DOCSLIB.ORG

Does the Cap Fit?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Does the Cap Fit? Does the Cap fit? An Analysis of the Impact of Welfare Reform in London A research report commissioned by London Councils © Navigant Consulting (Europe) Ltd. All rights reserved November 2011. This document is expressly provided to and solely for the use of London Councils and must not be quoted from, referred to, used by or distributed to any other party without the prior consent of Navigant Consulting (Europe) Ltd who accepts no liability of whatsoever nature for any use by any other party. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Executive Summary.............................................................. 5 1.1 Introduction 5 1.2 Methodology 5 1.3 Data Analysis and Findings 6 1.4 How will the households affected respond? 6 1.5 Impact on Local Government Services 7 1.6 Conclusions 7 2 Introduction ........................................................................... 9 2.1 Purpose and Scope of the Study 9 2.2 The Welfare Reforms: Introduction to Universal Credit 9 3 Literature Review ................................................................ 11 3.1 The Department for Work and Pensions 12 3.2 Professional and Associative Bodies 13 3.3 Academic and Research Institutions 14 3.4 Lobby Groups 15 3.5 Conclusion 16 4 Methodology........................................................................ 18 4.1 Affordability Assessment 18 4.2 Case Study Group 19 4.3 London-wide Projections 19 4.4 Alternative UC Cap Assessment 20 4.5 Local Government Service Impacts 20 5 Data Analysis and Findings ............................................... 21 5.1 Case Study Borough Analysis 21 5.2 Affordability/Unaffordability by Borough 21 5.3 Degree of Affordability by Borough 22 5.4 Affordability by Household Type 27 5.5 Affordability by Bed-size by Borough 38 5.6 Assessing the Overall Impact on London of the UC Cap 38 5.7 Affordability Shortfalls for London 44 6 A Universal Credit Cap to fit London ................................ 48 6.1 Exemption of Child Benefit from the UC Cap 52 6.2 Comparison of the Impact of the UC Cap and Amended Caps 55 7 Potential Consequences of Universal Credit Housing Unaffordability..................................................................... 57 7.1 Economic Variables 57 An Analysis of the Impact of Welfare Reform in London November 11 Page 1 7.2 Rental Inflation 57 7.3 Benefit Levels 57 7.4 Unemployment 58 7.5 Household Responses 58 7.6 Finding Employment 58 7.7 Absorbing the Shortfall 58 7.8 Overcrowding 58 7.9 Household Division 59 7.10 Migration 59 7.11 Assessing Future Impacts 59 8 Implications for local government services ..................... 60 8.1 Housing 60 8.2 Children and Young People’s Services 62 8.3 Adult Social Care 62 8.4 Community Cohesion 63 9 Conclusions ........................................................................ 65 9.1 Recommendation 68 Appendix 1 - Implications for local government services of Welfare Reform ................................................................... 69 Children and Young People’s Services.................................... 72 Introduction 72 Issues 72 Impact on Service Delivery 73 Impact on Local Authority Budgets 74 Policy Options 75 Adult Social Care ....................................................................... 76 Introduction 76 Issues 76 Prevention 78 Impact on Local Authority Budgets 79 Policy Options 80 Community Cohesion ................................................................ 81 Introduction 81 Impact on People and their Communities 82 Impact on Service Delivery 83 Impact on Local Authority Budgets 84 Policy Options 85 Housing....................................................................................... 88 Introduction 88 Issues 89 Impact on Service Delivery 90 Impact on Local Authority Budgets 91 Policy Options 92 An Analysis of the Impact of Welfare Reform in London November 11 Page 2 Appendix 2 - Bibliography......................................................... 94 TABLES OF FIGURES Figure 1: Impact Evaluation from the White Paper ........................................................... 11 Figure 2: Boroughs in Each Group..................................................................................... 20 Figure 3: Case Study Boroughs: Affordability/Unaffordability by Borough.................... 21 Figure 4: Comparison of UC and LHA impact on degree of Unaffordability by number of households............................................................................................................................. 22 Figure 5: Degree of Unaffordability Arising from the LHA Cap as % of living expenses by number of households..................................................................................................... 23 Figure 6: Degree of Unaffordability Arising from the LHA Cap in £ by number of households............................................................................................................................. 24 Figure 7: Degree of Unaffordability Arising from the UC Cap as % of living expenses by number of households .......................................................................................................... 25 Figure 8: Degree of Unaffordability Arising from the UC Cap in £ by number of households............................................................................................................................. 26 Figure 9: Degree of Unaffordability by Household Type for UC & LHA Cap as % of living expenses................................................................................................................................. 28 Figure 10: Degree of Unaffordability by Household Type for UC & LHA Cap in £.......... 