× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Work capability issues and ESA  →  Thread

Permission granted for JR challenge to consultation process for WCA reforms

 < 1 2

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3375

Joined: 14 July 2014

shawn mach - 16 January 2025 04:27 PM

Govt response included in the Guardian’s'report:

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.”

Disingenuous in the extreme.

The consultation was conducted by the previous government. The litigation was actively defended by the current government. It made a deliberate decision to defend the previous government’s conduct of the matter. It cannot wash its hands of that.

It would have been entirely open to the current government to have said, several months ago, that it was going to re-consult on the matter and found some way to extract itself from the litigation. A political decision was taken not to do that and instead to proceed as it did.

Benny Fitzpatrick
forum member

Welfare Rights Officer, Southway Housing Trust, Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 650

Joined: 2 June 2015

Unfortunately, one has come to expect nothing but mendacity and disingenuity from politicians of any stripe.

EKS_COTTON
forum member

Tax and Welfare Rights Officer, Equity

Send message

Total Posts: 295

Joined: 10 March 2014

Elliot Kent - 16 January 2025 12:21 PM

I think it was the PIP consultation that they said they weren’t going to continue with (although see: https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/dwp-pip-disability-benefits-reform-changes/)

They sort of sat on the fence on this one and said they would wait and see what happened at court. Whilst at the same time instructing Sir James Eadie KC et al to defend the JR at a two day hearing…

It will be interesting to see if they try and appeal this in outcome and - in any case - it will be interesting to see what the inevitable FOI tells us about how much in legal fees have been incurred in the failed defence of a previous government’s policy which the new government has not expressly endorsed.


Hi elliot - the foi is a great idea can I check you haven’t already done this

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3375

Joined: 14 July 2014

I haven’t done any FOI.

EKS_COTTON
forum member

Tax and Welfare Rights Officer, Equity

Send message

Total Posts: 295

Joined: 10 March 2014

Foi now done

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/how_much_money_was_spent_in_lega#outgoing-1791703

Also asking parliamentary questions and will update if get responses.

EKS_COTTON
forum member

Tax and Welfare Rights Officer, Equity

Send message

Total Posts: 295

Joined: 10 March 2014

Parliamentary questions and responses from Stephen Timms

1. To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the cost to the public purse was of the legal fees incurred in the judicial review of the work capability assessment consultation.

Answered on
28 January 2025

Judgment was handed down in the Work Capability Assessment (WCA): Activities and Descriptors consultation Judicial Review on 16 January 2025.

DWP’s litigation costs between 1 November 2023 and 21 January 2025 were £211,345.42.

DWP has been ordered to pay the Claimant’s reasonable costs of the claim. The DWP will endeavour to agree those reasonable costs with the Claimant following the standard legal process where necessary. The DWP has been ordered to pay £254,458.63 as a payment on account of the Claimant’s costs representing 60% of an estimate of the costs she has incurred in bringing this claim.

https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-01-22/25632

2. To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, with reference to the judgment in Clifford v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2025] EWHC 53 (Comm), for what reason she proceeded with the case.

30 January 2025

The Courts have found the previous government failed to explain their proposals adequately. We felt, on balance that the consultation that was under challenge had provided people with sufficient information and time to respond intelligently to the proposals. However, we have accepted the judgment and do not intend to appeal.

As part of wider reforms that help people into work and ensure fiscal sustainability, the government will re-consult on 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 finance forecasts.

https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-01-22/25632