DWP refuses to apologise after using ‘deeply irresponsible’ figure to exaggerate benefit claimant rise
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has refused to apologise for massively exaggerating the rise in people claiming out-of-work disability benefits, and then tried to cover-up its actions, just as ministers are trying to justify sweeping cuts to spending.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!DWP claimed in a press release last Thursday that there had been a “staggering 319 per cent increase” in the number of working-age people on the health and disability element of universal credit or receiving employment and support allowance (ESA).
The department said this showed the “alarming rate at which young and working aged people are increasingly falling out of work and claiming incapacity benefits”.
There has been an increase – most likely caused by the impact of growing NHS waiting-lists and the Covid pandemic, among other factors – but it is likely to be about 30 to 35 per cent, if comparing 2019-20 with 2023-24.
The error was spotted almost immediately by Ratigan, a disabled welfare rights campaigner.
He told Disability News Service (DNS): “It’s deeply irresponsible the DWP would publish such obviously misleading figures in an attempt to justify reforms that are striking terror into the hearts of millions of disabled people up and down the country.”
But it appears that no-one in the DWP press office, or work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall, or any of her highly-paid ministerial entourage, thought to question the figure.
Instead, the department used the figure to justify government reforms that it is believed will cut the amount paid to those receiving ESA or the health and disability element of universal credit.
The figure was quietly removed from the press release this week after DNS questioned its accuracy.
But DWP has so far failed to add a note to the website to show that the press release has been corrected.
And the department appears to have made no attempt to contact media organisations that published the inaccurate figure, including the Scottish national tabloid The Daily Record.
Labour’s social security and disability minister, Sir Stephen Timms, has repeatedly said that he wants DWP to move “towards much greater transparency about how we are doing things”.
Last month (PDF), Sir Stephen told the Commons work and pensions committee: “Things that ought to have been published and made public have been hidden, and that has contributed to a loss of trust.”
DWP has so far refused three times to respond to requests from DNS to comment on its use of the exaggerated figure.
The department’s continuing lack of transparency was further highlighted this week as DWP again refused to respond to a UN report that called on the government to take “corrective measures” to address the impact of cuts to disability benefits introduced under Conservative governments, just as Labour ministers are preparing to introduce further such cuts.
The recommendation by the UN’s committee on economic, social and cultural rights (CESCR) comes in its “concluding observations” on the UK’s progress in implementing the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Among its recommendations, the committee called for increased spending on social security, and for the government to take “corrective measures” to address the impact of post-2010 welfare reforms on the most disadvantaged groups, including disabled people.
But DWP refused to comment on the report last week.
And when asked again this week for its response to the committee’s conclusions and whether it would act on the recommendations, it refused to answer those questions.
Instead, a DWP spokesperson produced a statement that did not refer to the UN report or its conclusions but instead referred to the “broken” social security system and the need for “meaningful, principled” reform “so that it helps long-term sick and disabled people who can work to find employment, ensuring people receive the support they need, while being fair to the taxpayer”.
Credit for this article goes to John Pring with the Disability News Service
No responses yet