I fail to understand why the Opposition think that bringing an increase—or half of it, say—forward for a year, and paying it for a year, can turn out to be a cut. It means that people will receive an increase that they would have received anyway—or part of that increase—a year in advance, when they need it most. How, according to any lexicon, can that be portrayed as a cut?
Social Security
Proceeding contribution from
Angela Eagle
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 1 March 2010.
It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Social Security.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
506 c755 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 19:59:57 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_625127
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_625127
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_625127