YORK LAW SCHOOL

Getting Away from DoughnutsThe 'Discretion' in Discretionary Housing

Payments

YORK LAW SCHOOL

YORK LAW SCHOOL

Today’s Argument in a nut-shell: 2. That divergent

‘assumptive worlds’ are problematic – three key reasons for this:

1. Problems of Function2. Problems of Interpretations3. Problems of Agency

1. The Problem of the ‘Assumptive Worlds’ in the interpretation of DHPs

1. DWP + EWCA2. Local Authorities

YORK LAW SCHOOL

YORK LAW SCHOOL

Pot of money set aside by the DWP(£155 million pot)

Dolled out to Local Authorities

People Apply for DHPs to help them

YORK LAW SCHOOL

The Argument - Part One:

The Two ‘Assumptive Worlds’

YORK LAW SCHOOL

- Ken Young (1981)- A problem of the ‘assumptive worlds’ of

those initiating the task, and those carrying it out

- ‘Problems of implementation’ as referring to the centre’s failure to understand the values, perceptions, motivations and ‘definitions of the situation’ held by the other body

‘Assumptive Worlds’

Social Good Individual

Assumptive Worlds

YORK LAW SCHOOL

Social RightTo Housing

Benefit (Article 1:

Housing Benefit as a

possession)

Court of Appeal

Local Authoriti

es

Two Assumptive

Worlds

The DWP

YORK LAW SCHOOL

Assumptive Worlds

- Economic Policy (Thain, 1987; Dixon and Kouzmin, 2003) - Education (Marshall, 1985, 1988; Kirst et al, 2006; Humes, 2003; Bennett, 2001; Sacken and Medina, 1997; Finch and Gordon, 1989; Mazzeo, 2002)- Jurisprudence (Lacey, 1992; Kauffman, 2005) - Health (Marmor, 2013, Worth, 2001; Porter, 1989; Dopson and Fitzgerald, 2006)- Social Policy (Ham, 1980; Murray, 2006; Hill et al, 2009)

YORK LAW SCHOOL

The Assumptive World of:

DWP + Courts

YORK LAW SCHOOL

The Coalition Government Position – Giant Sticking Plaster

- ‘Discretionary pot for [local authorities] to tailor to their local and individual needs’ (Steve Webb MP)

- ‘the key is in the title’ (Stephen Williams MP)- the best way to incorporate ‘local issues’ on a ‘case

by case basis’  - local authorities are ‘best placed’ to make these

decisions ‘according to their assessment of local needs and in order to best reflect their particular circumstances’ (Lord Freud)

YORK LAW SCHOOL

R (MA & Others) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2014] EWCA Civ 13

‘Central to [the Secretary of State’s] thinking is the idea that there are certain groups of persons whose needs for

assistance with payment of their rent are better dealt with by DHPs than [housing benefit]…I consider that they

amount to an objective and reasonable justification of the scheme.’

YORK LAW SCHOOL

DHPs provide the ‘greater flexibility’ required to deal with the changing nature of ‘disability-related needs’ (para 74)…

'If read in isolation and without regard to the DHP scheme [the SSSC] plainly discriminates’ (para 39) against the disabled, so it necessary to analyse ‘the scheme as a whole.’ (para 40)

YORK LAW SCHOOL

Local Authority Assumptive World

YORK LAW SCHOOL

The other world: Local Authorities

- Behavioural and moralistic focus (ties into the responsibilisation agenda: Lister, 2014:12; McKee, 2012:855, Trnka and Trundle, 2014:3, ‘DIY project of the self’: Kelly, 2001:29)

- Widespread attachment of conditionality (Robinson, 2013; Bowpitt et al, 2013; Jacobs and Manzi, 2013)

- Potential influence of local politics (analysis of DWP data points to this)

- Huge variation between localities - geographical element to the problem

YORK LAW SCHOOL

YORK LAW SCHOOL

‘The present policy already gives consideration to the incentive and disincentive potential of

Discretionary Housing Payment decisions, in particular with regard to recognising and encouraging responsible housing choices. We would also expect to take into account other aspects of a claimant’s

behaviour, for instance in their engagement in activities to address worklessness or problematic and antisocial behaviour and in the steps they are taking to address

debts and budgeting difficulties.’

YORK LAW SCHOOL

YORK LAW SCHOOL

YORK LAW SCHOOL

An inherently local affair…

- Analysis of DWP Discretionary Housing Payment spend data, aligned with ‘predictor factors’:- Level of under-occupation- Number of Cases- Spend on other reforms (Benefit Cap + LHA reforms)

(https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/use-of-discretionary-housing-payments)

Average Level of Deduction (Bedroom Tax)

Measure combining level of under-occupation with the number of BT cases

YORK LAW SCHOOL

Role of Local Politics

Variable Unstandardised Regression Coefficient

Standardised Coefficient

Average Bedroom Tax Deduction (£)

33.865 .383*

Total number of Bedroom Tax Cases

-.060 -.446*

LHAReforms (£ Expenditure)

.002 .357*

Benefit Cap (£ Expenditure)

.003 .283*

No Overall Political Control   vs Labour

45.089 .552*

Conservative vs Labour

-44.882 -.577*Note: *p < 0.05.

YORK LAW SCHOOL

Argument Part One: Summary

Two very different interpretations of the discretion in DHPs by the DWP and Court of

Appeal compared to the Local Authorities

YORK LAW SCHOOL

The Argument - Part Two:

The Problem of the Assumptive Worlds – Why it is a problem?

YORK LAW SCHOOL

Problems of Interpretation

YORK LAW SCHOOL

Problems of Function

YORK LAW SCHOOL

Policy Delivery by Discretion

Policy Delivery by Rules and Exemptions

YORK LAW SCHOOL

Problems of Agency

YORK LAW SCHOOL

The ‘street-level bureaucrat’ as a scapegoat for policy failure is a familiar

figure.(Young, 1981)