Yes, ymb -- but the Welfare State tends to have to adapt itself to meet the "extreme cases", and the series of changes now being brought in has lurched away from that to a one-size-fits-all stance. This has the disadvantage that the system will be challenged in courts of law -- and most likely will lose several such cases, with the result that it has to change back again to fit the "extreme cases". That series of legal challenges is likely to cost the government time and money that it needn't have spent.
Grant Shapps on the Today Programme was talking about how it had taken three years from election to bringing this system in, as if that were a long time. It is not. It is far too short, and the consequences could well be either a lot of people left by the wayside that the State ought to have been providing for, or several embarrassing cases that the Government loses, forcing it to change the rules away from where they are planned to be.