29 Figure 11: Degree of Unaffordability by Household Type for LHA Cap as % of living expenses................................................................................................................................. 30 Figure 12: Degree of Unaffordability by Household Type for UC Cap as % of living expenses................................................................................................................................. 31 Figure 13: Degree of Unaffordability by household type for UC Cap in £ ...................... 32 Figure 14: Degree of Unaffordability by Number of Dependants as % of living expenses ................................................................................................................................................. 34 Figure 15: Affordability/Unaffordability by bed-size by Case Study Borough ............... 35 Figure 16: Ranking of Boroughs by % of Households whose Rent is not Affordable ... 39 Figure 17: Levels of Affordability in Respect of the UC and LHA caps for all London Boroughs ................................................................................................................................ 41 Figure 18: % and Number of Households with and without Dependants in all London Boroughs ................................................................................................................................ 42 Figure 19: Overview of Affordability across London – Number of Households ............ 43 Figure 20: Overview of Affordability across London - Percentage of Households ........ 43 Figure 21: Degree of Unaffordability from LHA and UC caps together by Borough (for 24 Boroughs).......................................................................................................................... 44 Figure 22: Average Loss for those Impacted by the LHA and UC Caps by Broad Household Type and the Aggregate Loss for all London per Week ................................ 46 An Analysis of the Impact of Welfare Reform in London November 11 Page 3 Figure 23: Impact of London-weighted UC Cap (£399 for a single adult and £570 for other households) on affordability ...................................................................................... 49 Figure 24: Degree of Unaffordability of the LHA Cap with a London-weighted UC Cap, in £........................................................................................................................................... 50 Figure 25: Degree of Unaffordability for London-weighted UC cap, in £......................... 51 Figure 26: Degree of Unaffordability for London-weighted UC Cap by household type by % of living expenses ........................................................................................................ 52 Figure 27: Affordability by Borough with Child Benefit exempted from the UC Cap .... 53 Figure 28: Degree of Unaffordability for LHA cap with Child Benefit exempted from UC Cap, in £ .................................................................................................................................. 54 Figure 29: Degree of Unaffordability for UC Cap with Child Benefit exempted from UC Cap, in £ .................................................................................................................................. 55 Figure 30: Comparison of impact of UC Cap for standard and varied UC Caps............ 55 Figure 31: Comparison of impact of LHA Cap for standard and varied UC Caps .......... 56 An Analysis of the Impact of Welfare Reform in London November 11 Page 4 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 Introduction The Government is planning fundamental reform of the welfare benefits system in order to simplify the existing system and improve work incentives. The cornerstone of these reforms is the introduction of the Universal Credit, from 2013. The Universal Credit will integrate
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Formation of Minimum Income Protection
    Luxembourg Income Study Working Paper Series Working Paper No. 373 The Formation of Minimum Income Protection Kenneth Nelson April 2004 Luxembourg Income Study (LIS), asbl THE FORMATION OF MINIMUM INCOME PROTECTION The Institutional Development of Means-tested Benefits in Different Types of Welfare States, 1960-2000 KENNETH NELSON Swedish Institute for Social Research Stockholm University ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to examine the institutional development of means-tested ben e- fits over the last four decades in a comparative perspective. The countries included in the study are Canada, Germany, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the Untied States. Since a main objective of means-tested benefits is to mitigate and alleviate poverty, the comparisons and evaluations presented in the study are based on the adequacy of benefits, that is, the extent to which provisions are provided at levels sufficient to allow recipients to escape pov- erty. The long time frame of the study also gives an opportunity to relate to the ongoing theo- retical discussion about potential differences in the development of means-tested benefits and social insurance entitlements. Here, two questions are addressed: the extent to which the development of means-tested benefits describes a different pattern than social insurance provi- sions, and the extent to which means-tested benefits are more prone to cutbacks than social insurance entitlements. The empirical analyses combine institutional information on the level of means-tested benefits with micro-level income data from the Luxembourg Income Study. Over the whole period covered, the development of means-tested benefits resembles more than diverges form that observed in the area of social insurance.
