Skip to main content

1-20 of 135 results for subject:Misuse

Year X
2009
Subject X
Social Security Advisory Committee

Type

House

Session

Month

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More
Social Security Advisory Committee (135)

Publisher


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

The noble Baroness has used the word "should" twice. The question is: exactly what happens?

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c489GC
House
House of Lords

It should be mentioned in a work-focused interview.

Member
Baroness Crawley (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c489GC
House
House of Lords

When does the access to work fund get mentioned to the claimant? At what point would that be mentioned?

Member
Baroness Thomas of Winchester (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c489GC
House
House of Lords

Yes, that is the process. Crucially, this assessment identifies the specific support required to undertake a particular role. Given this, we believe the amendment is impractical because it is impossible to determine what reasonable adjustment someone might need until you know what job they are going to do. The amendment...

Member
Baroness Crawley (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c489-90GC
House
House of Lords

Schedule 2: Abolition of income support: consequential amendments Amendment 84 84: Schedule 2, page 68, line 32, leave out paragraph 9 Amendment 84 agreed. Schedule 2, as amended, agreed. Clause 8 : Power to direct claimant to undertake specific work-related activity Amendments 85 to 93 not moved. Clause 8 agreed.

Member
Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c483GC
House
House of Lords

I thank my noble friend Lady Turner for her amendment, which gives me another opportunity to provide some reassurance—I hope—on issues on which, I acknowledge from what she and other noble Lords have said, they have had a lot of correspondence. On the issue about reference and engagement of the...

Member
Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c480-2GC
House
House of Lords

I apologise for coming in late and missing some of the opening speeches. For me, the amendment gets it the wrong way around. Can my noble friend tell us, or perhaps write, which fund, if any, the personal adviser could use to attach to somebody who is on or has...

Member
Baroness Hollis of Heigham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c493GC
House
House of Lords

I would be happy to write to the noble Baroness on that. As I originally said, our assessment of the cost of the amendment is serious money: £750 million.

Member
Baroness Crawley (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c493GC
House
House of Lords

Yes, we take that very seriously; I am sure that a meeting can be arranged. The noble Baroness, Lady Thomas, referred to the letter in the Guardian, which I have not seen, and talked about schizophrenia and being bipolar—they are mentioned the letter. She asked whether that would be in...

Member
Baroness Crawley (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c492GC
House
House of Lords

I wonder if my noble friend Lord Rea will allow me to be his friendly neighbourhood psychiatrist. I must confess that whenever I am inundated by hundreds of briefing notes, a little bit of me feels that they must be wrong. There is a little corner of me that is...

Member
Baroness Murphy (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c505-6GC
House
House of Lords

No, and I am sure that we will discover from the Minister’s answer to the debate whether that is a job adviser or anyone else within the jobcentre. I rather doubt it, but we will discover, won’t we? The specific matter of propensity raised in these amendments begs the question:...

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c508-9GC
House
House of Lords

I am very eager to support my noble friend’s amendment. I know next to nothing about drug addiction. The noble Lord will be pleased to hear that I am not going to speak at length about it. The alarm bells were set ringing when the noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, mentioned...

Member
Countess of Mar (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c505GC
House
House of Lords

My noble friend Lord Dubs has asked me to talk to the stand part debate because he cannot be here this afternoon. It was tabled at the suggestion of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, of which he is of course a member. The usual reason for tabling a stand...

Member
Lord Rea (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c503-4GC
House
House of Lords

I thank the Minister for that reply, and particularly thank the noble Baroness, Lady Campbell, for her speech, which was extremely interesting. It was so detailed, and she knew exactly what I was talking about. The noble Lord, Lord Taylor, has broken his duck for today, and I am glad...

Member
Baroness Thomas of Winchester (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c539GC
House
House of Lords

I am certainly happy to see whether we can reconsider the drafting to address that point more specifically. I understand the issue that is being raised.

Member
Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c534GC
House
House of Lords

I was just coming to that very point. Amendments 101 and 102 focus on this particular power. Amendment 101 removes it entirely, and Amendment 102 exempts health and social care workers from its scope. Both amendments would prevent the use I have just described. We also intend to use this...

Member
Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c530GC
House
House of Lords

It is very much to cover the circumstances that the noble Baroness identified. If somebody has come into Jobcentre Plus, been asked about drug dependency and has answered that they have none, but the flows of information from the police suggest otherwise, having that information available to Jobcentre Plus is...

Member
Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c531GC
House
House of Lords

I am happy to deal with that point and I promise that I shall come to it shortly. We do not intend to use the power to authorise the supply of information obtained by persons in the course of providing treatment, counselling or care to claimants. For example, the power...

Member
Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c531GC
House
House of Lords

It cannot be the Bill team. You should never blame officials. Clause 13 disagreed.

Member
Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c540GC
House
House of Lords

The Bill team tell me that it was their fault. They seem to be falling on their sword.

Member
Baroness Crawley (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 June 2009
Reference
711 c540GC
House
House of Lords