The challenges of a basic income

THIS whole Cummings affair makes me sad. Just a few days ago I could see lockdown was working, was willing to forgive the lack of preparedness and the consequences, and had a happy feeling in my head that yes, actually the British people believed in what they were doing and we could pull together to get the country and jobs back up and running.

I was even hoping that perhaps some of the worst causes of it all might finally be properly addressed. There was also talk of a Covid Levy, a National Care Service, creation of a pandemic “defence” industry, and even a war on obesity suggested by a Prime Minister who acknowledged his BMI of 36 was a major reason Covid almost killed him.

A PM who, from being at best a figure of fun eight months ago, was beginning to look like the guy to pull Britain’s socks up. And now all this happens.

Dominic Cummings should have had the humility to at least admit he had made a grave mistake, even though it may have been with the best of intentions, and apologised to the nation for misleading and misreading. It’s too late now, and too late for Boris to scrape any credit if he belatedly fires him.

He, too, could be gone soon. Britain has been humiliated and our worst internal and external opponents have won a huge victory without lifting a gun, trade war, material change in circumstance, a finger even.

I never thought I would say this. I wonder if Britain will ever recover. Allan Sutherland Stonehaven understanding the convoluted defences offered of Cummings’ conduct by various Government spokespersons, including the PM.

If confidence in the Government is to be restored, though it has been almost irreparably damaged by this episode, then Cummings needs to be cut loose so that the Government can return its focus to steadying the ship of state on the twin fronts of a recession brought about by Covid-19 and the attempt to secure a sensible Brexit.

Denis Bruce Bishopbriggs that presumably intelligent reporters can “misquote” circumstances.

Cummings did not go in the car to test his eyesight; he did it to verify to his wife that he was indeed fit to drive. He did say he understood those who felt he had done wrong (ie regret/sorrow).

In fact, no-one appears to have caught the virus due to this incident, unlike the thousands who attended the Cheltenham race meeting and the Liverpool football match, who did spread the virus.

James Watson

Dunbar

YOUR article on universal basic income (The Herald on Sunday, May 24) was interesting – and, yes, it is one way of delivering social security. But it is not in itself necessarily progressive.

For it to be progressive a number of conditions need to be met.

If it is to replace basic sick pay, unemployment benefit and state pension then it needs to be significantly over £100 a week – more than double the RSA figure. Even that figure would only allow people “to cover their basic needs” as long as many services continue to be provided outwith the market. In Scotland, for example, healthcare is provided outwith the market whereas food and heating are usually purchased. Right-wing proponents of a universal basic income often see it as a step towards having all public services provided through the market.

Clarity is also needed as to which benefits would continue and which would be subsumed into the basic income. Universal Credit has shown up the problems of trying to subsume housing benefit into the weekly figure.

This is not to argue that there is no place for a universal basic income – rather to argue that if it is to be progressive its supporters need to show how it fits into all the ways in which people’s basic needs are covered.