Welfare Reform Bill

I strongly support what has been said by the noble Lord, Lord Goodlad. I apologise to him and to noble Lords for not being here at the commencement of his speech. These amendments raise an issue of profound constitutional importance. As the Constitution Committee, of which I am a member, has pointed out, the Executive is acquiring ever more frequently powers to impose sanctions on citizens and punish them without having to take matters before the court. I take the view that it is no answer to the taking of those powers that a right of appeal to a court against the imposition of the sanction is given, not least because some people who are the subject of these powers, whose passports are taken away from them, may be deterred from appealing to the court by the exercise of the administrative sanction. They may be deterred by the cost, the inconvenience and, perhaps most importantly, by the formality of the exercise of an administrative sanction against them. Why is this power needed at all? Is it simply a matter of administrative convenience, as I suspect? If there is some more deep-rooted issue behind it, what is it? Why is it not, as in times gone by, enough that the state has a power to go to a court or a tribunal to seek the sanction against the individual? That would not be expensive, difficult or time-consuming, or involve any deterrent to the state with all the resources it has available to it. This is a matter of profound constitutional importance. I ask the Government to think again about it.