Subscribe to Blog via Email
Follow me on Twitter
My TweetsUpcoming Events
No upcoming events
-
Recent Posts
- CURA Events and Seminar Schedule 2020/21
- CURA invites expressions of interest from outstanding prospective PhD students
- Governance-driven democratisation and democracy-driven governance: democratic radicalization and co-optation in the case of Barcelona
- After the “Age of Austerity”: From COVID-19 to a New “Social Contract”?
- Expanded Resources on the Journal of Urban Affairs Blog for Remote Classes: Video and Power Point presentation on the Special Issue “Worlds of Austerity” edited by Prof Jonathan Davies
Archives
- October 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- December 2018
- October 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
Themes
- austerity
- Brexit
- canada
- citizen participation
- class struggle
- collaboration
- comparative politics
- contesting austerity
- Corbyn
- decentralisation
- democracy
- development
- devolution
- economic geography
- european union
- finance
- financialisation
- france
- housing
- industrial relations
- labour market
- Labour Party
- latin america
- local government
- marxism
- mexico
- migration
- municipalism
- neoliberalism
- organised labour
- podemos
- policy design
- political economy
- portugal
- public policy
- public services
- resistance
- security
- setting research agendas
- social impact bonds
- socialism
- social movements
- Spain
- structural violence
- urban studies
Disability and the Bedroom Tax: Discretionary Payments Violate Statutory Rights
The Guardian reported today that the Appeal Court have ruled the Bedroom Tax unlawful with respect to two cases – a victim of domestic violence “A”, and a severely disabled teenager, Warren Todd. The outcome is an important stepping-stone in the campaign against the Bedroom Tax, but the government has been given leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Bedroom Tax is a benefit sanction against those deemed by the Department of Work and Pensions to have a spare bedroom. Those affected have either to move to a smaller property, face housing benefit deductions or rely on a local authority subsidy to make up the difference. There have been a number of cases of disabled people being threatened with the loss of their homes. In the case of Warren Todd, the DWP argued that his family’s challenge to the Bedroom Tax on grounds of discrimination lacked credibility, because local authorities can make Discretionary Housing Payments (DHPs) to anyone sanctioned if they see merit in the case. An earlier High Court ruling accepted this logic, finding that the responsible authority, Pembrokeshire County Council, had covered the rental shortfall through a DHP, and there was no evidence to suggest it would stop doing so in future.
The reasons for the Court of Appeal decision are not yet completely clear – it ruled that the Secretary of State had failed to justify “admitted discrimination”. However, the ruling does suggest that the argument over DHPs is vitally important. Does the UK Government have a duty to recognize the rights of disabled people, or can it be left to the “discretion” of local authorities? How, logically, can a “discretionary” payment be construed as upholding statutory rights of disabled people not to suffer discrimination?
It is plainly wrong in principle to suggest – as the High Court did – that statutory rights can ever be upheld on a “discretionary” basis. Moreover, the High Court ruling ignored two important facts about DHPs, highlighted by our ESRC funded austerity research. First, there is no guarantee from Government that discretionary grants to help councils manage the transition to new benefit regimes will be retained long-term – local officials certainly think of them as bridging funds. Second, we know that some authorities attach conditions to DHP, meaning that a “spare room” is subsidized only if the recipient shows willing to move to a smaller property. The bedroom tax remains a looming threat for anyone in these circumstances.
DHPs cannot substitute for statutory rights in theory, and our research shows that they cannot do so in practice either. The Court of Appeal appears to recognize this, and if the government launches a challenge, disability rights in this country will depend on the Supreme Court upholding its eminently sensible ruling.
Professor Jonathan Davies is Director of the Centre for the Urban Research on Austerity
Share this: