UK Parliament / Open data

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.
My Lords, as the Minister said, these are extremely technical amendments. Perhaps he would care to look at paragraph 11 of Schedule 4. I have done a little analysis of Amendments Nos. 71 to 78, which totally redraft the paragraph from the beginning of line 5 to the end of line 15. I note that the amendments would insert the words ““an award of”” three times, in sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c). Surely it would be more appropriate for Amendment No. 71 to alter line 5 to state, "““‘existing award’ means an award of””," followed by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c). This would save six words on the statute book. We all try at all times to limit the statute book to the purposes for which the various Acts of Parliament are designed. I would have no complaint if the Minister decided to remove at Third Reading the whole of paragraph 11 and show us a Keeling schedule, which would make life a lot simpler. I agree with Amendments Nos. 52 to 56, but I am confused by Amendment No. 57. Why does income support suddenly appear? Amendment No. 58 relates to migration. I have covered the other amendments, except for Amendment No. 69. That amendment will leave out sub-paragraph (4), which defines ““existing award””, from paragraph 7 of Schedule 4. Why is this necessary?

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

690 c1098 

Session

2006-07

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top