Rishi Sunak’s spring statement succeeds most brutally in resurrecting and reinforcing the historical divisions between the “deserving” and “undeserving” poor (UK’s most vulnerable face crunch as Rishi Sunak helps better-off, 23 March). For the “deserving”, many on low wages who earn their poverty, the deceptive small increases are aimed to engender gratitude but will also contribute to scapegoating the “feckless” poor. For the “undeserving”, those on fixed benefits, who will see their income cut by up to 7% (taking into account predicted inflation), life will be hell, as they struggle to keep warm, feed their families or get by on their state pensions or disability allowances.
Many will blame themselves for having to depend on charitable relief for food, children’s clothes and bedding, and go without. As your editorial suggests (23 March), Sunak’s statement “is a strategy for inequality”. But notably absent in Wednesday’s parliamentary debate and follow-up interviews with the opposition was any commitment to a wider vision, to radically reduce major societal inequalities through more progressive income tax and wealth reform, or even propose the dignity afforded by a living wage.
Prof Mike Stein
University of York
• Rafael Behr points out that the spring statement from Rishi Sunak provides austerity by stealth, where the poorest bear the brunt of inflation (Rishi Sunak emerged from the pandemic as the candidate of sincerity. But he’s as cynical as Johnson, 23 March). Contrast this with the generosity of English people who offer their homes for Ukrainian refugees, yet consistently vote for governments who punish the poorest and most economically vulnerable.
Felicity McGowan
Cardigan, Ceredigion
• Rishi Sunak said he couldn’t help everybody in his spring statement. Well, he could. He could tax the rich energy companies. He could tax billionaires far more, he could introduce a land tax, he could introduce a tax on share dealings. He could also insulate every home, make all new housing zero-carbon, raise universal credit, ie give the £20 extra during the lockdowns back.
He could try living on universal credit for a month and then reflect on what it is like, and what it is about some human beings that makes them not want to share their wealth fairly.
Luckily, I don’t want a big house, flash car, ugly yacht, expensive new clothes. Someone said the rich aren’t happy – protecting and defending their wealth, losing their integrity, telling lies to themselves. Give me a garden and seeds, trees, somewhere beautiful to walk – these are the real riches of our world.
Miranda Cox
Bideford, Devon
• If the chancellor is looking for some extra cash, he might consider cancelling the proposed expenditure of £510m by Thérèse Coffey in pursuit of universal credit fraud. This will bring it neatly into line with the approach adopted by the government in respect of Covid fraud amounting to £4.3bn that is apparently too difficult to pursue.
Philip Arundel
Colwall Green, Herefordshire
• The tax-free winter fuel payment – between £100 and £300 – is paid annually to everyone over 67 years of age. Those who receive housing benefit, council tax reduction, child benefit or universal credit do not qualify. It would make far more sense to remove the automatic age qualification and pay it to everyone who is receiving any type of welfare benefit.
Judith Abbs
London
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication.
