moved Amendment No. 87:
87: After Clause 48, insert the following new Clause—
““Social Security Advisory Committee
Social Security Advisory Committee: remit
In section 173 of the Social Security Administration Act 1992 (cases in which consultation is not required) subsection (5) ceases to have effect.””
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I shall also speak to Amendment No. 88. Both amendments concern the remit of the Social Security Advisory Committee. Under the Social Security Administration Act 1992, draft regulations made within six months of the parent Act need not be referred to the Social Security Advisory Committee. That means that the Secretary of State and Parliament are denied the expertise of that committee when considering such regulations in draft form because many of them are, by necessity, made within six months of the parent Act’s coming into effect. Parliament and, I should have thought, the Secretary of State would find such expert views extremely helpful at a critical stage when a new benefit scheme is being set up. Professor Hazel Genn’s quinquennial review of the Social Security Advisory Committee recommended that this rule be abolished. In its 19th report, the SSAC stated that it was still working with the department on the implementation of the recommended strengthening of its role in relation to regulations laid within six months of an Act coming into force and that it is able to offer informal comments and advice, presumably to the Secretary of State. However, that does not mean that a report is published for Parliament to see.
Amendment No. 88 relates to the fact that the SSAC’s remit used to cover guardian’s allowance and child benefit before the administrative functions in respect of those social security benefits were transferred under the Tax Credits Act 2002 to what is now Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. The amendment would remedy this. Since 2002, this valuable committee has not been able to report to Parliament on draft regulations relating to child benefit and guardian’s allowance before they pass into law. I understand that under a memorandum of understanding HMRC may seek advice from the committee but it must remain confidential. Although we would like to see all benefits administered by HMRC brought within the remit of the SSAC, we recognise that the long title of the Bill permits amendments to be made concerning child benefits and guardian’s allowance only.
The Work and Pensions Select Committee and Professor Hazel Genn’s report recommended extending the remit of the SSAC. Can the Minister tell the House why the Government do not think it would be appropriate to extend the SSAC’s statutory remit in the way suggested? It would greatly help both Houses of Parliament to scrutinise effectively important delegated legislation in this field before agreeing to it. We should not let this legislative opportunity go by without trying to change the remit of this important committee. I beg to move.
Welfare Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Thomas of Winchester
(Liberal Democrat)
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 c1126-7 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:55:51 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_386157
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_386157
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_386157