The following amendments have been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Paul Davies, and amendment 2 in the name of Julie James. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected.

The next item is the Plaid Cymru debate on universal credit, and I call on Siân Gwenllian to move the motion.

Motion NDM6606 Rhun ap Iorwerth

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

1. Believes that the six-week application time for universal credit claimants will cause hardship during the Christmas period.

2. Reaffirms that the universal credit system is fundamentally flawed.

3. Calls on the UK Government to take mitigating steps to speed up universal credit payments, and avoid sanctions, over the Christmas period.

4. Calls on the Welsh Government to seek the same administrative responsibility over social security as the Scottish Government.

Motion moved.

Thank you, Llywydd, and it’s a pleasure to open the Plaid Cymru debate today on universal credit. This is the second debate in six weeks that we have tabled on this particular issue, because we are extremely concerned about the impact that this destructive policy will have on our citizens here in Wales. Like many of you in the Chamber today, we are concerned, but in addition to that, and in addition to pointing a finger at the Conservatives, we in Plaid Cymru are also offering a solution today, a solution that would start to put the power in our own hands here in Wales so that, ultimately, we can come up with a far fairer system.

Yesterday, we heard that 300 tenants were in debt in Torfaen, where universal credit has been implemented since July of this year. A report on the implications in Torfaen states this:

Early feedback indicates extremely disabling circumstances for many households.

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Ann Jones) took the Chair.

Plaid Cymru’s stance on this issue is clear: in order to protect our citizens from the actions of the Conservatives at their worst, we must start to devolve the administration of welfare to Wales. We can then put an end to the culture of delay and sanction, and also ensure that individuals rather than homes receive payments, in order to ensure that this new system won’t have a disproportionate impact on women.

We are suggesting starting by devolving the administration that would allow us in Wales to be more flexible in terms of payments, and to vary the payment method for housing benefit. This is already happening in Scotland. There, the SNP Government have changed the regularity of the payments from monthly to fortnightly. And in Scotland the housing elements are paid directly to landlords according to the wishes of the tenant.

Let’s turn to the issue of cost. Scotland has negotiated a financial framework with Westminster, which means that the funding for the administration of some elements of universal credit is transferred to Scotland as part of the block grant. In my view, the Welsh Government is using the cost as an excuse not to take action in this area. I will explain it in another way, just to make it entirely clear so that everyone understands this: the administration of welfare doesn't cost anything to the Scottish Government because the block grant was adapted so that there was an additional sum available to Scotland for those administrative costs, including any start-up costs too. The Welsh Government is in a position to come to an agreement on a similar framework to that negotiated for Scotland, and I cannot understand why the Government wouldn’t wish to start those negotiations. The UK Labour Party has been calling on the Government to make changes to the universal credit policy. Labour Assembly Members often stand in this Chamber and condemn the policy.

So, I am proposing a pragmatic approach in dealing with this problem, and I extend the proposal to you as Government to do something to change some of the worst aspects of universal credit. That would be greatly appreciated by the people who are affected by it. And it would also show the value of devolution, and show the value of our own national Parliament in introducing alternative ideas and a fairer way of doing things for the benefit of our citizens and our communities.  

Thank you. I have selected the two amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. So, I call on Mark Isherwood to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Mark.

Amendment 1. Paul Davies

Delete all and replace with:

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

1. Notes that the principle behind universal credit is widely supported, providing the right support for jobseekers, and of course putting proper care in place for people who cannot work.

2. Welcomes the wide-ranging package announced in the UK Government’s budget to address concerns around the transition to universal credit.

Amendment 1 moved.

Diolch. Universal credit is designed to help people into work and support people who need help or cannot work. It replaces a system that discouraged people from working more than 16 hours a week, and saw nearly 1.5 million people trapped on out-of-work benefits for nearly a decade. Unlike the disastrous roll-out of tax credits, which saw millions of people facing clawbacks after overpayments of £7.3 billion, universal credit is being introduced gradually. People are moving into work faster and staying in work longer. There are only six weeks, as we heard, since the last Plaid Cymru debate on universal credit where I noted that I'd written to the UK Secretary of State for Work and Pensions regarding universal credit helpline charges before his announcement they were being scrapped, and that backbench Conservative MPs were doing their democratic job by calling for a reduction in the six-week waiting time for universal credit payments. 

When I recently visited the new Jobcentre Plus district manager for north and mid Wales and staff at their Mold office, they told me that they can now focus on the claimant's needs, and instead of spending their days helping people filling out long forms as they come off and then back on jobseeker's allowance, and dealing with queries about delays in payments, they can now concentrate on coaching people about how to find extra work and become financially independent. They also told me about the personal budgeting support they provide and about the advance payments available, although these had rarely been taken up so far, they told me. 

