I think that that gives me half marks probably; that is, for tabling an amendment in the first place, but not for getting the wording right. It would be unfair—I have been unfair enough to the noble Baroness today—to ask her what is wrong with the way in which I have phrased this amendment, so I will not do it. Needless to say I am very pleased, as your Lordships’ Delegated Powers Committee will be, that the noble Baroness has accepted this amendment in principle.
I note of course that the Government is wont to accept the committee’s points even when, as I have pointed out twice now, in my view it is wrong. I refer to the statutory instrument abolishing income support and whether this is to be negative, as it is in the Bill, or affirmative, as the committee recommended. Quite clearly, from what we have heard on previous days, this is now to be affirmative. However, does this bode well for the report of your Lordships’ Committee on the Constitution, so ably chaired by my noble friend Lord Goodlad, which we discussed on Thursday? We will have to await the government amendments on Report, or perhaps discussions over the summer, to find out. In the mean time, I am delighted by the noble Baroness’s response and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment 178E withdrawn.
Schedule 6 agreed.
Clauses 47 and 48 agreed.
Welfare Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Skelmersdale
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 7 July 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Welfare Reform Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
712 c197GC 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:54:08 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_575060
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_575060
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_575060