
Our response emphasised the need to protect funding for assistive software for disabled and neurodiverse students. Using our organisational knowledge on the ethics and use of gen-AI, we encouraged the Department for Education to take a more a nuanced and evidence-based approach to future change.
On the whole, we were disappointed with the proposals and the weakness of the thinking evident in their creation. We are hopeful that the Department for Education will seriously revisit their proposals and seek to centre the lived experience of disabled students.
Henry Carter, Political Lead for the LUSU Accessibility Committee:
“Recently, the Disabled Students Allowance (DSA) has been facing proposed cuts and changes which would greatly reduce the amount of support available to disabled and neurodivergent students across the whole HE sector. I have worked closely with both LUSU and the Uni to oppose these potential cuts to the DSA, and I have helped shape the institutional response from both, ensuring the concerns and voices of us, the actual students at question, are involved in Lancaster's response to these proposals, which I'm glad to say are steadfastly against the idea of cutting the DSA down.
Both the Uni and LUSU, with my feedback and input have reported back to the DSA that cuts to their services would be an awful idea and most definitely a negative impact on many students. It's not over yet, but the way that Lancaster has reacted as a whole is definitely a step in the right direction for disabled students.”
Read LUSU’s response here: LUSU Response to Consultation on Assistive technology funded by DSA, June 2026