I urge all Members to visit a Jobcentre Plus office in their own area. The House of Commons Work and Pensions Select Committee stated in 2012:

'The principles behind Universal Credit have widespread support, which we share.'

Labour's shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, three years ago, said:

'Labour supports the principle of universal credit'.

Most of the respondents to the UK Government twenty-first century welfare consultation paper agreed with the need for fundamental reform and the principles underpinning universal credit. I therefore move amendment 1, noting that the principle behind universal credit is widely supported.

Rather than scrapping it, Labour's 2017 UK manifesto said, quote:

'Labour will reform and redesign UC, ending six-week delays in payment'.

And, in this context, amendment 1 also welcomes the wide-ranging package announced at the UK Government's budget to address concerns around the transition to universal credit. This £1.5 billion package, which reduces a claimant's wait for their first payment to five weeks, is actually significantly more generous than reducing the payment to one month, which I'll develop. 

Outside of the fact that I doubt any of us, potentially, in this room have ever gone five weeks without any income whatsoever, would you acknowledge that in nearly every single pilot that there's been, especially in Wales, there are significant arrears as a result of this?

Where proper engagement between the different agencies involved has not worked—particularly local authorities and the local Jobcentre Plus offices—that has arisen—and also housing associations—but where it's worked well, it has worked well.

And it's about more than just money: it's about helping people get into work, stay in work and live independently. From next month, claimants will be offered an advance of up to 100 per cent. In practice, this means that new claimants in December can already receive an advance of up to 50 per cent, and may now receive a second advance of up to 100 per cent in the new year. Payments of advances will now be recoverable over 12 months rather than six; claimants who had previously received housing benefit will receive an extra two weeks of support, worth on average £233, which will be unrecoverable, automatic and received early in the first assessment period.

Will you take an intervention?

The UK Government has also allocated—. Time's a bit short now, I'm afraid, Mick. I'm a bit worried that I'll run out, but if there's time at the end, I will. The UK Government has also allocated £8 million over four years to develop evidence over what works to help people progress in work. 

Department for Work and Pensions officials have been working with the devolved administrations since March 2012 on plans for universal credit roll-out, and the UK Government issued the universal credit local support services framework in February 2013, developed between the DWP and partners including the Welsh Local Government Association, to help claimants not yet ready to budget for themselves and those who need alternative payment arrangements, including victims of domestic abuse.

When we hear, for example, that in Wales the average value of rent arrears under universal credit is £450, more than three times the UK average, we have to ask the Welsh Government what has gone wrong here. Community Housing Cymru believe that some of the issues surrounding universal credit could be targeted by improving communication between the DWP, tenants and landlords. We also need to consider solutions such as the social change Ark Passport scheme, allowing tenants to separate and prioritise rent and other payments, and giving landlords greater security. And we need to engage with the UK Government's 10-year strategy to transform disability employment and help 1 million more disabled people into work. Thank you.

Thank you. I call on the Minister for Housing and Regeneration to move formally amendment 2, tabled in the name of Julie James.

Amendment 2. Julie James

Delete point 4 and replace with:

Recognises that were the Welsh Government to take on administrative responsibility for social security without substantial additional funding from the UK, this would simply impose new financial burdens on the Welsh Government while raising unfulfillable expectations that the Welsh Government could afford to make more generous provision for claimants.

Amendment 2 moved.

Formally.

Over the weekend, I did a shift collecting food at Tesco in Merthyr with the Merthyr Cynon Foodbank. It was just a couple of hours of my time to assist the food bank volunteers—volunteers who give many hours of their time, week-in, week-out, to provide invaluable support to people at their time of greatest need. Can I say that while I'm willing to do what I can to assist the work of the food bank, I don't find this an uplifting experience, as Mr Rees-Mogg MP described the work of food banks? In fact, I find it a very sad indictment of our times. It's sad that so many people—4,191 in my area alone—needed the help of a food bank in the last 12 months. As we approach Christmas, that should give everyone cause to reflect.

From the evidence of those constituents who come to me for advice—I know I'm not alone in this—it's clear that a number of people needing support from food banks are those who have faced difficulties with the DWP. My constituency office is authorised to issue food bank vouchers. In the conversations with constituents, it's all too often a crisis caused by a benefit claim or a delay in payment that leads directly to their need for emergency help.

People in my constituency are facing those difficulties now, and that is before the roll-out of universal credit arrives in Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney. I have real fears for some of the most vulnerable people in my community when these changes eventually take place—fears that are borne out from the evidence from those areas where universal credit has already been implemented, like the example from Torfaen that we've already heard about.

