I don't think the OP is thinking about people who spend the money on food, school uniforms and essentials.
I had a friend who had money issues. She'd pop round and say "DD's school shoe broke last night, could I borrow £20 so I can get her another pair."
Never minded one bit.
But then I'd find that what actually happened was they went out to get the shoes and she saw that Pizza Hut had an offer on so that meant that all three of them could eat for £18 and they hadn't eaten at Pizza Hut for so long... She'd then borrow the £20 for shoes from someone else.... and might well spend that on something else too.
It probably was 2 times out of 3 she spent the money given for essentials on something that she didn't need.
Now if she'd come to me and said she'd seen this offer and could I lend her £20 so they could go, I would have been happy to lend the money for that, so that isn't the point.
The point was that when her money came in at the end of the month she then had £40 or £60 to pay back rather than £20. So every month she had less and less money to start with. She just had no resistance to buying things when money was in her hand.
And I think what the OP is thinking is similar. I don't care, and nor will the government if people getting the money use it to buy essentials. I don't care, and nor do the government if they use it to buy luxuries. But what will be the issue is if someone spends it on going to Pizza Hut and then still has to borrow the money to pay the bills later. They're in no better position than if they didn't get the money except having had their Pizza Hut meal! The point of the money is to give people a better chance.
Also locally we have a charity that gives grants for essentials, and that includes heating grants. It used to be you applied and got the money. So they'd work out how much a (eg) decent fridge was and transfer that amount of money to the person. For fuel, it was a set amount. Then they started doing follow up calls and found that not infrequently the money hadn't been spent on what it had been given for. Problem was, that then put the charity in difficulties with the charity commission because you have a responsibility to make sure the charity funds are spent on the right things.
So they changed to ordering the items, or, in the case of fuel bills, paying it directly. Now this was actually often better for the client because they would pay the whole outstanding amount rather than just a lump sum that might not cover it. Also with appliances they'd make sure they were good makes and were installed correctly.
The number of applications for both dropped dramatically, despite it actually overall being better for people, which they were quite shocked about.
I don't know the right answer here. But I'd like to see money managing as a subject done in school. Showing people how a small loan can turn into a large one, how to budget, how to choose what to spend your money on. And how to try and avoid going into debt, and where to get help, and advice if you do.
I'd also like to see the government get a handle on the energy companies that are churning out massive profits and sticking the prices up.
That would make more difference.