Universal Credit
Debate between Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist and Baroness Donaghy(3 years, 3 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Donaghy (Lab)
My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler of Enfield, for initiating this debate. She was so comprehensive that I do not think I will use all my time, so as not to repeat her.
I want to make a couple of points, if I may, in reply to the noble Baroness, Lady Eaton. Somebody who was born on the day the old benefits disappeared and UC arrived has probably celebrated their 10th birthday by now, so I wonder how long that argument will be played out in this Chamber. I congratulate the noble Baroness on her stalwart defence but, really, it is getting a bit thin and memories of how bad the old system was are fading. I am the first to accept that it was a bad system; I just do not think that this is a particularly good one. I agree with the noble Baroness that it came into its own during the pandemic, however.
I slightly resent—this is not against the noble Baroness, Lady Eaton, or anybody individually—the fact that, if the benefits were adequate, we would not be having this discussion about a £20 uplift. If the benefits were decent, people would not be struggling. We are not talking about people falling into poverty here; we are talking about people falling deeper into poverty so that they cannot even afford the basics.
I want to say a little about the impact on actors, writers and other creative workers, who are often ignored in these debates. Some 65% of Equity members rely on universal credit and other welfare to stay in the industry. Removing the £20 uplift would mean 53% of them experiencing financial hardship, with 41% unable to meet housing and other essential costs. These figures were taken from a recent impact survey; I thank Equity for its excellent briefing. It joined 100 other organisations across the UK that wrote to urge the Government to abandon their plans. Only 9% of its actors and creative workers had received a grant or other funding from Arts Councils, and more than 40%
“have not received help from the Self Employed Income Support Scheme”.
Of equal concern is the reintroduction of the minimum income floor. These moves will risk an exodus of talent from our world-leading creative industry, already clobbered by the Brexit legacy. Obviously, there will be time in future to discuss the minimum income floor and Brexit, but families will receive significantly less help from the social security system now than they would have a decade ago. The loss of the £20 uplift will take the main rate of out-of-work support down to its lowest level in real terms since 1990.
I am aware that the chairs of the relevant House of Commons Select Committees have written to the Government to ask for the uplift to be made permanent. As the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, has already said, six former Conservative Work and Pensions Secretaries have urged the Chancellor to make the uplift permanent. If they cannot change the Government’s mind, I begin to despair. Why will they not publish the impact assessment mentioned by the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler? If—
Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist (Con)
I hate to interrupt a good speech but the noble Baroness is almost a minute over the suggested speaking time.
Covid-19: Working Mothers
Debate between Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist and Baroness Donaghy
Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist (Con)
The Government are sympathetic to the challenges working parents have faced during the pandemic and note the content of this excellent TUC report. The coronavirus job retention scheme was introduced to ensure that firms could keep millions of people in employment. Whether to use the CJRS remains a business decision for employers to take in consultation with their employees. It is not for the Government to decide whether an individual firm should furlough its staff.
Baroness Donaghy (Lab)
It is right that we should celebrate International Women’s Day today and celebrate women’s achievements, although some might think we have gone back to the 1950s. Low pay, job insecurity and an unequal society predate the pandemic but are exacerbated by it. Seven out of 10 women being rejected for furlough is one example. The TUC report received 50,000 responses, covering mental health, fear of being selected for redundancy and paid leave for carers. The Government should be producing a gender impact assessment on all their policies but rarely do so. How will the Minister make sure that this happens in future?
Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist (Con)
The noble Baroness is right to point out a number of very shocking statistics in the TUC report. We continue to actively monitor the impact of Covid-19 on the labour market, particularly on women. All departments ensure that equality considerations are at the heart of their decision-making. This is key to the Government’s commitment to delivering equality of opportunity for all as well as to complying with legal requirements under the public sector equality duty. The Government Equality Office, based in the Cabinet Office, runs a number of targeted programmes for women to support returners to work and others with protected characteristics, including minority groups.
Women’s Refuges
Debate between Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist and Baroness Donaghy
Baroness Donaghy
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the financial sustainability of women’s refuges.
Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist (Con)
My Lords, this Government are committed to ensuring that victims have access to support within domestic abuse safe accommodation, including refuges. After extensive engagement with the sector to ensure sustainable funding, MHCLG is introducing a new duty on local authorities to assess the need and commission support for victims and their children within safe accommodation. Meanwhile, 75 projects across England will share £16.6 million, supporting up to 43,000 victims until this duty comes into force.
Baroness Donaghy (Lab)
I thank the noble Baroness for her Answer, but the shortage of accommodation in refuges has worsened since I last asked this Question. More than 21,000 referrals to all refuges in England, about 60% of the total, were turned away in 2017-18. That includes women and children. The organisation Refuge has had its accommodation services cut by 50% since 2011 and local authorities are barely able to carry out their essential services. Apart from warm words, what are the Government actually doing to ensure sustainable funding for women’s refuges?
Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist
I acknowledge the noble Baroness’s long-standing huge commitment to this issue, but I believe that her specific concerns will be addressed in the new Domestic Abuse Bill, which includes a duty on local authorities to research and find all the possible outcomes we can give to these victims of abuse. The sustainable funding provided in the Bill will be confirmed in the spending review which we will announce by the summer. In the meantime, we will have this emergency funding until the Bill comes into effect.