    [Show full text]
  • For Official Use DEELSA/ELSA/MIN(98)2/ANN
    For Official Use DEELSA/ELSA/MIN(98)2/ANN Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Economiques OLIS : 05-Jun-1998 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Dist. : 10-Jun-1998 __________________________________________________________________________________________ Or. Eng. DIRECTORATE FOR EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT, LABOUR AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS For Official Use DEELSA/ELSA/MIN(98)2/ANN EMPLOYMENT, LABOUR AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE Meeting of the Employment, Labour and Social Affairs Committee at Ministerial Level on Social Policy BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS THE CARING WORLD: NATIONAL ACHIEVEMENTS TABLES AND CHARTS (Note by the Secretary-General) Paris, 23-24 June 1998 Declassified 66363 Or. Eng. Document complet disponible sur OLIS dans son format d'origine Complete document available on OLIS in its original format DEELSA/ELSA/MIN(98)2/ANN TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 2.1 Main social policy priorities and challenges ..............................................................................4 Table 3.1 Groups identified at significant risk of social exclusion, selected OECD countries .................9 Table 3.2 Total social assistance expenditure as a proportion of social security, 1980-1992 .................10 Table 3.3 Summary of social assistance arrangements, selected OECD countries .................................11 Table 4.1 Summary of assistance to families with children, OECD countries ........................................14 Table 4.2 Summary of special cash benefits for disabled children, selected OECD countries ...............15
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Credits Bill 5 DECEMBER 2001 Bill 52 of 2001/02
    RESEARCH PAPER 01/110 The Tax Credits Bill 5 DECEMBER 2001 Bill 52 of 2001/02 The Bill, due to receive its Second Reading on Monday 10 December 2001, revises the framework of financial support provided through the tax and benefit systems to low-income families. It introduces two new tax credits – the Child Tax Credit and the Working Tax Credit – and abolishes the existing welfare tax credits together with the child-specific parts of a range of social security benefits. The Child Tax Credit replaces the support currently provided by the Children’s Tax Credit and the child elements of Income Support, Jobseeker’s Allowance (income-based), Working Families’ Tax Credit and Disabled Person’s Tax Credit. The Working Tax Credit replaces the adult elements of Working Families’ Tax Credit and Disabled Person’s Tax Credit, increasing in-work support for childless families. Kim Greener/Graham Vidler SOCIAL POLICY SECTION HOUSE OF COMMONS LIBRARY Recent Library Research Papers include: 01/95 The National Health Service Reform and Healthcare Professions Bill 15.11.01 [Bill 47 of 2001-02] 01/96 The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Bill, Parts IV& V: Immigration, 16.11.01 asylum, race and religion [Bill 49 of 2001-02] 01/97 The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Bill, Part X: Police powers 16.11.01 [Bill 49 of 2001-02] 01/98 The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Bill, Parts III & XI: Disclosure and 19.11.01 Retention of Information [Bill 49 of 2001-02] 01/99 The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Bill, Parts I, II, VIII, IX & XIII: 19.11.01 Property,
    [Show full text]
  • Social Assistance in OECD Countries: Synthesis Report
    This is a repository copy of Social Assistance in OECD Countries: Synthesis Report. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/73427/ Monograph: Eardley, T, Bradshaw, J orcid.org/0000-0001-9395-6754, Ditch, J et al. (1 more author) (1996) Social Assistance in OECD Countries: Synthesis Report. Research Report. Department of Social Security Research Report, No.46 . HMSO , London. Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Department of Social Security Research Report No. 46 Social Assistance in OECD Countries Volume!: Synthesis Report A study carried out on behalf of the Department of Social Security and the OECD by the Social Policy Research Unit Tony Eardley Jonathan Bradshaw John Ditch Ian Gough Peter Whiteford London: HMSO Crown copyright 1996 Applications for reproduction should be made to HMSO Copyright Unit First published 1996 ISBN 0 11 762407 1 ISSN 0961 569 5 Views expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the DSS or any other government department, the OECD or any member countries of the OECD.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Dependency, Increasing Opportunity: Options for the Future of Welfare to Work an Independent Report to the Department for Work and Pensions
