The Universal Credit Act has now become law.
Despite some important concessions by the UK Government in the legislative process, the Act represents a continued retreat from the UK’s commitment to economic, social and cultural rights with its failure to provide protections for all.
At Just Fair, our vision is for a UK where everyone enjoys their economic, social and cultural rights, creating a fairer, more equal, and more just society for all.
Over the summer, we worked hard to raise the alarm over the human rights implications of the then proposed legislation. From urging MPs to reject the proposals at Second Reading to supporting amendments grounded in international law, we have consistently called for a rights-based approach to welfare reform – one that protects, not undermines, dignity.
What we did
When the legislation was first due to be debated, we issued briefings to MPs, outlining the human rights case for rejecting it. We highlighted the UK’s international obligations, including the right to social security and the right to an adequate standard of living. We also brought attention to the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights’ 2025 concluding observations, which had recently criticised the UK for eroding social protections and directly urged an increase, not a decrease in social security spending.
Our advocacy helped ensure that human rights were part of the UK Parliamentary conversation. At the first opportunity to debate the legislation, the human rights implications were raised by MPs we had briefed. At the next opportunity, MPs again referred to human rights in their contributions. This marked a noticeable increase in rights-based arguments being raised in Parliament.
We also supported an amendment tabled by Stella Creasy MP, that would have required the Secretary of State to have regard to Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (CRPD) when exercising powers. While this amendment was ultimately voted down, it offered a vital opportunity to bring rights-based reasoning into parliamentary scrutiny.
Why a rights-based approach matters
This legislation was never just about tightening eligibility criteria; it was about redefining the relationship between the state and those who rely most on it for support. It is part of an economic approach that prioritises growth over wellbeing, something that only deepens inequality and insecurity.
By contrast, a rights-based approach would require the UK Government to assess the impacts of reform on people already experiencing poverty and discrimination. It demands co-production with Disabled people, safeguards against regression, and protections grounded in dignity, not deterrence.
We are clear that to achieve a fairer, more equal, and more just UK, we must embed economic, social and cultural rights into law and practice.
In July, the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) sent the UK Government a series of questions about the then Bill, supported by many civil society organisations.
In its published response, the UK Government pointed to concessions made in the legislative process following extensive criticisms and advocacy from civil society but stopped short of addressing the Committee’s underlying concern: that the reforms risk deepening poverty and discrimination for Disabled people.
Rights-based scrutiny and a broader rights-based approach matter. They can make a critical contribution to ensuring that people-centred policy is developed with dignity at its core, embedding rights into both law and practice.
What comes next
The fight for a fair, rights-based social security system is far from over.
We are calling on the UK Government to ensure that any further reforms are grounded in rights. As a starting point, we urge them to address two of the priority recommendations highlighted by UN CESCR, calling on the UK Government to:
- Conduct an independent assessment of the cumulative impact of the austerity measures introduced since 2010 on economic, social and cultural rights, focusing on disadvantaged groups, regional disparities and the effects of subsequent policy shifts; (para 23 a)
- Assess the impact of the welfare reforms introduced since 2010 on the most disadvantaged groups and to take corrective measures, including reversing such policies as the two-child limit, the benefit cap and the five-week delay for the first Universal Credit payment; (para 41 a).
Reform of the social security system can only be rights-compliant and guarantee dignity if it is rooted in a deep understanding of the problems and inequalities within the system, and if the measures adopted meaningfully address these issues.
This is why it matters that the UK Government complies with the UN CESCR priority recommendations: doing so will enable the development of better, more rights-protective policy.
It is also vital that Disabled people and Disabled People’s Organisations are meaningfully involved in shaping changes to the social security system that affect them, rather than only being consulted after decisions have been made.
We will continue working with the MPs who spoke up for human rights, challenging rights violations, and advocating for future reforms that place dignity, equality, and rights at the centre.
Background image by Oreste Vinciguerra
