A PLANNED £12bn cut to the welfare budget will mean working age people on benefits each lose an average £19 a week, according to new estimates.

 

An independent benefits advice service said the group would have to be targeted as other areas are either protected or will not produce big enough savings to meet the Conservative Party's plans if they are re-elected at May's General Election.

Steve Donnison, a former welfare rights advisor and co-founder of the independent Benefit's and Work website, says those affected by the £19 a week reduction are likely to include people claiming housing benefit, disability benefits or those unfit to work and reliant on employment and support allowance.

Prime Minister David Cameron was criticised for failing to give any detail about where the axe will fall when grilled by Jeremy Paxman in Thursday's night's Sky/Channel 4 leadership debate.

But pensioner benefits, which make up well over half of the benefits bill are to remain untouched while other expected cuts will save too little, Mr Donnison's report says.

Freezing the uprating of working age benefits, one of the details which has been announced, will save £2bn, he says, according to figures from the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

The proposal to cut housing benefit for some under-25s will only save £50 million, and paying child benefit for only a family's first three children will save £300 million.

This leaves the larger part of £10 billion to come from the five million working age claimants in the UK, an average of £2,000 per claimant over two years or £19 a week.

Mr Donnison said the Institute for Fiscal Studies had also concluded that the £10 billion unaccounted for and could only be delivered by radical changes or big cuts.

He added: "It is immensely cruel of the chancellor to announce such deep cuts to benefits but refuse to say where the axe will fall."

Benefits cuts wer usually popular with the media and a section of the electorate, he said, raising questions about why Mr Osborne was not saying where they will be found. "How vicious must these cuts be that he doesn't say what they are?"

Dr David Webster of Glasgow University said they might even be an underestimate as the cuts appear to be intended to take effect annually over two years.

Professor Paul Spicker, chair of public policy at Robert Gordon University, said it was very unclear how the Conservatives intend to deliver the proposed £12bn saving, but it could not be achieved by 'cheese paring'.

"If you say pensions won't be affected, and they make up the majority of benefits, that immediately causes a problem," he said. "George Osborne's aim is to shrink the size of the state. That inevitably means people on low incomes end up on lower incomes."

"There seems to be an assumption that you can just stop people's benefits and they will manage."

Others have already experienced bigger cuts, by moving from disability benefit to the less generous job seekers allowance, through the bedroom tax, or by having their benefits stopped, he said.

"People have had quite substantial sums taken away and we've seen a growth in food banks, and a pernicious trend towards payday loans."

Further reducing the welfare bill could cause more suffering, he said. "If there is no safety net the consequences will be extremely negative and could include people starving, committing suicide and you will have people who turn to crime."

A Conservative Party spokesman said: "We have already said we will freeze benefits for two years so benefits are not rising faster than wages - this is the right thing to do and will save billions.

"We've delivered £21 billion of welfare savings so far and are confident that by sticking with our long-term plan to reform our welfare system so it rewards work we can make sure Britain lives within its means."