    Reducing dependency, increasing opportunity: options for the future of welfare to work An independent report to the Department for Work and Pensions by David Freud Department for Work and Pensions Reducing dependency, increasing opportunity: options for the future of welfare to work David Freud An independent report to the Department for Work and Pensions Corporate Document Services © Crown Copyright 2007. Published for the Department for Work and Pensions under licence from the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office by Corporate Document Services, Leeds. Application for reproduction should be made in writing to The Copyright Unit, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ. First Published 2007. ISBN 978 1 84712 193 6 Views expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the Department for Work and Pensions or any other Government Department. Printed by Corporate Document Services. Contents iii Contents Foreword ........................................................................................................v Executive summary ........................................................................................ 1 1 UK performance to date ......................................................................... 11 2 Towards 80% in work ............................................................................ 45 3 Contracting support for the hard to help ................................................ 51 4 Modelling outcome based contracting ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Poverty122pp
    feature Celebrating sixty years of the welfare state? In the recent celebrations of the sixtieth being of many working-class communities by the socio-economic upheavals of those years.’ anniversary of the implementation of the majority of Beveridge’s welfare state Benefits also help people cope with family change, including allowing some individuals reforms, the National Insurance Acts and either an independent income within relation- ships or a way out of relationships which turn the National Assistance Act, which out to be abusive. And social security also ties together introduced a nationwide system of the whole population together in interwoven webs of cross-subsidy (as part of the public national insurance and a means-tested finances, which Richard Titmuss likened to Crewe junction, with transfers going in many safety net, seem to have been forgotten. different directions). Fran Bennett looks at what happened. This last point is worth emphasising. Far from benefits up to 2003 being a mechanism which emphasised ‘them’ and ‘us’ (as New Labour, wrongly, said when it introduced new tax cred- its), both national insurance and child benefit could be seen as drawing people together.2 National insurance does this by bringing about a sharing of risks, and acting as a national sav- ings scheme without high overheads. Child benefit does so by achieving redistribution over the individual lifecycle and between the genera- tions, with the whole community contributing to Mark Boulton/Photofusion everyone’s future through helping parents with the cost
    [Show full text]
  • SOCIAL SECURITY – WHERE HAVE WE BEEN and WHERE ARE WE GOING? If Universal Credit Is the Answer, What on Earth Was the Question?
    SOCIAL SECURITY – WHERE HAVE WE BEEN AND WHERE ARE WE GOING? If universal credit is the answer, what on earth was the question? October 2019 Alison Garnham ____________________________________________________________________________ Introduction – a brief history Our social security system is failing us big time. We have gone from Beveridge’s bestseller in 1942, which aimed to abolish the five giants of ‘want, disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness’, to the shaming spectacle of food banks and destitution in 2019, with 7 in 10 poor children living with a least one earner. What on earth happened? Tasked with reviewing the patchwork of existing health and social insurance schemes and remnants of the poor law, Beveridge set about creating a comprehensive system based on a national health service, national insurance benefits and child allowances. In the midst of war, he declared: ‘A revolutionary moment in the world’s history is a time for revolutions, not for patching.’1 His plan was dubbed by the press as support ‘from the cradle to the grave’. But Churchill dismissed it as ‘false hopes and airy visions of utopia and El Dorado’.2 As we face another revolutionary moment in UK history, has Churchill turned out to be right? Local poor law origins Recognisable themes repeat themselves across the history of UK social security. ‘Deserving’ and ‘undeserving’, low rates of benefit and extensive means-testing. Under the Elizabethan poor law, parish relief was designed to provide a residual safety net when other resources – from paid work, savings, charity, family and friends - had failed.3 Examples include residential ‘indoor relief’ and cash ‘outdoor relief’ for the deserving sick, orphans, elderly and widows.
