Debt by Design: Universal Credit, Deductions and Administrative Justice

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Project overviewIn the UK, the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) may reclaim a claimant's debtthrough a 'deductions' scheme. Debt can be incurred for a number of reasons, such asoverpayment by the DWP, or falling behind on money owed to third parties (e.g. fuel bills,rent or council tax). Under the 'deductions' scheme, weekly Universal Credit payments maybe reduced by up to 25% of the standard allowance. Here, claimants' income may fall belowsubsistence levels, creating a profound impact on their day-to-day lives.Indeed, the UK'slargest food bank operator found that nearly half of those referred to food banks are in debtto the DWP (Trussel Trust, 2022).Whilst also somewhat politically problematic, there is also anecdotal evidence that the DWPdecision-making falls below the standards of lawful administration. As such, the deductionsscheme engages with questions of 'administrative justice': whether governmental agenciesare lawfully implementing the law. Accordingly, this research project will examine both thelived experiences of DWP debt and critically assess deductions practices through the lens ofadministrative justice. In collaboration with legal NGO,. the Public Law Project, it will use thisanalysis to critically assess DWP decision-making practices around deductions and toground policy advocacy work and effect change.Therefore, this project fits within the Security, Conflict and Justice pathway. It addresses thepathway's focus on the challenge of social deprivation. More generally, it engages squarelywith questions of justice, focusing specifically on the administrative justice of deductionsdecision-making. 'Administrative justice' concerns both the legal requirements of governmentadministration, and the means by which injustice can be legally challenged. This project thusconnects injustice and conflict, aiming to reduce both.Research MethodsThe research project will comprise four main elements. First, it will undertake legal analysisof the deductions scheme; this involves a doctrinal analysis of the relevant legislation, caselaw, and applying human rights law to deductions outcomes. Second, it will undertakesemi-structured interviews with welfare benefits advisers, to understand common problemsin decision-making, how advisers respond to these, and what administrative justice issuesmay arise. Access to such participants will be negotiated via the project partner, the PublicLaw Project. Third, it will undertake interviews with claimants who have experienceddeductions, to understand: the circumstances leading up to the deduction; their experiencesof the process; and, the impact of the deductions on their ongoing welfare.Fourth, with theassistance of the Public Law Project, the researcher will interrogate their analysis for thepurposes of policy advocacy.Qualitative fieldwork raises a number of ethical issues. First, informed consent; participantsmust fully understand the research aims, what participation entails, and their ability towithdraw at any point. Second, when researching claimants, some participants may bevulnerable. Accordingly, care must be taken to anticipate and minimise the possibility thatdiscussing their circumstances may cause upset. Third, the issue of confidentiality is vital.FInally, there is the issue of data management and security. No fieldwork will take place untilappropriate ethical clearance has been given by the University's ethics committee.