---

Welfare Reform Bill

I thank the noble Lord, Lord Northbourne, for this amendment. With the leave of the Committee, perhaps I may briefly return to some matters that we debated earlier, one of which is certainly relevant to the amendment before us. During our debates over the past few weeks, several issues have been raised, with resonance with discussions in another place, around the conditionality requirements for parents and the safeguards that we are providing for this group and for those with health conditions or disabilities. There have been some lengthy and important debates, with valuable contributions made by noble Lords from all sides. We have been listening to and carefully considering those contributions. We are conscious that, to be successful, our policies need to be perceived by lone parents as positive and supportive. As noble Lords have eloquently made clear in previous sessions, this is not always the case and there remains fear about our policies and about how people may be treated in reality. The Secretary of State and I have been struck by the powerful arguments put forward by noble Lords and stakeholder groups that more reassurance needs to be given in the Bill. As such, I am pleased to inform the Committee that we intend to introduce a number of government amendments on Report. We have had an extremely important debate about the need for advisers to take into account the well-being of the child when they discuss return-to-work activity with parents. In particular, I pay tribute to the contribution of the noble Lord, Lord Northbourne, here. We are fully persuaded of the importance of this approach and therefore intend to make express provision in the Bill that the well-being of the child or children must be taken into account when a jobseeker’s agreement or action plan is drawn up with a parent. We have had also had considerable debate on the factors that decision-makers should consider when determining whether there is good cause for failing to undertake mandatory activity. Noble Lords are aware that these factors are set out in regulations. We now intend to amend the Bill to enshrine in primary legislation that decision-makers must consider the availability of childcare, when the claimant is a parent, and the claimant has a health condition or disability. This is our current policy and practice, but it will now be set out in primary legislation. We had a very useful debate on victims of domestic violence, when the noble Baronesses, Lady Thomas and Lady Kennedy, made powerful contributions. The Secretary of State and I are very sympathetic to these arguments, and wish to include in the Bill that parents who are in receipt of jobseeker’s allowance and are victims, or in fear, of domestic violence should be entitled to continue to receive jobseeker’s allowance without the job-seeking conditionality for a period of three months. In short, they can have a three-month exemption from conditionality. There has been some confusion about our plans for lone parents with a youngest child aged seven and above. Last November we changed regulations so that this group would no longer be entitled to income support. Instead they will have to claim either jobseeker’s allowance or employment and support allowance, depending on their circumstances. The Bill makes no change to this position but it seems that there may be some concern that we plan to extend jobseeker’s allowance conditionality to lone parents with younger children. I give noble Lords a categorical assurance that this is not our intention. We will therefore amend the Bill to make it clear in primary legislation that lone parents and partners with a youngest child aged below seven will not be required to seek or take work. This is our commitment, and the Bill will now make it clear. As we have discussed, we plan to introduce the progression-to-work pathfinders for those lone parents with a youngest child aged three to six. Concerns have been expressed that, in the future, this policy may be extended and lone parents of very young children could be required to undertake work-related activity and may be sanctioned for failure to comply. We will therefore put in the Bill that no lone parent with a child aged below three will be subject to mandatory work-related activity. They will still be able to volunteer for such activity, though, and receive appropriate support. These amendments confirm existing government policy by putting it into primary legislation. We have always made it clear that the measures will be implemented in a way that supports families and children. These safeguards give parents reassurance that Governments will not be able to make changes to this landmark Bill without going back to Parliament. I hope that noble Lords will welcome this statement and the proposed amendments, which we will table in advance of Report. I hope to be able to meet noble Lords in advance of Report to discuss them in more detail. I will also write to all noble Lords who have spoken on the Bill, giving them the text of this statement, which I believe is available here today. I hope that noble Lords will forgive me for straying a little wider than the amendment, but I thought it a useful opportunity to put on the record some things that we have been thinking about in recent days. I thank noble Lords for all their contributions, which have been helpful.