A consultation on a DWP plan to impoverish disabled people was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.
What ever induced the Tories who launched it to think they would get away with it? And why in blazes is Labour trying to go ahead with the plan?
The Department for Work and Pensions launched its pitifully-short eight-week consultation in autumn 2023 – on a plan to cut around £3 billion from the benefits bill.
The aim was to cut the amount of money claimed by people applying for disability payments under Universal Credit by changing the way applications are scored in the work capability assessment (WCA). Existing claimants are unlikely to be affected, but the cuts were expected to harm more than 450,000 new applicants by 2029.
Buy Cruel Britannia in print here. Buy the Cruel Britannia ebook here. Or just click on the image!
The plan was to cut the number of people qualifying for the highest rates of disability benefit via the “limited capability for work or work-related activity” (LCWRA) group.
Disabled people in the LCWRA group do not have to undertake any activities related to finding work, whereas those assessed as having “limited capability for work” are expected to undertake activities preparing for employment.
Those who don’t qualify as either LCWRA or limited capability for work (LCW) are effectively assessed to be non-disabled and must spend up to 35 hours a week actively looking for work or risk having their benefit cut.
When it launched its consultation, the DWP had made no estimate of how many disabled people would find work as a result of its proposals. Instead, it had been trying to work out how much money its plans might save.
It was left to the Office for Budget Responsibility to reveal, six months after the consultation closed, that more than 450,000 people were likely to suffer benefit cuts totalling around £416 per month at current rates. This would be enough to push 100,000 of them into absolute poverty.
The consultation material barely mentioned the financial implications for disabled people. Instead, it framed the proposals as helping disabled people take up post-pandemic opportunities to work from home – falsely; OBR figures showed that just 15,400 disabled people would find paid work as a result of the planned reforms by 2029 – just 1/30 of the number who would be pushed into poverty.
Thank goodness for disability activist Ellen Clifford, of Disabled People Against Cuts, who launched a judicial review with the help of the Public Law Project.
She alleged that the consultation was unlawful because:
• It did not explain properly that many people would receive significantly less money if impacted by the reforms, and would be subject to tighter requirements around work-related activity.
• The consultation did not disclose that the main motive was to cut spending on disability benefits rather than get more people into work.
• The consultation paper did not provide any meaningful information about the likely impact of the proposals, which prevented consultees from being able to comment meaningfully on them.
• The consultation period was too short at just under eight weeks.
The High Court agreed. In a judgment published on the morning of Thursday, January 16, Mr Justice Calver said
• The consultation documents failed to highlight the “substantial” loss of benefits facing those affected by the proposals.
• The consultation gave the “misleading impression” that changes were required to ensure deaf and disabled people could access employment support, when they could already choose to access this voluntarily.
• Despite the consultation presenting the changes as being solely about helping disabled people into work, in reality “costs savings was at least one of the two bases, if not the central basis, on which decisions would be taken on which policies would be taken forward by the government”.
• And the eight-week consultation was unlawfully short in the circumstances.
Repeatedly describing the DWP consultation as “misleading”, “rushed” and “unfair”, Mr Justice Calver said: “The unfair burden upon vulnerable people of having to deal with a yet further consultation process at this time at such short notice cannot be overstated,” Mr Justice Calver said in his judgement.
“In setting the consultation period, the [secretary of state for work and pensions – at the time, Mel Stride, who is now Shadow Chancellor] ought to have had more regard to the attributes of those people who would be affected by these proposals. These were proposals which, in particular, could potentially drive vulnerable people into poverty as well as adversely affecting disabled people and substantial risk claimants who have mental health conditions and suicide ideation.”
The judgment does not require the current government to drop the proposals or re-run the consultation, but if it tried to implement the cuts based on a consultation that has now been ruled unlawful, further successful legal action would likely follow. The government may choose to re-run the consultation, or find other ways to achieve the planned savings.
After the consultation, the DWP chose to proceed with three proposals, which have yet to be implemented:
• Mobility problems will no longer be enough by themselves to qualify as LCWRA.
• Difficulties getting between two places will score lower in relation to the LCW group.
• The substantial risk regulations, under which people whose mental health would be harmed by undertaking work-related activity are placed in the LCWRA group, would only apply in exceptional cases.
That’s a lot to take in but brace yourself, because here comes the big shock:
Labour is planning to proceed with these Tory plans that it now knows will not help anything like the number of people they were claimed to and will in fact take huge amounts of money away from nearly half a million people, plunging 100,000 of them into absolute poverty.
Yes, you read that right:
Labour now deliberately plans to inflict poverty on huge numbers of disabled people – many of whom may be pushed to suicide because of it – in order to save a little bit of cash that they could make up simply by taxing the rich properly.
A government spokesperson said: “The judge has found the previous government failed to adequately explain their proposals. As part of wider reforms that help people into work and ensure fiscal sustainability, the government will re-consult on the WCA descriptor changes, addressing the shortcomings in the previous consultation, in light of the judgment.
“The government intends to deliver the full level of savings in the public finances forecasts.”
Chilling.
Reading between the lines, it seems current Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall is happy to re-run the consultation, this time accurately describing what will happen to claimants.
She is likely to receive a massive backlash against her proposals – but here’s the thing: she can simply ignore it if she likes.
It seems this is exactly what she has decided to do.
This article was compiled using material from two Big Issue pieces which you can find here and here.
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (bottom right of the home page). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
5) Follow Vox Political writer Mike Sivier on BlueSky
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Cruel Britannia is available
in either print or eBook format here:
The Livingstone Presumption is available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
Consultation on a DWP plan to impoverish disabled people was unlawful
A consultation on a DWP plan to impoverish disabled people was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.
