income-related Jobseeker’s Allowance, income-related Employment and Support Allowance (the main incapacity benefit) and Income Support.
READ MORE: Exclusion from financial support is putting cleaners in Scotland at risk
Following the introduction of the UC uplift last spring, the Disability Benefits Consortium, a network of 100 organisations, called for it to be extended to the legacy benefits, to no avail. They and others, including MPS, have since continued to demand that the DWP give the £20 increase to those on legacy benefits, but Therese Coffey, the Secretary for Work and Pensions, has dug her heels in and refused. This leaves millions of people, including disabled people, without the increase. This is nothing short of discrimination, and is especially appalling during a pandemic. At the very least we should continue to shine a light on it.
Mo Maclean
Glasgow
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