Skip to main content

1-20 of 725 results for subject:Unemployment

Legislation X
Welfare Reform Bill 2008-09

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

More

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Welfare Reform Bill 2008-09 (725)
More

Subject

More

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

I agree that the role of Jobcentre Plus should be to help with that process, but I will write specifically to the noble Baroness. Perhaps she could exchange with me some of the detail that prompted her inquiry; I shall certainly take it up. I understand the sentiment behind the...

Member
Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c191-2GC
House
House of Lords

Indeed. I believe that that will be the case and if it is not—if the noble Lord would prompt me on it—I will make sure that he gets the detailed figures. Apart from new staff being recruited, 2,000 staff have been redeployed from within Jobcentre Plus to deal with the...

Member
Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c191GC
House
House of Lords

I am grateful to the noble Baroness. I was thinking that a member of staff from a jobcentre could, for example, read the local paper. The information is available, but not necessarily to the client at the time when he wants it. The noble Baroness has made a valuable suggestion.

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c190GC
House
House of Lords

Having listened to the Minister’s exposition of the position, I was only going to say that of course we all understand entirely what he said—but it might not necessarily be wholly comprehensible to the ordinary jobseeker. That seems very bad PR. If our advisers are trying to be jobseekers’ friends,...

Member
Lord Northbourne (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c178GC
House
House of Lords

I am grateful to my noble friend, as ever, for her explanation of her engagement in this at an earlier stage. In February 2004 the DWP published an independent evaluation of the community sentences on withdrawal-of-benefit pilots. The evaluation highlighted a small increase in the number of people who complied...

Member
Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c181GC
House
House of Lords

The phrase "buckets of salt" comes to mind. With that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 24 withdrawn.

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c178GC
House
House of Lords

Unlike with local housing allowance, there has been a fairly prompt evaluation of this pilot. I note that the Minister said that it did not appear to make much difference and, in any case, that it was not cost-effective. That is a very good reason for not pursuing it. We...

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c179GC
House
House of Lords

I shall speak also to the other government amendments in this group. In 2001, the Government introduced a pilot scheme in four areas to apply a benefit sanction to those found to be in breach of their community orders. The pilot covers Derbyshire, Hertfordshire, Teesside and the West Midlands and...

Member
Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c178-9GC
House
House of Lords

I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, on this amendment, which gives us the chance to discuss whether all Jobcentre Plus offices around the country will have enough high-quality trained staff properly to manage "work for your benefit" schemes. As the noble Lord said, the Minister has kindly provided us...

Member
Baroness Thomas of Winchester (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c184-5GC
House
House of Lords

Amendment 26 26: Clause 1, page 4, line 16, at end insert— "( ) No provisions in this section shall come into effect unless the Secretary of State is satisfied with the readiness of job centres to manage "work for your benefit" schemes."

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c182GC
House
House of Lords

What I think the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood—I am putting words into his mouth now—and I would require is a timetable, not least a timetable between the decision to end the pilots and the finish of the independent evaluation, showing how long it took. As the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood,...

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c182GC
House
House of Lords

The noble Lord is quite right; my terminology was wrong. Clause 1 is indeed about welfare to work, which, as we all know, involves contractors and, as I think we all know, subcontractors. Someone is going to have to monitor all this. As the contractors in the pilots will be...

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c193GC
House
House of Lords

Rather like the Government never apologising for either inflation or, as we have now, deflation, I do not apologise for conflation. The whole point of what I was trying to say, and I was very ably backed by virtually all noble Lords—not quite all since the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis,...

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c192GC
House
House of Lords

Can the noble Lord explain the word "moderately"?

Member
Baroness Hollis of Heigham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c192GC
House
House of Lords

We have had two and a half days on Clause 1 and there are still questions to be asked, as both the noble Baroness, Lady Afshar, and the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, have pointed out. I have said I do not know how many times during those two and a...

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c196-7GC
House
House of Lords

I thank the noble Lord for his suggestion. I suggest that pilots should also include densely populated minority areas, which still lack most facilities.

Member
Baroness Afshar (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c196GC
House
House of Lords

Of course, the centre of the DWP is not dysfunctional, which I accused the individual jobcentres of being. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 26 withdrawn.

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c193GC
House
House of Lords

Cap that. I support the rationale behind the noble Baroness’s amendments; indeed, as the Committee will note, I have added my name to Amendment 42. They would ensure that the participant was given a fair and reasonable chance to prove himself to have good cause for failing to uphold his...

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c224-5GC
House
House of Lords

I need to check volumes and practicalities on this. I shall do that and revert to noble Lords specifically on that point. I am not sure about the percentage of people, unemployed or otherwise, who have access to a telephone. Perhaps I can get some data on that as well....

Member
Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c226GC
House
House of Lords

If the claimant cannot speak English well enough to understand what is being said, would it be possible at that point to have some kind of interpretation.

Member
Baroness Thomas of Winchester (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 June 2009
Reference
711 c226GC
House
House of Lords