I can't help but contrast the impact of universal credit, which, remember, is not just a key part of Tory welfare reform, but part of a bigger picture of failed Tory austerity policies—contrast that with the progress that was made in the fight against child, family and pensioner poverty under previous Labour Governments. Statistics show that from the late 1990s until the arrival of the UK coalition Government in 2010, Labour had used the levers of Government to help lift 500,000 children and 900,000 pensioners out of relative poverty. As we've talked about many times, the plague of in-work poverty in our communities continues to grow as the abolition of tax credits has pretty much wiped out the potential benefit from the introduction in 2015 of George Osborne's phony national living wage.

As many of us might well highlight, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has just reported that child, family and pensioner poverty is now pretty much back at pre-1997 levels. So, as a direct result of UK Government-imposed austerity, we've gone backwards over recent years in dealing with poverty, and the roll-out of universal credit will set us back even further. I often wonder to what extent a UK Government Cabinet full of Tory millionaires can ever truly understand these issues. Do they ever get out and see first hand the impact of their policies on the least resilient members of our communities? If they do, and they persist with these changes, then they have no heart, no scruples and no compassion.

So, I'm pleased that Plaid Cymru have brought forward this motion as we clearly do share concerns over the flaws in universal credit, and I fear that without a fundamental change in UK Government policy on this, we will return to the debate many more times in the coming year.

Thanks to Plaid for bringing today's debate. As Siân Gwenllian stated in her opening remarks, Plaid did bring a debate on this subject six weeks ago and I gave UKIP's position at that time. Our stance hasn't really changed since then so I will be fairly brief, particularly bearing in mind that this is only a half-hour debate.

We in UKIP share the concerns of other parties here over universal credit. As a party, we haven't supported a lot of the Conservatives' welfare reforms. We were against the bedroom tax, for instance. So, in these particular matters, we definitely aren't to the right of the Conservatives, as many people like to characterise us; we are actually closer to the left-of-centre parties. Strange but true.

We share concerns over the length of time—[Interruption.]—yes, I'm sure they're delighted—the length of time taken to make the payments, the fact that joint payments can leave people destitute, and the fact that the direct payment of universal credit to tenants rather than landlords will undoubtedly increase rent arrears. We are also worried over the fairly random application of sanctions that will likely occur, and by the fact that sanctions could be taken against people who are already in work and who may already have two or even three jobs. This kind of thing renders the whole scheme of universal credit rather an abject nonsense, whatever good intentions may have initially lain behind it. 

I don't normally spend much time in here knocking the Conservatives, because there's enough of that going on from the Labour and Plaid Cymru benches, so it does get a bit repetitive. I don't want to fall out with the Conservative Members here, who are perfectly amenable people—[Interruption.]—no, I'm not going anywhere; thanks for the suggestion—and, of course, they also now number some of our old friends, like Mark Reckless, although currently absent. [Interruption.] He's not there.

I'm not sure he would agree with you.

He's not here either, Mike.

To be serious, I'm not sure giving responsibility for the welfare system to Iain Duncan Smith in 2010 was ever really going to be a good idea. This is the chap who turned up in Merthyr not long after his appointment and said, seemingly on the spur of the moment, that it might be a good idea if some of the locals thought about popping down to Cardiff to look for work, when, of course, the reality was that thousands of people from Merthyr and other Valleys towns were already doing that and had been doing that for some years. So, the universal credit scheme overseen by such a naïve blunderer as IDS was never really likely to be a success.

However, I would repeat that we don't support Plaid's objective in getting the welfare system devolved to Wales. We recognise what the Welsh Government has stated on this count: that this would only place a huge, additional spending burden on the Welsh public. So, while we do share Plaid's concerns over universal credit, we do not share their proposed solution.

Thank you. I call the Minister for Housing and Regeneration, Rebecca Evans.

I'd like to thank Members for their contributions to the debate this afternoon. I'd like to be clear that we agree with much of the Plaid Cymru motion, differing only, as our amendment makes clear, over the practicability and the desirability of taking over the administrative responsibility for social security. As Members would expect, we reject the complacent amendment from the Conservatives, which glosses over the real suffering being caused by their party's botched and heartless efforts at welfare reform.

We've repeatedly called on the UK Government to end their flawed and unnecessary austerity policy; a policy reinforced by their autumn budget. We remain concerned about the impact of previously announced welfare cuts, especially given that we know these will hit low-income households hard, and particularly those households with children. 

