-
Rate of universal credit claimants whose payments
are cut or cancelled has doubled since pre-pandemic for those
expected to do full-time work search
-
‘Postcode lottery’ means northern jobcentres impose
disproportionately more sanctions, IPPR research
finds
-
Think tank urges government to pause all sanctions
until inflation is brought under control
The government should stop imposing punitive benefit cuts on
people claiming universal credit until the cost-of-living crisis
has eased, the IPPR think tank urges today.
It says its research shows widespread variation in how job
centres apply work-search rules, and even wider variation in how
often different age groups face sanctions. IPPR says these need
to be fully investigated and understood before new sanctions are
rolled out.
The report comes just days after , the chancellor, said he would
expand the existing regime to include more stay-at-home parents,
and apply rules more rigorously to people who do not meet strict
requirements to search for work, as part of his spring
Budget.
Some 100,000 people have had their payments cut or cancelled
because they are judged not to have made enough effort to find
work, according to the most recent (DWP) data. This means an
overall sanction rate for universal credit claimants in the full
‘searching for work’ group of 7.9 per cent, or one in 12 people
-- double the pre-pandemic rate.
Concerningly, analysis by IPPR shows that jobcentres across the
country appear to operate vastly different sanction regimes. For
example, 13 per cent of universal credit claimants in Knowsley,
Merseyside are sanctioned, while the sanction rate is only 2.9
per cent for people in Broadland, Norfolk.
Overall, people on universal credit in the north of England
(North East, North West, Yorkshire and the Humber) are more
likely to be sanctioned than those in other English regions, or
in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Men are 2.6 times more likely to be sanctioned than women, and
young men are more likely to be sanctioned than other demographic
groups – with one in five subject to sanctions.
IPPR argues that people whose universal credit payments are cut
are likely to face great hardship as a result, made more acute by
the cost of living crisis. Given the lack of data to describe
exactly who is sanctioned, the think tank is calling
for:
-
Benefit sanctions to be immediately suspended
until inflation is brought under control, as they were through
the Covid crisis
-
The government to urgently seek to understand the
recent surge in the sanctions rate and regional
variations, and to address the risk that officials in
some Jobcentres use their discretion to apply the rules more
strictly than in others
-
A ‘yellow-card’ system to be introduced, to
remove a financial penalty as the first sanction and replace it
with an intervention meeting
-
The Department of Work and Pensions to develop fuller
sanctions statistics to better understand why there
are such wide variations, and to provide information on the
sanction rate for different ethnic groups – not currently
available – to assess possible issues of discrimination.
Henry Parkes, senior economist at IPPR,
said:
“Sanction rates are climbing rapidly, and it seems your
chances of being sanctioned are largely down to the temperament
of your local jobcentre. We already know that sanctions can push
people into destitution, so as the cost of living crisis
continues it is urgent that the government pauses, rather than
expands, its sanctions regime while it investigates what’s
driving the rise and variation in sanction rates.
“To press ahead instead with even tougher sanctions when the
existing system is already something of a postcode lottery, and
when everyone is struggling with rising living costs, would be
both foolish and unfair.”
|
Local authority
|
Universal Credit sanction rate
|
|
Bottom five
|
|
Broadland, Norfolk
|
2.9 per cent
|
|
Tamworth, Staffordshire
|
3 per cent
|
|
Ceredigion, Wales
|
3.3 per cent
|
|
Na h-Eileanan Siar, Outer Hebrides
|
3.5 per cent
|
|
City of London, London
|
3.6 per cent
|
|
Top five
|
|
Knowsley, Merseyside
|
13 per cent
|
|
Midlothian, Scotland
|
12.8 per cent
|
|
Basildon, Essex
|
12.6 per cent
|
|
East Lothian, Scotland
|
12.4 per cent
|
|
Wrexham, Wales
|
12.1 per cent
|
ENDS