• Donate
  • Login
Sunday, December 7, 2025
  • Login
  • Register
Canary
Cart / £0.00

No products in the basket.

MEDIA THAT DISRUPTS
  • UK
  • Global
  • Opinion
  • Skwawkbox
  • Manage Subscription
  • Support
  • Features
    • Health
    • Environment
    • Science
    • Feature
    • Sport & Gaming
    • Lifestyle
    • Tech
    • Business
    • Money
    • Travel
    • Property
    • Food
    • Media
No Result
View All Result
MANAGE SUBSCRIPTION
SUPPORT
  • UK
  • Global
  • Opinion
  • Skwawkbox
  • Manage Subscription
  • Support
  • Features
    • Health
    • Environment
    • Science
    • Feature
    • Sport & Gaming
    • Lifestyle
    • Tech
    • Business
    • Money
    • Travel
    • Property
    • Food
    • Media
No Result
View All Result
Canary
No Result
View All Result

DWP facing court action over its controversial proposed changes to the WCA

The Canary by The Canary
13 November 2023
in News, UK
Reading Time: 4 mins read
174 8
A A
0
Home UK News
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on BlueskyShare via WhatsAppShare via TelegramShare on Threads

Disabled activist Ellen Clifford has begun a legal challenge against the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP). It’s over the DWP’s failure to consult fairly or lawfully on plans for the Work Capability Assessment (WCA). Its proposed changes could cut income for some chronically ill and disabled people by £390 a month.

DWP WCA changes

Proposed changes to the WCA will result in reduced benefits for many disabled people who qualify for Employment Support Allowance and the health element of Universal Credit, by changing how the DWP awards points for conditions such as incontinence, immobility, and social anxiety.

The DWP also proposes to make it more difficult for individuals who do not score enough points, but who have in any case been assessed as not being able to work or do related activity due to a substantial risk to their health, to qualify for additional benefit payments.

Clifford’s lawyers at the Public Law Project say the consultation process on the WCA changes may be unfair and unlawful, because:

  • At eight weeks, the time period was too short.
  • Not enough information was provided for people to engage properly with the consultation – it did not make clear that some people could lose up to £390 a month or engage with other negative impacts on disabled people.
  • No reasonable adjustments were made for the fact that the most important consultees are disabled people who may need additional support to respond.
  • The consultation design shows no evidence that the secretary of state gave due regard to his Public Sector Equality Duty.

‘Unfair and unlawful’

Clifford said:

The DWP’s proposals will take much-needed money out of the pockets of disabled people. The proposals themselves do not stack up, and the way they have gone about consulting on the changes is unfair and unlawful. At the very least, the DWP must not pursue any proposals without proper, lawful consultation.”

The consultation proposes changes to how the system assesses ‘mobilising’, ‘absence or loss of bowel/bladder control’, ‘coping with social engagements’ and ‘getting about’ activities, by removing them entirely or reducing the points awarded for the descriptors.

People affected by these conditions may lose some benefits altogether or could be moved into a different benefit category which would require them to carry out mandatory ‘work related’ activities as a condition of receiving these benefits.

Pushing more chronically ill and disabled people into poverty

She continued:

These proposals could harm many disabled people who rely on benefits, and push more disabled people into poverty.

The consultation took place over less than eight weeks. Deaf and disabled people’s organisations – DPPOs – had no advance warning. There was another consultation process running at the same time, in addition to lots of other competing demands on the time of under-resourced DPPOs, of which DWP was well aware.

For impairment-related reasons, I found it personally difficult to engage with the proposals within the short consultation period. All the DPPOs I spoke to who were able to respond said eight weeks was too short and didn’t give them the chance to consult properly with their members. A number of DDPOs (including DDPOs in the devolved nations) had to rely on a template response in support of key points made by DPO Forum England.

This left them unable to provide DWP with the level of detail appropriate for a consultation on proposals with the potential to have such serious adverse impacts on the lives of disabled people. Some DDPOs were totally unaware of the consultation and others simply couldn’t respond at all within the given timeframe..”

The DWP says that the increase in working from home means disabled people can access the world of work more easily. Research shows that disabled people are less likely to work from home than non-disabled employees, yet DWP made no attempt to engage with or even acknowledge those findings.