Recent Institute of Fiscal Studies analysis projects that absolute child poverty in Wales will increase by nearly 7 percentage points between 2013-15 and 2019-21. This is driven by the UK Government's welfare benefit changes, including the limiting of tax credit and universal credit to two children and the freeze to most working-age benefits. The planned UK Government's tax and benefit reforms account for nearly four of those 7 percentage points in the increase in absolute child poverty over this period, and the remainder of the 7 per cent is due to projected earnings growth and other changes in the economy.

Will you take an intervention? I have great sympathy for some of the arguments that you're outlining, but how can you say that when you don't want to have the powers to be able to do something about it yourself?

I think history has taught us what happens when the UK Government devolves benefits to us, for example with the council tax benefit, when they top-sliced the budget. So, we're certainly once bitten, twice shy there. And, frankly, the responsibility for this does lie with the UK Government, and the UK Government needs to sort this out.

We might as well all go home then.

Analysis—. Well, we've got our own responsibilities here that are devolved to us in the Welsh Government. Analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies also shows that households in Wales will lose 1.6 per cent of their net income on average, or around £460 a year, from the UK Government's tax and benefit reforms introduced between 2015-16 and 2019-20. This is equivalent to around £600 million a year to Wales as a whole.

We know that lower income households and particularly those with children will lose considerably more on average—around 12 per cent of net income. Large families are particularly hard hit, losing around £7,750 a year or 20 per cent of their net income on average. So, I'm deeply concerned about the devastating impact that universal credit is having on our most vulnerable people.

The analysis by the IFS shows that, whilst one-earner couples with children may gain, working lone parents and two-earner couples are likely to lose. So, the UK Government claim that universal credit will encourage people into work and make work pay just doesn't stack up, because it weakens the incentive for both parents to work and it weakens the incentive for single parents to be in work. Unfortunately, though, the UK Government seems determined to ignore these facts and maintains the line that universal credit ensures that work always pays.

Immediately after coming to post, I wrote to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, setting out our concerns and the views of this National Assembly for Wales, which were expressed during the previous debate that we had on this subject. I called on him to reverse the UK Government's damaging cuts to welfare, to halt the roll-out of universal credit and to address the fundamental concerns being raised with regard to it. As part of his response to me last week, the Secretary of State said that around 80 per cent of new universal credit claimants are being paid in full and on time, but, even if that's the case, I have to ask: what about the other 20 per cent? Failure on this scale is leading to claimants seeking urgent help from food banks, with many struggling to cope with the complexities of this new benefit.

What's extremely worrying to me is that, of those new universal credit claimants who are seeking vital support with their housing costs, many will not be able to pay their first rent to their landlord until their first payment is received. And local authorities, where universal credit full service is already in operation, are telling us that they're seeing increases in rent arrears for many tenants. This is causing or exacerbating debt problems for those who are most in need of support, and it has serious consequences for people who may face eviction as a result of not having the money to pay their rent.

I spoke to the Minister of State for Employment on the day of the autumn statement. He told me that the DWP has put in place advance payments for new universal credit claimants waiting for their first payment. The DWP says this payment will be made within five working days of application and on the same day to anyone in urgent need. I say, as I've said to the Minister, that they need to go much further in addressing the issues. I do not consider that the DWP's solution of offering a loan is sustainable as a permanent solution for claimants who will often already be in debt. No-one is claiming that benefit rates are generous, so tell me: how is a claimant expected to live on eleven twelfths of that benefit for a whole year while the original advance is being paid off?

I wrote to the Minister for Employment last week, seeking his assurances that universal credit claimants would be able to receive payments over the Christmas period. DWP officials have indicated to my officials that there are robust procedures in place to ensure that all payments to claimants due by 21 and 22 December will be paid, and I sincerely hope that these reassurances will be borne out in practice, but I have to say that our experience to date of the UK Government's delivery of universal credit and other welfare benefits doesn't fill me with confidence. 

The national advice network for Wales is working closely with us and with other key partners to ensure that the advice services can help claimants through the complexities of universal credit. The DWP must recognise that many claimants want and need to choose the frequency of their payments. I'll be impressing on the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions that the choice should be universally available to all claimants of universal credit through the DWP's alternative payment arrangements. I do not believe that we would need the same administrative arrangements as in Scotland to achieve this.

Evidence recently presented to the work and pensions committee indicates that there are real disadvantages to the flexibilities offered to claimants in Scotland, with payments being deferred as a result. The flexible arrangements in Scotland only start after the first universal credit payment is received. So, some Scottish claimants have been waiting six weeks or more for their first payment. 

Are you winding up, please?

