Letter: Social Fund does not meet needs of the poor

Mr Mike Bolton
Friday 05 August 1994 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Your report on the Social Fund ('Loans system fails struggling mother', 2 August) comes as no surprise to many people. As a benefits adviser working with single people who are homeless, I come into daily contact with the Social Fund. This system has two main fundamental flaws.

First, as a discretionary scheme with restrictions on the total budget for each benefits agency district, the system ensures that only the most urgent applications are met. This creates a hierarchy of poverty and leaves many applicants without sufficient resources to meet their needs for furniture, clothing etc.

Second, the budgeting loans offered by the scheme are restricted by the ability to repay. A maximum of 78 weeks' repayments are normally allowed at a rate of up to 25 per cent of the applicant's usual benefit level. Claimants with higher needs can quickly exhaust their 'available credit' and then be excluded from the scheme on the grounds of their poverty.

One alternative to the failure of the Social Fund would be to reinstate non-discretionary lump sum payments - with strictly defined entitlement criteria. These payments could be either grants or loans, according to the situation and needs of the claimant. The community care model of the current Social Fund could be built into the entitlement legislation, as could provision for the necessary level of budgetary control.

Yours faithfully,

MIKE BOLTON

Nottingham Hostels Liaison Group

Nottingham

2 August

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in