Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 30 June 2009. It occurred during Committee proceeding and Debate on bill on Welfare Reform Bill.
Welfare Reform Bill
I thank the noble Lord for the amendment. The clause modernises the powers to pilot regulations under the Jobseekers Act 1995 and the Welfare Reform Act 2007 in two ways: it aligns the scope of the piloting powers across the two regimes for greater consistency in the way that pilots are conducted for the two benefits; and it extends the duration of pilots to a maximum of 36 months before they need to be renewed so that they are better attuned to the current approach to commissioning and evaluation. The amendment seeks to restrict the operation of pilots under the Welfare Reform and Jobseekers Acts to a maximum of 24 months.. Before I deal with the amendments, it might be helpful to provide some background to the pilot powers. The first working-age benefit pilot powers were introduced in the Jobseekers Act around 14 years ago. They were an innovative measure which set the framework for testing new approaches and the 12-month renewal limit set at the time was appropriate for the scale of the pilots then being introduced. As pilot design and practice has become increasingly sophisticated we have sought to extend the length of pilots. Hence, we took powers in the Welfare Reform Act 2007 to test the employment support allowance measures for up to 24 months. However, these powers were introduced before we developed the pilots to test conditionality regimes, which will be expected to last longer than 24 months. The existing renewal limits for pilots constrain the commercial strategy and effective evaluation of pilots. DWP is increasingly making use of contracted provision for the private and voluntary sectors to deliver employment programmes, including pilots. We want to continue to draw on the expertise of these sectors but short-term contracts for employment support programmes are often unattractive commercially and may not be viable if significant investment is required. Longer pilots tend to be better value for money and attract wider commercial interest. Developments in evaluation practice also mean that we now need longer pilots in order to gather robust evidence on which to base future policy. In order to capture a true picture of the effectiveness of a pilot, we need sufficient time for the longer term outcomes of a programme to be determined. We recognise that it is important to find the right balance between modernising these powers while retaining appropriate levels of accountability. I assure noble Lords that the pilot regulations will still require approval from both Houses when they are first made and if they require renewal. This will continue to provide a full opportunity to examine and debate individual pilots. I hope that on that basis the noble Lord will withdraw his amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 712 c74-5GC
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Staff Complaints Disability Contracts Appeals Carers Community care Advisory services Community care grants Housing benefit Fraud Employment Jobseeker's allowance Income support Jobcentres Eligibility Income Jobcentre Plus Earnings rules Mental illness Pilot schemes Personal savings Pensions Payments Loans Lone parents Standards Social security benefits Maternity benefits Social security Social Fund Training Take-up Unemployed people Employment and support allowance
- Legislation
- Welfare Reform Bill 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-05-30 11:06:25 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_571913
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_571913
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_571913