    [Show full text]
  • Workfare in 21St Century Britain the Erosion of Rights to Social Assistance
    Workfare in 21st century Britain The erosion of rights to social assistance Dr. Anne Daguerre and Dr. David Etherington November 2014 Acknowledgments The research has been carried out thanks to the mid-career ESRC fellowship grant, ‘Welfare reform in the US and the UK: an interdisciplinary analysis’ (Grant number: ES/I035951/1). We wish to acknowledge the work of Florian Sintès, the research assistant on this project, whose professionalism and reliability are really outstanding. Florian also provided an up to date analysis of case law regarding the Reilly vs Wilson case. Professor Stephen Syrett from the Centre for Enterprise and Economic Development Research (CEEDR) has also been extremely helpful and supportive during various stages of the writing of this report. Finally, we would like to thank the various interviewees for their generosity with their time. Workfare in 21st century Britain Executive summary .............................................................................................................. 5 Background ........................................................................................................................ 5 Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 5 Key findings ....................................................................................................................... 6 Introduction and methodology ......................................................................................... 8 1-
    [Show full text]
  • A Councillor's Guide to Leading the Homelessness Sector | Local Government Association []
    11/05/2021 A councillor's guide to leading the homelessness sector | Local Government Association [] Home [/] > Publications [/publications] View [/publications/councillors-guide-leading-homelessness-sector] Edit [/node/8265934/edit] Delete [/node/8265934/delete] Revisions [/node/8265934/revisions] A councillor's guide to leading the homelessness sector In this guide, we seek to provide councillors whether in cabinet, scrutiny or their own wards, with some key information about homelessness and, perhaps, more importantly, some inspiring examples of action by councils that has made a real difference already. Housing, planning and homelessness [/topics/housing-and-planning] 11 May 2021 LGA 5.111 Foreword When someone becomes homeless it is a personal tragedy. For a single person it can mean living rough, and a downward spiral of ill-health, unemployment and poverty. For families it can mean disrupted education, long hours travelling to work and huge strains on relationships. Councils face increased housing demand pressures across the board as they strive to provide homelessness support and invest in homelessness prevention services. Councillors face challenging policy choices and often see the impact of homelessness on individuals and their communities at first hand. The immediate impact of COVID-19 was a great concern and we saw councils do an incredible job getting people sleeping rough off the streets and into safe accommodation in record time. As we emerge from the pandemic waiting lists are set to potentially nearly double and the Local Government Association (LGA) is asking for councils to be given powers to kickstart a post-pandemic building boom of 100,000 new social homes for rent each year to help tackle the issue.
