Welfare Reform Bill

I have very little to add to what the noble Lords, Lord Goodlad and Lord Pannick, have said, except to support the amendments most strongly. My noble friend Lord Kirkwood, who much regrets that he cannot be here this afternoon, likened the noble Lord, Lord Goodlad, to a cavalry charging over a hill into the government ranks. His Constitution Committee has produced an admirably succinct and unequivocal report, which poses the central question to this part of the Bill—whether the power of sanctions is one that the Executive rather than a court should be allowed to exercise. We agree strongly with the Constitution Committee’s answer to that. Perhaps I might quote the comments of the noble Lord, Lord Goodlad from last year, when the Minister changed his mind and agreed with the Constitution Committee. He said, and his words were prophetic: ""I note that he reserves the right to come back with future legislation and, of course, no Parliament can bind its successors. We will scrutinise any proposals that come forward pursuant to that intention with the same rigour".—[Official Report, 13/5/08; col. 964.]" He then supported the amendment, which of course changed the position. Now that it has come back, I expect that the Minister will say that it is because of the number of payments that are still not coming forward. However, that does not make it right, and we strongly support the amendments coming from the Constitution Committee.