The DWP’s Esther McVey is blasted for giving ‘incorrect statements’ to parliament

The DWP Logo and Esther McVey
Support us and go ad-free

The Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP) secretary Esther McVey has been caught giving out “incorrect” and “wrong” information to parliament. But it’s all become a bit personal for one MP, as well.

The DWP: in the dock again

As The Canary previously reported, on 14 June the DWP lost part of a court case over Universal Credit. It centred on the loss of benefits for two claimants when they moved onto Universal Credit. Because this new benefit from the DWP replaces most previous ones, some disabled people with severe impairments could lose out on money. Solicitors Leigh Day argued that the DWP had acted unlawfully by not making up a loss of £178 a month for one claimant specifically, when he changed over from his old benefits to Universal Credit.

And the judge partially agreed.

They ruled that the arrangements for the delivery of Universal Credit for severely disabled people are “discriminatory” and “unlawful” on ground three of the case; that is, that the:

implementation of universal credit and the absence of any ‘top up’ payments for this vulnerable group as compared to others constitutes discrimination contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights [ECHR].

Leigh Day judgement one

McVey had already changed the rules for people receiving the benefit in question: the Severe Disability Premium (SDP). So people moving onto Universal Credit would have the amount they previously received protected. But the judge still found the DWP to have committed “unlawful discrimination”, historically, before it made the changes. Because McVey only made the changes days before the court judgement. And the DWP denied to John Pring at Disability News Service that the two were connected.

Read on...

Support us and go ad-free

Leigh Day judgement two

But in parliament on Thursday 21 June, McVey appeared to have forgotten this.

Wait, what…?

Labour’s Debbie Abrahams raised the case during the debate. According to parliamentary record Hansard, she said:

I cannot believe what I am hearing from the government. They are in absolute denial… In the past six months, there have been not one, not two, but three High Court decisions or tribunal rulings saying that the government’s actions… most recently… are discriminatory and unlawful…

McVey hit back:

I ask the honourable lady to read the court judgement. I had already made the decision on the disability premium. The court did not ask the government to alter the severe disability premium – we won on that point of law – so I ask the honourable lady to digest the judgement properly.

Ruffled

But Abrahams was not having it. At the end of the debate, she raised a point of order – an official query as to whether a debate has been conducted properly. She said:

The secretary of state, in response to my question, incorrectly said that the government had not been found to have acted unlawfully… I have looked up that judgement. I was at court 28 when the judgement was handed down… and it is absolutely the case that… the government were found to have acted unlawfully and in a discriminatory way. I would appreciate it if the record were corrected.

McVey still wasn’t having it:

If the honourable lady read and were, supposedly, at the judgement… I am giving her a get-out clause. On many of the points, the government ​won. They were questioned on how moving area had impacted on people with the severe disability premium. It was not about the fundamental change that I have made… which is different.

But neither was Abrahams.

Weasel words

She took to Twitter to highlight McVey’s less-than transparent behaviour:

So was McVey wrong? Well, the judge clearly said the DWP had previously acted unlawfully and discriminatorily. But McVey went in and changed the rules in time, to avoid the whole case being ruled in the claimants’ favour. Still, the judge’s words were clear. Unfortunately for McVey, they were words she didn’t seem to like hearing.

Get Involved

– Support DPAC and Black Triangle, campaigning for disabled people’s rights.

Featured image via UK government – Wikimedia and Mr Topple – YouTube

Support us and go ad-free

We need your help to keep speaking the truth

Every story that you have come to us with; each injustice you have asked us to investigate; every campaign we have fought; each of your unheard voices we amplified; we do this for you. We are making a difference on your behalf.

Our fight is your fight. You’ve supported our collective struggle every time you gave us a like; and every time you shared our work across social media. Now we need you to support us with a monthly donation.

We have published nearly 2,000 articles and over 50 films in 2021. And we want to do this and more in 2022 but we don’t have enough money to go on at this pace. So, if you value our work and want us to continue then please join us and be part of The Canary family.

In return, you get:

* Advert free reading experience
* Quarterly group video call with the Editor-in-Chief
* Behind the scenes monthly e-newsletter
* 20% discount in our shop

Almost all of our spending goes to the people who make The Canary’s content. So your contribution directly supports our writers and enables us to continue to do what we do: speaking truth, powered by you. We have weathered many attempts to shut us down and silence our vital opposition to an increasingly fascist government and right-wing mainstream media.

With your help we can continue:

* Holding political and state power to account
* Advocating for the people the system marginalises
* Being a media outlet that upholds the highest standards
* Campaigning on the issues others won’t
* Putting your lives central to everything we do

We are a drop of truth in an ocean of deceit. But we can’t do this without your support. So please, can you help us continue the fight?

The Canary Support us

Comments are closed