The consultation papers do not make clear that the changes may mean a reduction in the amount of benefits a person receives, and that those impacted after undergoing a new Work Capability Assessment could become subject to mandatory activities in order to receive their benefits, and risk being sanctioned if they cannot comply with the conditions imposed.

DWP make statements about how appropriate support will be available to help disabled people to get back into work, but there is no real detail on this, and they refer to existing projects like Access to Work (AtW). Difficulties accessing AtW consistent with my own personal experience have long been flagged by DDPOs without adequate remedy.

‘Life-altering consequences’

Aoife O’Reilly, the Public Law Project lawyer acting for Clifford said:

There are principles of fairness that Government departments must follow when carrying out consultations like this.

The changes being consulted on will have life-altering consequences for disabled people. When you think about the diverse accessibility needs of the people the consultation was aimed at, consulting for just under eight weeks is wholly inadequate.

It is unclear why DWP thought it was appropriate to close the consultation after just eight weeks, given that it seems to not envisage actually bringing in any changes until 2025.

We are very pleased to be working with Ellen on this important case and await DWP’s response to our pre-action letter so we can assess next steps.

Backlash to the DWP’s plans

In addition to DPPOs being concerned about the proposals, the Equality and Human Rights Commission and the Work and Pensions Select Committee have criticised the consultation process for being too short, and questioned whether it has grappled meaningfully with the impact that the changes will have on Deaf and disabled people.

Public Law Project has written a pre-action letter to Mel Stride’s Department on behalf of Clifford, arguing that the consultation process was unlawful and that DWP must not pursue any proposals without further (lawful) consultation.

A response from the DWP is expected on 14 November 2023.

Featured image via the DWP – YouTube

Tags: chronic illnessDepartment for Work and Pensions (DWP)disability
Share135Tweet84ShareSendShareShare
Previous Post

How to write a compelling 1000-word essay in under two hours

Next Post

From the archives: the Court of Appeal just ruled that Theresa May broke the law. But the media are barely reporting it.

Next Post
may GE2017

From the archives: the Court of Appeal just ruled that Theresa May broke the law. But the media are barely reporting it.

From the archives: Corbyn delivered a speech that could win him the election but the BBC isn’t showing it

From the archives: Corbyn delivered a speech that could win him the election but the BBC isn't showing it

Julian Assange at the Embassy

Julian Assange: sabotage is solidarity where telling the truth is treason

disability pay gap day

It's Disability Pay Gap Day, so here's how much less disabled people earn. Spoiler: it's a lot

Greta Thunberg at a Fossil Free London protest

Greta Thunberg was out in London again - this time, disrupting the Lord Mayor's banquet

Please login to join discussion
Israel
Analysis

Israel executes two unarmed Palestinians after they surrendered

by Charlie Jaay
28 November 2025
Palestine Action
Analysis

Disabled arrestee refuses to be silent, saying “freedom is not to be taken from us without a fight”

by Ed Sykes
28 November 2025
Syria
Analysis

Syria: Fragile peace after Bedouin murders ignite sectarian tensions

by Alex/Rose Cocker
28 November 2025
Barghouti
Skwawkbox

Video: Barghouti honoured with new mural after 24 years as Israel’s political prisoner

by Skwawkbox
28 November 2025
palestine action
Analysis

Shocking new report reveals what really drove the government’s crackdown on Palestine Action

by The Canary
28 November 2025
  • Get our Daily News Email

The Canary
PO Box 71199
LONDON
SE20 9EX

Canary Media Ltd – registered in England. Company registration number 09788095.

For guest posting, contact ben@thecanary.co

For other enquiries, contact: hello@thecanary.co

Sign up for the Canary's free newsletter and get disruptive journalism in your inbox twice a day. Join us here.

© Canary Media Ltd 2024, all rights reserved | Website by Monster | Hosted by Krystal | Privacy Settings

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Fill the forms below to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
  • UK
  • Global
  • Opinion
  • Skwawkbox
  • Manage Subscription
  • Support
  • Features
    • Health
    • Environment
    • Science
    • Feature
    • Sport & Gaming
    • Lifestyle
    • Tech
    • Business
    • Money
    • Travel
    • Property
    • Food
    • Media
  • Login
  • Sign Up
  • Cart