{"id":101902,"date":"2025-01-17T16:00:00","date_gmt":"2025-01-17T16:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/?p=101902"},"modified":"2025-01-17T14:40:37","modified_gmt":"2025-01-17T14:40:37","slug":"labours-dwp-reform-plans-spark-outrage","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/labours-dwp-reform-plans-spark-outrage\/","title":{"rendered":"Labour\u2019s DWP Reform Plans Spark Outrage from Disability Advocates"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Labour Party has reaffirmed its commitment to reforms of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), even after a High Court ruling found the previous consultation process to be unlawful. Disability activists and legal experts are urging the party to reconsider, citing concerns about the impact on vulnerable groups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The High Court judgment declared that the consultation process for proposed changes to the Work Capability Assessment (WCA) system was misleading and inadequate. Despite this, Labour has indicated it will move forward with the reforms, promising to address the shortcomings flagged in the court\u2019s decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Labour’s stance amidst judicial rebuke<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The High Court ruling came after Justice Calver sided with disability <\/a>rights activist Ellen Clifford, who challenged the government\u2019s approach to the WCA <\/a><\/strong>reforms. The court found the consultation process \u201cmisleading, rushed, and unfair<\/strong>,\u201d noting a lack of transparency in explaining the proposed changes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The reforms in question aim to reduce the emphasis on mobility and physical movement difficulties <\/strong>in disability evaluations, a move that has sparked significant backlash. Critics argue that this approach could marginalise <\/strong>those who rely on the current system for adequate support.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A Labour spokesperson responded to the ruling, stating, \u201cThe judge has found the previous government failed to adequately explain their proposals.\u201d The party has committed to a new consultation process<\/strong> to address these issues while maintaining its intention to implement the reforms<\/a>. This decision has drawn sharp criticism from advocacy groups, with Svetlana Kotova<\/strong>, director of campaigns at Inclusion London, urging the government to rethink its approach to social security.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Disability advocates call for inclusive policymaking<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Disability rights organisations have voiced alarm <\/strong>over the potential consequences of the reforms, warning that they could cause further harm to vulnerable individuals. \u201c this ruling as an opportunity to rethink their approach to social security\u201d Kotova emphasised. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

She cautioned against the pursuit of savings that \u201cunleash misery on disabled people.\u201d<\/strong> “It is not a matter of simply explaining the changes in a different way \u2014 they must stop pursuing Tory policies that do not work and will cause disabled people so much harm.” Svetlana added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Labour’s intentions to move on with the changes<\/strong> have been interpreted as supporting measures put in place by the Conservative administration. Activists contend that these actions, which disproportionately impact marginalised communities, are part of a larger trend of austerity-driven legislation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Labour’s push for reforms to the Department for Work and Pensions has hit a legal snag, with a High Court ruling branding the process “unlawful.” Disability activists are sounding the alarm, warning of devastating impacts on vulnerable groups.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10,"featured_media":101905,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[46],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-101902","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-social-welfare","generate-columns","tablet-grid-50","mobile-grid-100","grid-parent","grid-33","no-featured-image-padding"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101902","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=101902"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101902\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":101915,"href":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101902\/revisions\/101915"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/101905"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=101902"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=101902"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.econostrum.info\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=101902"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}