An Opportunity To Rethink

John Pring writes:

A “groundbreaking” legal victory at the high court has provided fuel for disabled activists to fight the new government’s expected cuts to spending on disability benefits, and to call on ministers to meet their legal obligations to co-produce policy.

Disabled activist Ellen Clifford, who brought the high court case, said she was “overjoyed” after Mr Justice Calver ruled the last Conservative government had issued a “rushed”, “unfair” and “misleading” consultation on proposals to make “substantial” cuts to out-of-work disability benefits.

Clifford and other activists and disabled people’s organisations (DPOs) told Disability News Service (DNS) this week that the new Labour government must now commit to work in co-production with disabled people and DPOs to build a new, fairer social security system.

Clifford said she hoped the victory had given disabled people “momentum” and inspired them to believe that “we can make a difference”.

She said the case was a “real collective effort” and came out of the work of the UK coalition of DPOs that monitors the implementation of the UN disability convention, and the work of disabled activists and allies who have visited Geneva to give evidence to the UN about that lack of progress.

She said outside court that the judgment had “respected the expertise of Deaf and disabled people’s organisations” and was “a win for disabled people”, although “we know that this isn’t the end of the fight” and that “the government is hell bent on attacking disabled people”.

Disability Wales, which raised concerns with DWP about its consultation, said Clifford’s victory over the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and its former secretary of state Mel Stride was “groundbreaking”.

Rhian Davies, chief executive of Disability Wales, called on the new UK government to be “open and transparent about its current proposals and to engage co-productively with disabled people’s organisations on reforms that reflect the higher costs of daily living faced by disabled people as well as addressing the wide-ranging ableist barriers in workplaces and everyday life”.

Svetlana Kotova, director of campaigns and justice for Inclusion London, which provided a witness statement for the legal case, and worked with Clifford and her lawyers, said: “We are delighted that the court has seen beyond the DWP’s deceptive tactics and upheld the rule of law.

“The legal judgment handed down last week is a damning indictment against the previous government’s attempts to obscure their plans for huge cuts to essential benefits, for nearly half a million disabled people.”

She added: “We would urge the Labour government to start working with disabled people and to use this ruling as an opportunity to rethink their approach to social security.

“They must not simply announce the same devastating cuts in a different way – they must stop pursuing Tory policies that do not work and will cause disabled people so much harm.”

John McArdle, co-founder of Black Triangle Campaign, who provided a witness statement for Clifford’s case stating that he felt “personally misled” by the consultation, said it was a “magnificent victory”.

He said it would “absolutely” provide impetus for disabled activists to fight back against attacks by the new government on disabled people’s support and rights.

He warned the government that if it “does decide to make a bonfire of disability rights, we will fight them all the way through the courts” and that every disabled person should write to their MP and say “these proposals must not pass” if they are re-introduced by Labour.

He said: “We have won a case in the high court hands down.

“The machinations of DWP policy-making have been exposed for all to see.

“We want evidence-based policy; what has been exposed in this court case, and it has all come into the glaring daylight, is that their first consideration was to slash the budget and then to find evidence to justify it.

“Now Labour are planning to do the same, but it’s not going to happen.”

Emma Cotton, a social security adviser and co-ordinator of the trade union group of Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC), said the fightback against the consultation had been “incredible” and “a great lesson in the power of solidarity”.

She said: “The judgement itself is damning – agreeing with nearly all of Ellen’s arguments and by doing so establishing helpful case law principles for social security cases to come.

“It means the government will have to be very cautious in the way it approaches another consultation on the work capability assessment.

“I hope this gives disabled people some hope and would urge them to reach out to their local DPAC and get involved in the continuing fight for disability rights.”

Disability Rights UK, which had criticised the consultation and was another DPO mentioned in the judgment, congratulated Clifford on her “important legal victory”, and said: “Without her steadfast, principled and brave campaigning, the DWP would not have suffered the conclusive loss it has. 

“Instead of pursuing the further impoverishment of disabled people, it needs to co-produce reforms that will protect our rights to an adequate standard of living.”

Disability North, another DPO that had been critical of the consultation and was mentioned by Mr Justice Calver, said the judgment was “a victory for fairness and transparency”.

Vici Richardson, chief executive of Disability North, said: “We hope this will send a strong message that any future consultations must be grounded in clear communication, respect and with enough time and appropriate means to feed back.

“Moving forward, in any conversations around welfare reform, we want to see disabled people supported, not vilified, ensuring the right support for those who need it most.”

Aoife O’Reilly, from Public Law Project, the solicitor who acted for Clifford, said: “This judgment has vindicated our criticism of the DWP’s unlawful consultation and we now urge the government to scrap these planned reforms, which were disingenuously presented to the Deaf and disabled people who would be affected.”

Finding DWP’s actions unlawful, Mr Justice Calver said in his 42-page judgment that the eight-week consultation – issued by Stride in September 2023 – had failed to explain that planned reforms to the work capability assessment (WCA) would cut the benefits of 424,000 disabled people, with many worse off by at least £416 a month.

If the reforms became law, those 424,000 disabled people would also have to comply with work-related requirements and face the possibility of sanctions, while another 33,000 disabled claimants who were already in the limited capability for work group would now have to comply with even tougher work-related requirements and potential sanctions.

Stride had failed to make it clear that one of the key motives for his reforms was to cut spending by about £3 billion over four years.

He and his ministers had claimed that the reforms were intended to support more disabled people into work, yet only 15,000 of the 457,000 affected were expected by DWP to enter employment.

Internal DWP documents, revealed during the legal case, showed that nearly 100,000 more disabled people could be forced into poverty.

Despite issuing a statement to other media last week – in which it pledged to repeat the consultation – DWP had failed to respond to questions from DNS by noon today (Thursday).

DNS had asked the department, now led by Labour’s Liz Kendall, for its next steps on the proposed reforms, and whether it would apologise to disabled people for misleading them in the 2023 consultation document.

Fears of further cuts to disability benefits were heightened this week when prime minister Sir Keir Starmer – in an interview with The Sun newspaper published the day after the judgment – boasted that he would be “ruthless with cuts” if necessary and would “fight” to convince his own MPs of the need for cuts to benefits.

Details of Labour’s plans will be included in a green paper in the spring and then – following a 12-week consultation – a white paper later this year, but the government has already pledged to make the same £3 billion in cuts as those proposed by the Conservatives, although it has not yet said whether it will implement the same reforms proposed by Stride.

The Guardian reported a DWP spokesperson saying: “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.”