---

Welfare Reform Bill

For the avoidance of doubt, I am at it again—probing, that is. New Section 17A(9)(a) speaks of hardship payments being payable only if, ""prescribed requirements as to the provision of information are complied with"." Hardship payments should be paid only to people who, for whatever reason, lose their income-based jobseeker’s allowance and have little or no other money to live on. This, we believe, is the right approach in a civilized society. However, the question arises of how detailed these prescribed requirements are to be. How, in other words, will the responsible Jobcentre Plus officer establish that hardship payments are warranted? Knowledge of the state of bank accounts and credit card statements spring to mind, but what else? My other question is: since hardship payments already exist in legislation, as we discussed a few moments ago, why does provision have to be made for them in the Bill? I am also confused by the juxtaposition of subsection (9)(b) and subsection (6), which is why I have tabled Amendment 17. In what circumstances may the prescribed period be different in each case? I beg to move.