Proceeding contribution from Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 11 June 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Welfare Reform Bill.
Welfare Reform Bill
I admire the lengths to which the noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, has gone in her amendments to suggest what might be considered good cause for not fulfilling an obligation or duty imposed by the Bill. As has already been pointed out, she has even thought about someone being unable to fulfil their duty because they were helping to launch a lifeboat, which is not a task that I would have thought about had she not so diligently included it. I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Murphy, that the devil is in the detail in all of this, although I would not be as specific as that. None the less, to be fair to the Minister—as, I hope he will agree, I sometimes am—we are beginning to pin him down on "just cause". This amendment adds to that pressure. The noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, specified a number of different scenarios, including risk to health and well-being, excessive travel time, participating in a scheme or activity, or serving as a juror. I am not sure that I can find anything to criticise in those ideas, because each provides a valid excuse for someone obliged to participate in the schemes under this Bill not to do so. Indeed, suitable childcare and transport were mentioned by the Minister on Tuesday. There will be circumstances which justify an act or omission which puts the participant in breach of his obligations. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, that we do not want to build a culture of suspicion—I slightly paraphrase what he said. The Bill recognises that common-sense position by allowing for regulations to be made which will describe those circumstances in greater detail. I wonder whether we really need this level of prescription in the Bill, if only for the reason that it takes a long time to change an Act of Parliament. The Minister has pointed out several times that he requires flexibility in negative resolution orders. There is a good use for regulations, because, during the pilots, it will be found that various things need to be changed—probably quite quickly. The noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, is shaking her head. Does she want me to give way?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 711 c125-6GC
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Contracts Childcare Disadvantaged Charities Benefits rules Employment Jobseeker's allowance Jobcentre Plus Learning disability Home education Mental illness Pilot schemes Parents Pupil exclusions Pay Poverty Minimum wage Staff Lone parents Scotland Social security Social security benefits Voluntary organisations Training Transport Wales Unemployment Truancy Unemployed people Employment and support allowance Statutory instruments
- Legislation
- Welfare Reform Bill 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 02:34:39 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_565948
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_565948
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_565948