I'm winding up. I do not support the devolution of welfare or the administration of welfare to Wales. The devolution of welfare benefits to the Scottish Government has transferred the associated financial risk, with the demand for welfare benefits growing faster per head in Scotland than in England from the point of devolution. For Wales, this would pose a significant and unacceptable financial risk, and the costs associated with administering the welfare system would take resources away from the front-line delivery of services.

So, to conclude, as I've already said, we will be opposing the Conservative amendment, and, I have to say, the Conservative contribution fails to acknowledge the scale of the problems that have already been identified. And, as set out in our amendment, we believe that were we to take on administrative responsibility for social security without substantial additional funding from the UK, it would simply transfer additional financial burdens to the Welsh Government and create an unfulfillable expectation that the Welsh Government would be able to make more generous provisions for claimants.

Thank you. Can I call on Steffan Lewis to reply to the debate? Steffan Lewis.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I thank Members for their contributions this afternoon. Dawn Bowden raised the important point that, of course, welfare reform is part of a wider social agenda of this UK Conservative Government, and it's a central theme of austerity.

In Gareth Bennett's contribution—I listened to it carefully—I wasn't sure whether, by the end, he was going to defect to the Conservative Party or the communist party [Laughter.] But I thank him for his contribution this afternoon.

I have to say that I'm deeply disappointed with the Minister's response to the debate today. It is a fact that the Scottish Government have negotiated, through their fiscal framework, with the UK Government, for an uplift to the block grant in order to cover the costs of the administration of welfare. I think it's interesting to point out as well that, earlier on in the debate in this Chamber, the Cabinet Secretary for local government reiterated the Welsh Government's proposals for the devolution of justice to this place. Nobody has suggested that there would be an enormous administrative cost that would mean that public services would have to be cut to cover it. In fact, the First Minister himself has repeatedly said that he is confident that the Welsh Government can come to an arrangement with the UK Government in order to have a Barnett consequential, and other consequentials as well, so that Wales can cover the costs of further powers. There is no reason why that cannot be negotiated between the Welsh Government and the UK Government for the administration of welfare, and universal credit in particular.

Let's also not kid ourselves: to suggest that devolved services and devolved Government and local government is not already paying a hefty price for the damaging welfare reforms that are being pushed through I think is to be in complete denial about the reality. Part of the point of devolution of the administration of welfare would be that we would run a more efficient and effective and humane system in this country that would end up saving money for public services. Why are there programmes that the Welsh Government is administering at the moment, such as Supporting People? These are very good programmes indeed, but part of the reason for the increased demand upon those services is because welfare is being administered by the Conservatives at Westminster today. And I have to say, I find it absolutely incredible that a Labour Minister would rather a Conservative in London administer welfare and social protection for the citizens of Wales than take responsibility themselves.

Let's also bear in mind the fact that the administration of welfare, of course, was always devolved and localised. The interwar period was that period where centralisation occurred—

Will you take an intervention?

Of course I'll take an intervention.

Thank you. Would you acknowledge that the reason why universal credit has been piloted across the UK is because of the scale of the issues that are attached to it? Would you also acknowledge it would be a double whammy for those claimants in Wales if we didn't get the amount of money that would be needed to fund this properly? That is the concern; it is the claimants that are at the heart of this.

Well, I'm sure that the Member will have as much faith as I do in the Cabinet Secretary for Finance for him to go up to London and negotiate a deal for Wales for the administration of welfare that would bring us the consequentials that we need. I have every confidence that we'd do a much better job of administering welfare in this country ourselves than that lot up in London. Absolutely.

I was making the point, Deputy Presiding Officer, that the administration of welfare and its centralisation are a relatively new thing in these islands. The reason why we have the Merthyr Tydfil judgment of 1900 is because of a stand taken by the poor law guardians of Merthyr Tydfil to try and support striking miners, and, of course, we have circular 703 issued by the Ministry of Health back in the pre-war days in order to try and curtail local support for people living in poverty. The interwar period saw the emergence of a hypercentralised state and, originally, after the second world war, that benefited many people, but the political reality today is that for as long as everything is in the hands of Ministers in London, then it's the citizens of Wales that will pay the heavy price, and the most vulnerable citizens of Wales that will pay the heaviest price.

In closing, Deputy Presiding Officer, I mentioned that period of hypercentralisation during the interwar period, and Professor Norman Ginsburg, someone who's a social policy expert, described the centralisation of that period as serving to contain the revolutionary potential of the working class. Why don't we decentralise it, and perhaps the Welsh Government can find its own revolutionary potential to protect the people of this country?

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Thank you. Therefore, we defer voting under this item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.

Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I am going to proceed to voting time. Fine, thank you.