Welfare Reform Bill

moved Amendment No. 5: 5: Clause 2, page 2, line 27, leave out paragraph (a) The noble Lord said: I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 8, 11, 19, 22 and 25. As I and the noble Lords, Lord Addington and Lord Oakeshott, explained earlier, all today’s amendments are probing amendments. I have tabled my amendments for the reason given earlier by the noble Lords, which is to explore the Government’s thinking behind the low level of benefit given during the assessment phase. We have already established that migrating claimants from IB will not have to go through13 weeks of assessment on the low benefit rate because we have been given assurances that migrating to ESA will not reduce the income of those already claiming benefit. That is obviously sensible: a person moving from long-term higher level IB to the support group from ESA would be justified in objecting to a significant drop in benefit for that amount of time. Given the justification for maintaining the benefit level for migrants over the assessment phase and the current practice of backdating incapacity benefit to the date of claim, can the Government tell us what has prompted this innovation? I cannot think of any reason except to save money. This cost-cutting measure could cause significant hardship to those whose disability leads to costs that non-disabled unemployed claimants do not have to meet. The current system allows any debts caused by the discrepancy between the benefit received while being assessed and the costs of living to be met with the backdated funds once the claim is successful. My reading of case study 1 in the Explanatory Notes on the regulations is that people will be able to apply for ESA while they are still being paid statutory sick pay. Can the Minister confirm that that is correct? That would go some considerable way to ensuring that disabled people did not have to undergo such a considerable period of restricted benefit. The income from their sick pay would then support them until the support or work-related component kicked in to provide a supplement to the basic allowance. Also, given that SSP lasts for six months, is there any bar on that benefit and ESA both being in payment other than, naturally, the usual total income rules? I also probe why the Government have decided that 13 weeks should be both the minimum and maximum period of assessment. What exactly is magic about13 weeks? How was that period chosen? I accept that time is taken in assessing the individual and, originally, in putting the claim through the system, but the fact remains that in many quarters 13 weeks looks like an awfully long time. Having said that, a guaranteed date to which benefit is back-dated once the assessment is complete is only sensible. However, a minimum length will give rise to the extraordinary situation of completed assessments being embargoed. Do the Government intend to keep claimants in suspense for the whole 13 weeks? I certainly hope not as I am advised that with mentally ill people suspense can lead to stress, then depression—a vicious downward spiral that we should all hope to avoid or, at the very least, keep to a minimum. But perhaps the Government intend that those whose claims have been rejected will move on to JSA, with its accompanying support, as soon as it becomes clear that they will not be eligible for ESA. The Government have already conceded that with many assessments the conclusion will be only too evident. They have explained that those who are too ill or disabled to undergo a face-to-face interview will be moved to the support group on the basis of paper evidence—for example, from their doctor. Are the Government really planning to say that, although they understand that someone is unable to undergo an interview, he must still wait a full 13 weeks before collecting his benefit? I am sure that the Minister will be quick to reassure me that many of these concerns are the result of a misunderstanding of the Government’s intentions—a favourite word that he used in responding to me and to us all the other day. I look forward to his clarification. I beg to move.