What ever induced the Tories who launched it to think they would get away with it? And why in blazes is Labour trying to go ahead with the plan?
The Department for Work and Pensions launched its pitifully-short eight-week consultation in autumn 2023 – on a plan to cut around £3 billion from the benefits bill.
The aim was to cut the amount of money claimed by people applying for disability payments under Universal Credit by changing the way applications are scored in the work capability assessment (WCA). Existing claimants are unlikely to be affected, but the cuts were expected to harm more than 450,000 new applicants by 2029.
Buy Cruel Britannia in print here. Buy the Cruel Britannia ebook here. Or just click on the image!
The plan was to cut the number of people qualifying for the highest rates of disability benefit via the “limited capability for work or work-related activity” (LCWRA) group.
Disabled people in the LCWRA group do not have to undertake any activities related to finding work, whereas those assessed as having “limited capability for work” are expected to undertake activities preparing for employment.
Those who don’t qualify as either LCWRA or limited capability for work (LCW) are effectively assessed to be non-disabled and must spend up to 35 hours a week actively looking for work or risk having their benefit cut.
When it launched its consultation, the DWP had made no estimate of how many disabled people would find work as a result of its proposals. Instead, it had been trying to work out how much money its plans might save.
It was left to the Office for Budget Responsibility to reveal, six months after the consultation closed, that more than 450,000 people were likely to suffer benefit cuts totalling around £416 per month at current rates. This would be enough to push 100,000 of them into absolute poverty.
The consultation material barely mentioned the financial implications for disabled people. Instead, it framed the proposals as helping disabled people take up post-pandemic opportunities to work from home – falsely; OBR figures showed that just 15,400 disabled people would find paid work as a result of the planned reforms by 2029 – just 1/30 of the number who would be pushed into poverty.
Thank goodness for disability activist Ellen Clifford, of Disabled People Against Cuts, who launched a judicial review with the help of the Public Law Project.
She alleged that the consultation was unlawful because:
• It did not explain properly that many people would receive significantly less money if impacted by the reforms, and would be subject to tighter requirements around work-related activity.
• The consultation did not disclose that the main motive was to cut spending on disability benefits rather than get more people into work.
• The consultation paper did not provide any meaningful information about the likely impact of the proposals, which prevented consultees from being able to comment meaningfully on them.
• The consultation period was too short at just under eight weeks.
The High Court agreed. In a judgment published on the morning of Thursday, January 16, Mr Justice Calver said
• The consultation documents failed to highlight the “substantial” loss of benefits facing those affected by the proposals.
• The consultation gave the “misleading impression” that changes were required to ensure deaf and disabled people could access employment support, when they could already choose to access this voluntarily.
• Despite the consultation presenting the changes as being solely about helping disabled people into work, in reality “costs savings was at least one of the two bases, if not the central basis, on which decisions would be taken on which policies would be taken forward by the government”.
• And the eight-week consultation was unlawfully short in the circumstances.
Repeatedly describing the DWP consultation as “misleading”, “rushed” and “unfair”, Mr Justice Calver said: “The unfair burden upon vulnerable people of having to deal with a yet further consultation process at this time at such short notice cannot be overstated,” Mr Justice Calver said in his judgement.
“In setting the consultation period, the [secretary of state for work and pensions – at the time, Mel Stride, who is now Shadow Chancellor] ought to have had more regard to the attributes of those people who would be affected by these proposals. These were proposals which, in particular, could potentially drive vulnerable people into poverty as well as adversely affecting disabled people and substantial risk claimants who have mental health conditions and suicide ideation.”
The judgment does not require the current government to drop the proposals or re-run the consultation, but if it tried to implement the cuts based on a consultation that has now been ruled unlawful, further successful legal action would likely follow. The government may choose to re-run the consultation, or find other ways to achieve the planned savings.
After the consultation, the DWP chose to proceed with three proposals, which have yet to be implemented:
• Mobility problems will no longer be enough by themselves to qualify as LCWRA.
• Difficulties getting between two places will score lower in relation to the LCW group.
• The substantial risk regulations, under which people whose mental health would be harmed by undertaking work-related activity are placed in the LCWRA group, would only apply in exceptional cases.
That’s a lot to take in but brace yourself, because here comes the big shock:
Labour is planning to proceed with these Tory plans that it now knows will not help anything like the number of people they were claimed to and will in fact take huge amounts of money away from nearly half a million people, plunging 100,000 of them into absolute poverty.
Yes, you read that right:
Labour now deliberately plans to inflict poverty on huge numbers of disabled people – many of whom may be pushed to suicide because of it – in order to save a little bit of cash that they could make up simply by taxing the rich properly.
A government spokesperson said: “The judge has found the previous government failed to adequately explain their proposals. As part of wider reforms that help people into work and ensure fiscal sustainability, the government will re-consult on the WCA descriptor changes, addressing the shortcomings in the previous consultation, in light of the judgment.
“The government intends to deliver the full level of savings in the public finances forecasts.”
Chilling.
Reading between the lines, it seems current Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall is happy to re-run the consultation, this time accurately describing what will happen to claimants.
She is likely to receive a massive backlash against her proposals – but here’s the thing: she can simply ignore it if she likes.
It seems this is exactly what she has decided to do.
This article was compiled using material from two Big Issue pieces which you can find here and here.
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (bottom right of the home page). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
5) Follow Vox Political writer Mike Sivier on BlueSky
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Cruel Britannia is available
in either print or eBook format here:
The Livingstone Presumption is available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
you might also like
Let’s start the New Year with some hopeful news
More mistakes in the script? Correcting Cameron’s New Year speech
The lies that smashed the unions and destroyed our coal industry