Last Updated on April 30, 2024
Two Government departments are set to appear in a landmark court case this week to avoid revealing social care data. Government agencies, HM Treasury and the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC), are appearing in court this week against the Information Commissioner (ICO), with Access Social Care (ASC) as a second respondent, in a landmark court case for England.
This landmark case is happening due to the Government challenging a ruling by the ICO that it must disclose details around the decision-making process which determines funding for adult social care. ASC has stated that this will be a 'landmark court case for Government transparency and accountability in social care, as well as for the many families across the country who rely on adult social care'.
This case began when Freedom of Information requests were made by ASC to reveal data available to and used by policymakers in relation to decision making on social care funding. Both HM Treasury and DLUHC denied the requests.
These decisions to deny the request were then overturned by the ICO in July 2023, who ruled that disclosure was in the public interest and outweighs the arguments made by HM Treasury and DLUHC that it should be exempt as it is live Government policy. Government then placed an appeal for this ruling, and that is what will be discussed in court this week.
The ICO will be represented in the case by John Fitzsimons of Cornerstone Barristers, while ASC will be represented by Niamh Grahame of Public Law Project and Stephen Cragg KC of Doughty Street Chambers. HM Treasury and DLUHC will be represented by Laura Shepherd of 30 Park Place.
Ahead of the landmark data court case, Chief Executive Officer of Access Social Care, Kari Gerstheimer, commented, 'The social care sector, including public bodies, charitable and commercial organisations, are all aligned that social care is critically underfunded. Government’s position is that social care is adequately funded but they are refusing to reveal their maths.'
It has been two years in which the two Government bodies in this case have refused to share information regarding how they reach the conclusion that social care is adequately funded, despite agreement from the ICO that it is in the public interest to do so.
ASC is a specialist legal rights charity working in the social care sector. Through its work ensuring people receive the social care they have a legal right to, ASC has seen that older and disabled people are denied that care every day. According to the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (ADASS), 434,243 people are still waiting for assessments, care and support, direct payments or reviews. In addition, Age UK estimates that 2.6 million people over the age of 50 in England are living with some unmet need for care.
The aim of this case is to reveal the decision-making that guides social care in this country, and how that process can be improved upon. ASC hopes that it will 'shed light on whether the Government is considering [all] relevant factors'. Keri Gerstheimer argues that, 'this case strikes to the heart of the need for Government transparency to enable good quality public decision making'.
ASC is currently running a litigation funding appeal via crowd funding site, Crowd Justice, to ensure it can continue to seek transparency and accountability in this case.
In other news, The National Care Forum (NCF) has launched a new report resulting from the Social Care International Workforce Summit.