“I really wouldn’t bother applying, if I were you” says DWP
spokesperson, adding “as
so few of you are likely to qualify”
The new information on the stringent qualifying
criteria for Universal Credit (UC) came as the DWP confirmed that it was about
to run the first stringent pilot test of the new systems that have been
introduced in the DWP and HMRC to manage “many benefits under one label” UC,
which will replace a number of currently separate benefits.
Setting out the new criteria in detail the
spokesperson explained that "UC will only go to single people; with no disabilities and no
children, who are fit and able to work" quickly continuing “Who
are not entitled to Housing Benefit or mortgage interest support, have been
unemployed for no more than six months, do not have parents or siblings or
partners with whom they are living in sin for whom they exercise any form of
caring responsibility, and who were born in the Tameside area, preferably on a
Tuesday in a year the digits of which are exactly divisible by 4 and who like
listening to King Crimson and home baking and flower arranging"
This radical redefining of who can qualify for UC
is fully expected to deliver the immense savings in welfare expenditure Work
and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith has constantly been assuring Chancellor
George Osborne UC would deliver, ever since the Chancellor agreed to provide
the DWP with the countless hundreds of £millions extra funding required to
deliver the IT hardware and software which UC required.
The DWP spokesperson also stressed that the pilot
exercise would start shortly, as soon as “the pilot claimant” had been
identified, adding that after several weeks work by a crack DWP investigative
team bolstered by support from Tameside CID the department felt it was “close
to identifying our man”.
The “pilot test” is likely to involve a “parallel
running” exercise involving processing the pilot claim on both the new IT
systems and manually, to see which works and which is quickest. The DWP spokesperson said that should it
prove in both cases to be the manual system that should not be regarded as “bad
news” because it meant the full national roll out of UC could proceed whilst
the Department concentrated on getting that new IT system up and running,
without its unavailability hindering the garnering of the massive savings that
UC will deliver, whilst adding that the DWP might have to run a swift recruitment
exercise to ensure sufficient “paper and pen familiar” staff were on-hand to “process
the claims from people who had given up trying to actually lodge an on-line
claim, and simply printed the screen details out and walked them into their
nearest JCP+”
(with
thanks to MW for the steer)
5 comments:
Good news! They finally found the one potential claimant this afternoon.
Even better news! She's starting a new job next week!!
The search for a live test case goes on...
You must be mistaken. Nobody likes King Crimson AND flower arranging. Must have been a fraudulent applicant.
W42, thanks! That proves it then. All UC claimants are fraudsters and charlatans the whole welfare system can be shut down tomorrow.
MW - it shouldn't be that difficult to adopt the information provided by Woodsy42 into that "signature strengths" on-line questionnaire (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/25/dwp_psych_test/) (http://www.behaviourlibrary.com/strengths.php) that the Cabinet Office Behavioural Insights Team developed for the DWP, and which the DWP "encourages" its clients to use, by amending it to include separate
"do you like listening to King Crimson" and
"do you like home baking and flower arranging"
questions, and anyone who answers "Yes" to both will immediately receive an on-screen message which says
"You are quite clearly a would be fraudulent or charlatan claimant: Do not proceed with a claim. Your details have been passed to the DWP anti-fraud unit and you should expect a visit from them shortly."
That way, something which has so far received a mainly negative press for "misleading JSA recipient potential job seekers" could be turned around and shown to be a brilliant anti skivers and shirkers, fraudulent claimant identifier" tool.
Whilst benefitz are funded from income tax and not equally given it's a good idea for them to be as small as possible.
Post a Comment