Controversial UC Plan: Tories Propose Benefit Cuts & Spending Bans
Controversial UC Plan: Tories Propose Benefit Cuts & Spending Bans
A new Conservative plan targets Universal Credit claimants with payment cuts and spending restrictions, sparking fierce condemnation from charities who warn of a "fast track to increased poverty."
The Conservative party has unveiled a contentious plan aimed at reforming Universal Credit (UC), which could see payments drastically cut and spending restricted for hundreds of thousands of claimants. The proposals, spearheaded by Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, are framed as a move to push people into work, but have been met with severe criticism from poverty charities.
Under the new scheme, individuals claiming Universal Credit would initially receive their full entitlement for six months. However, after this period, their payments would be reduced by a third if they haven't made sufficient National Insurance contributions for at least twice the length of their claimant period. For example, someone with two years of NI payments would qualify for another 12 months of full UC before the lower rate kicks in.
This reduced rate would set payments at 70% of the standard amount. For a single claimant under 25, this could mean living on just £237 a month, or barely £7.50 a day. Couples aged 25 or over could see their total income fall by £200, leaving them with £466 monthly.
These reduced payments would be issued via a “back to work card,” which would prevent purchases of alcohol, tobacco, gambling, or cash withdrawals, a system inspired by a scrapped Australian model.
Kemi Badenoch defended the proposals, stating that welfare must be a
safety net for those who genuinely need it, not a lifestyle choice for those who can't be bothered.
The party estimates that the plan would affect approximately 350,000 people across England, Scotland, and Wales, saving an estimated £538 million annually. Exemptions would apply to those already in work (who make up about a third of UC claimants) and those assessed as having limited capability for work due to health conditions or disabilities.
Payments related to housing or dependent children would remain unaffected.
However, charities have vehemently condemned the initiative.
Sara Ogilvie, director of policy at Child Poverty Action Group, warned that these proposals are “a fast track to increased poverty” and the “last thing people need as they try to get back on their feet,” highlighting the ongoing impact of austerity cuts and rising living costs.
Helen Barnard, head of policy at Trussell, called the idea “deeply misguided,” arguing that cutting support makes it harder, not easier, for individuals to find and sustain employment, especially when struggling with basic needs like food, rent, or transport.
The Conservatives point to countries like Germany and the Netherlands, where unemployment payments are contingent on contributions and can be time-limited. Critics, however, note that these international systems often provide significantly more generous payments, between 60% and 70% of a person’s previous monthly wage, and offer separate support for those who haven’t contributed sufficiently, such as Germany’s £480 monthly allowance for single individuals.
