Professor Ruth Patrick:

I thank the committee for the invitation to attend this hearing. In my opening statement, I wish to share some key reflections about the roll-out of universal credit, looking particularly at research evidence, which includes a participatory research project funded by Joseph Rowntree Foundation that explored experiences of the roll-out of universal credit within Northern Ireland, and, second, an ongoing major programme called Changing Realities, which is a UK-wide project documenting life on a low-income and co-producing recommendations for change.

The first theme I will pick up is how we approach major reform such as benefit simplification. As we heard, universal credit represented a major reform of the UK’s social security system. From the beginning, ministers and Department for Work and Pensions officials proclaimed what they described as a test-and-learn approach to the benefit’s implementation. This included its initial roll-out into four pathfinder areas from April 2013 before wider implementation. A test-and-learn approach was a high-risk one, and one which I have argued elsewhere very much neglected the opportunities to instead listen, learn and draw directly, for example, on the expertise that comes with experience of social security regimes. This was a mistake by the UK Government, which could have been avoided were it instead to recognise and act on the fact that those with experiences of claiming social security and navigating life on a low income have a specific and specialist form of expertise. Many of the problems that have emerged with universal credit, which the previous witnesses have commented on, such as the default to monthly payment and the five-week wait, could have been avoided had policymakers involved claimants themselves in the development of the benefit.

Beyond this, there are very big and important opportunities in drawing on this expertise in the roll-out of new policies and in raising awareness about them. For example, a group in Northern Ireland called UC:Us has created the first claimant-led guide to universal credit, which provides key information to claimants in an engaging, user-friendly and accessible format.

This second theme I wish to pick up is the importance of adequacy. To emphasise, it is not possible to divorce questions of benefit adequacy from wider questions about the design and delivery of social security benefits. With universal credit, the payment levels are simply too low to enable households to meet essential living costs, as has been effectively demonstrated by campaigning activities by organisations such as Joseph Rowntree Foundation and the Trussell Trust. The inadequacy of social security delivered through universal credit inevitably and significantly negatively impacts on claimants’ experiences of it and its scope to meet underpinning objectives.

Third - this again follows what we have heard - is the theme of working with, rather than against, the grain of individual lives. A key ambition of universal credit was for it to promote working behaviours among claimants, and aspects of its design were supposed to reflect this.

This included a default monthly payment, and the payment of housing element directly to tenants rather than to their landlords. The idea of that was it mimicked working behaviours but these payment features went against the grain of people’s individual lives and undermined established budgetary practices. Notably, many on a low income are in fact paid weekly or fortnightly by their employment and the monthly payment period meant people had to stretch their budgeting over a much longer period, which was often incredibly challenging. Another example, which we might discuss further in this session, was the decision to offer payment to one person in the household, with important gendered implications and risks for those facing domestic violence. This is another place where a listen-and-learn approach could have prevented these implementation policies.

Fourth, with regard to risks and benefits implications, universal credit was motivated by a drive to simplify benefits, rolling up housing costs and means-tested support for children and adults into one payment, while a separate system of disability support remained. While simplification is a laudable objective - perhaps - for many people, receiving different payments at different time points such as, for example, income support, child benefit, housing benefit or child tax credits, helped with their budgeting work and ensured that they had small cash injections at different points across the month. There is also a potential tension between seeking benefit simplification and making sure that a social security system responds to and meets diverse needs. Doing the latter, arguably, demands an element of complexity to assess and properly meet diverse needs and household circumstances.

Fifth, universal credit was proudly digital by default, with the application process all completed online. This has created and continues to create problems for those without digital literacy. It also creates barriers to entitlement, which may reduce take up. I will share a direct experience from Roxy, who is part of Changing Realities, who highlights some of the problems in a diary entry from 9 May this year. She states:

For the last 6 days I have been unable to log into my Universal Credit account as they aren't sending me the text with the security code, I've phoned Universal Credit, their answer to this is for me to attend the job centre, I work full time I said I can’t, so they’ve said well if you refuse a appointment we don’t have to pay you.... so I can’t log in for their fault, there answer to them not sending the texts is to make me miss work not get paid to do what?

Members can see how she is in a cycle that is partly created by the digital system.

Sixth, and some others have mentioned this as well, there have been real problems around the assessment periods, with a claimant’s income in the previous month determining his or her pay in the following month. Edison, in her diary entry from 3 May, articulates the problem well, by stating “I had a two wage month in an assessment period this month making my universal credit practically nothing - I wish more than anything they would sort this assessment fiasco out.”

Regarding conditionality, we do not have the time to discuss this at length but it is important to flag that universal credit brought with it additional conditionality, for example, rolling out in-work conditionality for the first time. Conditionality governs encounters between Jobcentre Plus DWP staff and claimants, and the UK has created and sustained a culture of distrust. It has also been one-sided, for example, through universal credit claimants being required to sign a "claimant commitment" where they can pledge to do certain things in return for that benefit. They do not, however, receive a reciprocal offer from the state about what they are entitled to expect from the DWP. Aurora, part of Changing Realities, set out her experience in a diary entry in March 2024:

I am a lone parent who relies on Universal Credit. My mental health has been greatly impacted by conditionality. I live in fear of sanctions and my anxiety is triggered. When I was unemployed I was prescribed antidepressants. I have now been employed for almost 2 years and yet conditionality still has an influence because of the type of work I was able to find. (Enabling me flexibility due to childcare constraints) I work a zero hours contract. There have been some issues with this due to how UC works for people in my situation. When I have found myself at an appointment the work coach tells me I must find another job or more hours. The coaches are so unhelpful and this pressure perpetuates mental health issues.

Members will be pleased to know I only have two more but in respect of learning from difference, it is still not widely known that universal credit has been rolled out differently within the UK, with the most notable differences being observed in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland’s roll-out did not begin until 2017, that is, it began later, and it included key differences, such as a default to fortnightly payments, the option to pay rent directly to landlords available to all and scope for split payments, although the numbers of those taking up this option are still very low. Discretionary payments were also available to offset the five-week wait in Northern Ireland and conditionality applies slightly differently within Northern Ireland. More needs to be done to learn from these differences, and how far or whether they have improved experiences of the benefit. I am pleased this is part of a major research programme I lead that has just begun, which is called Social Security in a Devolved UK and is funded by the Nuffield Foundation.

Finally, reflecting on some lessons from the pandemic and ending on a positive note, during the pandemic the UK government moved quickly to allocate additional support to households at particular risk of increased poverty and this included a temporary uplift to universal credit of £20 per week. It seemed as though, and I am not an expert in this, that the computer systems and online infrastructure enabled this to be actioned rapidly. The system also withstood the large increase in claims over this same period. I will end on that note.