Share this post:

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has refused to answer direct questions about its decision to release new figures on Universal Credit-linked deaths and serious harm only after MPs voted to cut benefits for disabled people.

In response to a follow-up inquiry from Vox Political, the DWP stated it had “nothing further to add” to its earlier comment — leaving multiple questions about its transparency, timing, and safeguarding failures entirely unanswered.

This silence follows a growing controversy around the department’s Internal Process Reviews (IPRs) — investigations carried out after serious incidents involving benefit claimants, including deaths.

Figures quietly released in the DWP’s Annual Report and Accounts (ARA) on July 10 revealed that the number of IPRs involving Universal Credit had nearly doubled, from 31 in 2023–24 to 55 last year.

That report was published just hours after MPs voted through a major cut to the Universal Credit “health element” — reducing support for many disabled people by £47 a week from April 2026.

What DWP refused to answer

Earlier this week, Vox Political asked the department:

• Whether the timing of the ARA publication was set before or after the Commons vote

• Whether there was any consideration of publishing the IPR data separately or earlier, to properly inform MPs

• Why promised recommendations from IPRs dating back to 2020 have still not been published

• Why only the 2022–23 recommendations were included in the most recent publication

• Whether the DWP is tracking repeat failures or systemic issues across IPRs — and if any such findings have been released

The DWP declined to answer any of these questions, simply stating:

“Nothing further to add to our previous comment.”

This follows its earlier defence that the ARA was published “as soon as we were able to collate and audit all of the relevant information,” and that its approach to publishing recommendations must protect “sensitive and personal information.”

But that leaves significant questions unresolved — including the most critical:

Did ministers or officials knowingly delay publication of data about safeguarding failures until after a politically sensitive vote — and is that acceptable conduct in a democracy?

Why it matters

Civil servants have a legal and constitutional duty to ensure MPs are properly informed before making decisions.

In this case, serious case review data — including multiple deaths — was held back until after a vote that will directly affect disabled people’s income and security.

The DWP’s refusal to explain itself only adds to growing concerns that these figures were withheld at a politically convenient moment, rather than in the public interest.

Vox Political will continue to pursue answers — and to report on what the government is refusing to say.

What you can do

The DWP has refused to answer key questions about why crucial death review data was published after Parliament voted to cut disability benefits.

That’s not just bad practice — it may be a failure of public duty.

Here’s how you can help keep the pressure on:

• Email your MP – Ask them whether they knew these figures before voting, and whether they’ll demand a full explanation from the DWP.

• Support public scrutiny – Share this article and help others understand what’s being hidden.

• Watch this space – Vox Political will be submitting formal Freedom of Information requests and raising the issue with parliamentary committees.

• 💳 Back this work – Independent journalism holds power to account. Support us here: https://ko-fi.com/voxpolitical

Share this post: