I say to my noble friend Lady Hollis, who, as ever, expresses the dilemma very well and very clearly, that the regulations which will flow, whether or not they are embedded in whole or in part in the Bill, will set out non-exhaustive circumstances. At the moment there is, and will continue to be, flexibility for the decision-maker to take account of considerations which are not specified in the regulations. I am sure that we would all support that. At the end of the day, the test of reasonableness is a common-law test in which all considerations relevant to the decision need to be balanced in coming to a sensible judgment. That is not unique to these circumstances and I readily accept, at least at the margins, that it is difficult. Ultimately, judgments will need to be made. From applying these kinds of considerations currently, I am not aware that there is a whole host of considerations which arise where there is a challenge and the appeals process is engaged, but I will go back on some data to try to get a handle on the scale of these issues. It is a dilemma but at the end of the day there is a tried and tested process which, overwhelmingly, meets the requirements both of Jobcentre Plus but also of individuals.
Welfare Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord McKenzie of Luton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 11 June 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Welfare Reform Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
711 c132-3GC 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:11:48 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_565970
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_565970
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_565970