Welfare Reform Bill

Amendment 74A seeks to include those who have left home due to domestic violence in the definition of those who fall into the Clause 3 category of those entitled to jobseeker’s allowance without seeking employment. The exclusion from the need to seek employment would last for three months. The reason why I am moving this amendment and not the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy of the Shaws, is that she thought that she might be detained in court when this amendment came up. Happily, she has managed to be here—but that is why I am taking the liberty of moving this amendment from these Benches. The amendment uses the same definition of domestic violence as that used in the Income Support (General) Regulations 1987, which allows a claimant in this situation to claim housing costs even though he is not resident in the home. So we are not reinventing the wheel. In 2008, research conducted by Gingerbread and Family Action examined the financial impact of domestic violence on women and found that it had a profound effect on women's ability to participate in employment, both while they were in a violent relationship and after they had left. Not only did it severely dent their confidence, but the very prospect of employment raised safety issues around their former partners knowing their whereabouts. Women fleeing domestic violence have also to be rehoused and resettled, often in temporary accommodation or refuges, which leads to significant disruption of their lives. Reading the Report and Third Reading stages of the Bill in another place, the then Secretary of State, Mr. James Purnell, whom I seem to keep quoting, assured the Opposition spokesman that there would be three months' grace during which a woman who is housed in a refuge following domestic violence will not be required to work in order to qualify for JSA. How will that be taken forward? Will the Minister put down his own amendment? Will this be spelt out in regulations or simply be in guidance? I understand that at present Jobcentre Plus has the discretion to grant up to two months’ respite for women in a situation of domestic emergency to look for work. There is also a suggestion that that could be extended to three months. However, we are looking for clarity and commitment for women who are specifically fleeing domestic violence. Why should they rely on the discretion of a decision-making Jobcentre Plus in such an important area of policy? In Grand Committee, we have discovered that decision-makers do not always get these things right. Sometimes, they may even say that black is white. When the Opposition spokesman asked about the three months’ grace, the former Secretary of State said that he could definitely give that assurance, which sounds to me like a firm promise of action. We want statutory protection for these women. I hope that however this promise is taken forward, it will extend to women who are not just in refuges following domestic violence but who might be elsewhere—perhaps with a family member or friends. I beg to move.