Carers deserve a new, fairer social contract | Letter

Your editorial (27 October) is right: serious issues with the Department for Work and Pensions’ administration of carer’s allowance run far deeper than inadequate IT systems. Well-documented systemic failures and flawed design have caused preventable financial and emotional harm. While the abolition of the punitive “cliff edge” is welcome, a taper cannot be the extent of the government’s commitment to carers.

The unacceptably long timeline for implementation prolongs the injustice. How will the government protect carers who are at risk of incurring overpayments debt in the period until 2030-31? Following the revelation that the DWP has completed fewer than 2% of the cases included in its reassessment exercise, this brings into question the urgency given to improving carers’ financial security.

Carer’s allowance, originally intended for unmarried women who were presumed available to care, has barely changed in half a century. It reflects assumptions about gender roles and work that no longer hold true. At £86.45 per week, even with the new taper it limits claimants to low-paid work that does not facilitate a decent standard of living. Its interactions with the state pension, universal credit and disability benefits are unfair.

It is time to ask what the purpose of carer’s allowance is in 2026. We can learn from the Scottish government’s reform process, which resulted in a clear statement of purpose. Its overall aims are: “to provide income for unpaid carers in recognition of their vital role and its impact on their lives”; “to provide stability and support carers to access opportunities outside of caring”; and “to ensure that carers have a positive experience of the social security system, and to maximise carers’ take-up of all support available to them”.

After years of inaction, it’s time for a new social contract that properly values carers.
Becky Driscoll, Dr Louise Overton and Dr Maxine Watkins University of Birmingham
Prof Kate Hamblin, Prof Nathan Hughes and Fay Benskin University of Sheffield

• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.