Welfare Reform Bill

I thank the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, for his amendments to Schedule 1. Earlier in Committee, I outlined how Clause 3 deals with the entitlement conditions for JSA as set out in the Jobseeker’s Act 1995 and paves the way for a major simplification of the benefits system by enabling JSA to take on the role currently performed by income support. Schedule 1 contains a number of further amendments to the Jobseeker’s Act and it is worth saying at this point that the provisions within it are not new. The schedule amends and updates existing legislation to enable the introduction of the modified JSA regime and to ensure that a consistent approach is taken across benefits. Some of the amendments in Schedule 1 simply restate the existing rules for jobseekers, while most carry forward into JSA the system of conditionality and support established by Clause 2 for people on income support in the progression-to-work group, such as lone parents. Paragraph 2 of the schedule removes the requirement for JSA claimants who are not subject to the jobseeking conditions to attend interviews and provide evidence about their jobseeking activity. Claimants who are available for work would normally be required to attend fortnightly interviews at their local Jobcentre Plus office in order to provide information and evidence of their availability for employment and active job search, often referred to as signing-on. When we proposed moving people from income support to the modified form of JSA we recognised that it would be inappropriate for people who were on income support, who are not expected to be available for and actively seeking work, to be subject to the same conditionality as jobseekers. There was certainly no intention to require them to look for work or to sign on in the same way as current jobseekers. This paragraph makes it clear that the signing-on provisions do not apply to people on the modified regime, and I hope the Committee will agree that this is a sensible approach to take. The provisions in new Section 11B of the Jobseekers Act, to which the second amendment refers, repeat the wording of existing provisions in the Social Security Administration Act in relation to work-focused interviews. In doing this, we have aimed to maintain consistency of legislation across the benefits system. For people in receipt of more than one benefit, these provisions ensure that we set out in regulations which benefits can be subject to a sanction for not attending a work-focused interview and the extent of any such sanction. The amendment would remove that important transparency for our customers, which I do not believe was the noble Lord’s intention. I turn briefly to Amendment 76A. I can understand why the paragraph of Schedule 1 to which it refers may seem odd. There has always been a provision in the Jobseekers Act that enables prescribed groups to be exempt from the jobseeking conditions. It was drafted on the basis that everyone on JSA would be required to look for work, and it is used in limited circumstances when jobseekers attend training courses and are therefore not expected to sign on or actively to seek work. Paragraph 23(3) of Schedule 1 to the Bill amends this provision so that the current arrangements can continue as now for people who would normally be subject to the jobseeking conditions, while making it clear that the regulations will apply only to people who are not otherwise entitled to JSA, in particular under the new arrangements for groups currently on income support. That is why it provides that regulations may prescribe circumstances where income-related JSA can be available to a person without needing to meet the jobseeking conditions if they would not otherwise be entitled to benefit. This is very much a detailed point, but the key thing is that the new provisions will help ensure that all groups that should be claiming JSA can be catered for under the new arrangements as seamlessly as possible. Several additional points were raised in connection with the amendments and otherwise. The noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, referred to the letter to which he referred on the previous day in Committee. He is right that a group information system is not a work-focused interview. One work-focused interview will usually follow a group information session. It is therefore not mandatory to attend a group session and action to impose a sanction cannot be taken for failing to attend. The noble Lord asked about work-focused interviews for parents with young children. The work-focused interview should operate at the point of first claim, then at six months and one year. That is the only conditionality for parents whose youngest child is below the age of one. The noble Lord asked what is the purpose of work-focused interviews. It is as an opportunity to explain to our customers the journey that they may be required to undertake in future, to explain the functions of Jobcentre Plus, to explain issues around work and skills and, generally, to be a keeping-in-touch opportunity for people who would otherwise not necessarily be focused on the labour market. The noble Lord asked about the IB to ESA migration timescale. The plan, which we previously discussed, is for all claimants on incapacity benefits to be transferred between 2010 and 2013 but, as ever, we are keeping the issues under review and the final timetable has not been determined. I hope that deals with the points the noble Lord raised and that he will feel able to withdraw his amendment.