Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Newton of Braintree (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 25 January 2012. It occurred during Debate on bill on Welfare Reform Bill.


Welfare Reform Bill

My Lords, if anyone wondered why I moved from my earlier position, they would have guessed that it was to stand shoulder to shoulder with my noble and learned friend Lord Mackay. He and I were in cahoots over the attempts to tackle this problem 20 years ago. We were in cahoots with what was said in Committee on this matter, and I have made it clear that I intend to remain in cahoots with him on this amendment. I have not been at the meetings, but I have had a number of conversations with Ministers and I give them credit for being willing to talk to me as well. I think that my noble friend in front of me will acknowledge that I have consistently said that if they could satisfy my noble and learned friend, I would not seek to push it, but if they could not satisfy him, I would stick with him. Essentially, I share his views. I do not think that it is fair, right or productive. The letter that presumably went to everybody in the House was mostly convincing. I have no problem with the case for reform or the desire to cut the costs. I have no problem with the desire to encourage people to collaborate voluntarily. What I have a problem with is that I do not think that those general points connect to the conclusion that my noble and learned friend’s amendment is wrong. I shall vote for it if he decides to press it, following what has been said. It is a simple position. I will not rehearse his arguments or seek to elaborate them. I shall make only one other point which relates to the 13-month review. I am in favour of a review, but the case for reviewing it after experience is stronger on the basis put by my noble and learned friend than on the basis put by my noble friend the Minister. If there is evidence that it is discouraging sensible, voluntary arrangements in the interests of children, we can look at it again then. I do not believe that it will—and this would need to be shown before we changed from the basic, fundamental proposition that it is not right, fair or just for a parent with care to have money deducted on these grounds from the money paid for her children.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
734 c1093-4 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Codes of practice Devolved matters Childcare Appeals Benefits rules Employment Fees and charges Education Domestic abuse Local government Overpayments Mental illness Maintenance Northern Ireland Parents Poverty Lone parents Scotland Social security benefits Social Fund Registration Welfare tax credits Standards Training Wales Telephone services Universal credit Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission
Legislation
Welfare Reform Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk