Debt by Design: Universal Credit, Deductions and Administrative Justice

在英国，工作和养老金部（DWP）可以通过“扣除”计划收回索赔人的债务。债务的产生有多种原因，如DWP多付的款项，或拖欠第三方的款项（如燃料费、租金或理事会税）。根据“扣除”计划，每周通用信贷付款可能会减少高达25%的标准津贴。在这种情况下，索赔人的收入可能会低于维持生计的水平，对他们的日常生活产生深远的影响。事实上，英国最大的食品银行运营商发现，近一半的人提到食品银行是欠DWP的债务（Trussel Trust，2022）。虽然也有点政治问题，但也有轶事证据表明，DWP的决策福尔斯低于合法管理的标准。因此，扣除方案涉及“行政正义”的问题：政府机构是否合法地执行法律。因此，本研究项目将通过行政司法的透镜，审查DWP债务的生活经验，并严格评估扣除做法。与法律的非政府组织合作。公共法律项目，它将使用此分析来批判性地评估DWP决策实践周围的扣除和接地政策宣传工作和效果的变化。因此，这个项目适合在安全，冲突和司法途径。它解决了途径对社会剥夺的挑战的关注。更一般地说，它直接涉及正义问题，特别关注演绎决策的行政正义。“行政正义”既涉及政府行政的法律的要求，也涉及对不公正行为提出法律挑战的手段。这个项目thusconnects不公正和冲突，旨在减少both.Research MethodsThe研究项目将包括四个主要元素。首先，它将对扣减计划进行法律的分析;这涉及对相关立法、判例法进行理论分析，并将人权法适用于扣减结果。其次，它将对福利顾问进行半结构化访谈，以了解决策中的常见问题，顾问如何应对这些问题，以及可能出现的行政司法问题。将通过项目伙伴公法项目谈判接触这些参与者。第三，它将与经历过扣除的索赔人进行访谈，以了解：导致扣除的情况;他们对这一过程的经历;以及扣除对他们持续福利的影响。第四，在公法项目的帮助下，研究人员将询问他们的分析，以达到政策倡导的目的。定性实地调查提出了一些道德问题。第一，知情同意;参与者必须完全理解研究目的，参与需要什么，以及他们在任何时候退出的能力。其次，在研究索赔人时，有些参与者可能是脆弱的。因此，必须注意预测和尽量减少讨论他们的情况可能导致不安的可能性。第三，保密性问题至关重要，最后是数据管理和安全问题。在大学伦理委员会给予适当的伦理许可之前，不会进行实地考察。

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.