Proceeding contribution from Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 3 November 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Welfare Reform Bill.
Welfare Reform Bill
My Lords, I feel a bit short-changed in regard to this matter. I thought that we were talking about sunset clauses, but actually this is a pilot scheme. A pilot scheme is not a sunset clause. I do not want to labour that because we are where we are, but I would be much happier with a straightforward measure. The very powerful arguments made by the noble Lord, Lord Goodlad, during the passage of last year’s child support legislation were much more in that vein than the amendment we are discussing, which stands in the Minister’s name. I wish to register that objection but, more importantly, what will the report contain that will make it a useful tool for the House to consider in two years’ time to enable it to decide whether it is sensible to continue with these powers? The House will have nothing to compare the report with. It would be much more sensible to, say, run one system in Callendar Park and another in Plymouth and compare and contrast them after two years. You would then be able to see what the counterfactual was. CMEC and the Child Support Agency will change their behaviour as soon as this amendment is passed and motor as hard as they can for the next two years to ensure that the measure looks as good as possible and then present the House with no alternatives. What are we expected to say? What will the report contain that will enable us to weigh in the balance whether the current system, which contains the protection offered by the court, is better than or different from the new system? All we will get is a report on whether the new system has worked. The Government will pile resources into this to ensure that it works, count up the extra child maintenance that is paid—I am in favour of that—and then say that there is no alternative. I do not know how the proposed report will enable the House to make a sensible judgment at a future date on whether to keep the new powers or to revert to the status quo. Until I receive reassurance on that, I am not sure that I support the amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 714 c166-7
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Council tax benefits Children Disability living allowance Disclosure of information Criminal proceedings Benefits rules Community care Employment Jobseeker's allowance Driving Disqualification Domestic abuse Drugs Fathers Medical treatments Pilot schemes Parents Misuse Passports Lone parents Parental responsibility Social security Social security benefits Rehabilitation Registration Registration of births, deaths, marriages and civil partnerships Travel restrictions Information sharing
- Legislation
- Welfare Reform Bill 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 13:38:33 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_591392
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_591392
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_591392