    [Show full text]
  • Financial Support for Single Parents in Caring for Their Children: Private Child Support and Social Assistance
    FINAL REPORT FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR SINGLE PARENTS IN CARING FOR THEIR CHILDREN: PRIVATE CHILD SUPPORT AND SOCIAL ASSISTANCE May 2015 DEBBIE BUDLENDER Submitted to UN Women Multi-Country Office - Caribbean UN Women is the UN organisation dedicated to gender equality and the empowerment of women. A global champion for women and girls, UN Women was established to accelerate progress on meeting their needs worldwide. UN Women supports UN Member States as they set global standards for achieving gender equality, and works with governments and civil society to design laws, policies, programmes and services needed to implement these standards. It stands behind women’s equal participation in all aspects of life, focusing on five priority areas: increasing women’s leadership and participation; ending violence against women; engaging women in all aspects of peace and security processes; enhancing women’s economic empowerment; and making gender equality central to national development planning and budgeting. UN Women also coordinates and promotes the UN system’s work in advancing gender equality. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of UN Women, the United Nations or any of its affiliated organisations. Editor: Jeffrey F. Stern Layout editor: Jerome Agostini FINAL REPORT FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR SINGLE PARENTS IN CARING FOR THEIR CHILDREN: PRIVATE CHILD SUPPORT AND SOCIAL ASSISTANCE Debbie Budlender Submitted to UN Women Multi-Country Office - Caribbean and the UNICEF Office for
    [Show full text]
  • Dignity and Opportunity for All: Securing the Rights of Disabled
    Dignity and Opportunity for All Dignity and Opportunity for justfair Dignity and Light Green: Pantone 573C Opportunity for All: (#c1e2de) Dark Green: Pantone 7473C (#29a294) Securing the rights of Blue: Pantone 7546C (#384f60) disabled people in the austerity era FULL REPORT just justfair fair 2014 © Just Fair July 2014 The Just Fair Consortium works to realise a fairer and more just society for everyone in the UK by monitoring and securing the fundamental human rights contained in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), including the rights to food, housing, social security, education, equality, employment and health. (www.just-fair.co.uk) ICESCR Monitoring Reports Every year, the Consortium publishes a number of monitoring reports assessing the extent to which rights under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) are being realised in the UK. This report focuses on the rights of disabled people to independent living, work, social protection, social security and an adequate standard of living, which are set out in ICESCR and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Authorship and Acknowledgments This report was authored by Jane Young. Aoife Nolan authored Chapter 2 and provided input throughout the report. Neil Crowther provided advice and support. Alice Donald provided editorial and overall support. Jonathan Butterworth undertook research and provided logistical support. We are extremely grateful to the organisations that provide funding for our vital monitoring and advocacy work: Barrow Cadbury Trust, Clifford Chance Foundation, Henry Tinsley Foundation, Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, Network for Social Change. Many Consortium members contributed to this report by identifying priority issues, providing data, and contributing qualitative evidence.
    [Show full text]
  • Unemployment-Related Benefits System in the United Kingdom
    RP15/99-00 Unemployment-Related Benefits System in the United Kingdom June 2000 Prepared by Mr Jackie WU Research and Library Services Division Legislative Council Secretariat 5th Floor, Citibank Tower, 3 Garden Road, Central, Hong Kong Telephone : (852) 2869 7735 Facsimile : (852) 2525 0990 Website : http://legco.gov.hk E-mail : [email protected] C O N T E N T S page Acknowledgements Executive Summary Part 1 - Introduction 1 Background 1 Objectives and Scope 1 Methodology 2 Part 2 - Historical Development of Unemployment Insurance System 3 The 1911 National Insurance Act 3 The 1920 Amendments 4 The Unemployment Act of 1934 4 Reforms of the Unemployment Insurance System from 1940s to Mid-1990s 5 Reforms of the Unemployment Insurance System as Part of the 6 Restructuring of the Social Security System Programme in mid-1990s Jobseekers Act 1995 7 Jobseeker's Agreement 7 Part 3 - Current Unemployment Benefits Provisions 9 Jobseeker's Allowance 9 Eligibility Conditions for the Jobseeker's Allowance 9 Disqualifications from the Jobseeker's Allowance 9 Waiting Period 10 Contribution-based Jobseeker's Allowance 10 Coverage of the Contribution-based Jobseeker's Allowance 10 Qualifying Conditions for Receiving the Contribution-based 10 Jobseeker's Allowance Benefit Amount Payable by the Contribution-based Jobseeker's 12 Allowance Duration of Receiving the Contribution-based Jobseeker's Allowance 12 Number of Beneficiaries Receiving the Contribution-based Jobseeker's 13 Allowance Income-based Jobseeker's Allowance 13 Coverage of the Income-based
    [Show full text]