My Lords, it most certainly was not my intention to intervene or interfere with the underlying principle of the Bill, which as I have said on numerous occasions I agree with as far as policy goes. However, from all the amendments there are clearly matters of detail about which I am, shall we say, suspicious.
One thing I do not want is to undermine the key principle of the Bill—that only the most severely disabled and those in their last few months of life should go into the support group. For the others, the ability to function—perhaps for the next few weeks or months—is what matters. Earlier in our proceedings, I got the comfort that I wanted from the Minister; namely, that if they were unable to function for whatever reason—chemotherapy or anything else—they would not be expected to undertake work-related activity. I am most comforted by what the Minister has just said. I doubt that I will have to come back to this matter at the next stage of the Bill but I am afraid that, if on reflection I decide that I ought to, I will. With that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 8 [Limited capability for work]:
[Amendments Nos. 7 and 8 not moved.]
Welfare Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Skelmersdale
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 19 March 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Welfare Reform Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
690 c1030 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:55:36 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_386007
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_386007
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_386007