Welfare Reform Bill

My Lords, I added my name to this amendment and intimated to the Clerks and to the previous Chairman that I wished to move this amendment. It is unfortunate that my noble and assiduous friend Lord Kirkwood—he is a friend—did not seek to move it. He has drafted it very well and I shall speak to it briefly because I know we have a very important amendment in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, and, indeed, many other important amendments coming up. But this amendment allows us to discuss at an early stage the implications of devolution in relation to the Bill. It also gives me an opportunity to raise an issue about devolution that applies to other Bills as well. Indeed, a lot of what I am saying about this Bill applies to them. Unfortunately, because of devolution, we have had less consideration of Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish business here in the United Kingdom Parliament. That has had some unfortunate consequences in Scotland that are causing political difficulties for some of us. It has now gone too far because the United Kingdom is still responsible for about half the identifiable public expenditure in Scotland, including welfare benefits, and for about half the legislation affecting Scotland, including this Welfare Bill. Yet we seldom discuss the implications for the devolved authorities because they have different arrangements for dealing with certain things, and I want briefly to mention one or two of them. There is a mistaken view—I heard it from the noble Lord, Lord Butler, earlier today in a Question on the Floor of the House—that we effectively almost have independence for Scotland rather than devolution, and devolution is a very different thing. We are still the United Kingdom Parliament. We are ultimately responsible for everything that happens in the United Kingdom, and the devolved Parliaments are subsidiary Parliaments to this United Kingdom Parliament. This legislation has a massive effect in Scotland, as well as in Wales and Northern Ireland, and it is often different because of the different regimes. It is right for us to give the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly and the Northern Ireland Assembly their appropriate place in consideration of this matter. Yesterday, there was by fortuitous chance a debate on this Welfare Bill in the Chamber of the Scottish Parliament. I want to illustrate the effect that the Bill will have in Scotland, and there is no better way than quoting a speech made yesterday by my successor as a Lothian list MSP in the Scottish Parliament, Kezia Dugdale. She referred to a meeting that had taken place of the cross-party group dealing with welfare with Action for Children Scotland, One Parent Families Scotland and Children in Scotland. Of course, I accept that the majority of issues that they raised were similar to the ones raised by bodies in England or in the United Kingdom as a whole, but there were two peculiarly Scottish issues. Kezia Dugdale said: "““The Scottish Child Law centre also made an interesting point. It highlighted the possible impact of the reforms on the minute of agreement for separating couples, which is unique to Scotland””." I do not know whether the Minister or his officials—and he has a bevy of officials behind him, as always—have even thought about the impact of the minute of agreement for separating couples. "““It is a formal, signed agreement on the division of assets and custody. The bill seems to threaten it””." Kezia Dugdale said that the second specifically Scottish dimension is that, "““the bill requires the new child maintenance system to be implemented through sure start centres””." They do not exist in Scotland. There are no Sure Start Centres in Scotland, therefore the Scottish Government will have to come up with an alternative way of dealing with implementation. I do not know whether the Minister and his officials have thought about that or what discussion they have had with the Scottish Executive in relation to that. Those are just two specific examples. I think that the Scottish Government need a bit of a stimulus to consider some of these implications. Again, I quote from Kezia Dugdale in the debate yesterday: "““In June, I lodged a parliamentary question to ask whether any work was being done to assess the impact of the changes on child maintenance. In her answer, Roseanna Cunningham said that no work had been done. I then wrote to her to ask whether she would model the impact on Scotland to decide what could be done to address it. She wrote back saying that she had no plans to model the impact of the changes.""What does that tell us? I suggest that it tells us that the Scottish Government is taking a very relaxed, perhaps even complacent, approach to the distinct areas that it has the power to address now. That view is shared by One Parent Families Scotland, which was, in its words ‘very disappointed’ with the response that Roseanna Cunningham gave me, which, naturally, I shared with it””." By consulting formally on a number of occasions and in a number of ways—of course, this amendment deals with a particular consultation at a particular time in a particular way, but I want to mention all the consultations that should take place right now—it might activate their interest and shake them out of their complacency so that they look at the peculiar implications in relation to Scotland. Finally, yesterday my noble friend Lady Healy kindly gave me the submission from the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities—COSLA—which I had not seen. COSLA highlighted another impact which is different in Scotland. I quote from its submission: "““After 10 years of devolution the Scottish legislative framework and duties on Scotland’s local authorities are very different to England. Scottish local authorities are working towards the 2012 statutory duty that all unintentionally homeless households will be offered settled accommodation. Direct payments, alongside ""other housing benefit changes, such as the extension of the shared room rate and under occupancy, may jeopardise councils’ ability to meet the 2012 homelessness target””." Again, there is a difference in Scotland. Consultation with the devolved authorities is essential not just in the context of the amendment drafted by my noble friend Lord Kirkwood, but in the context of every aspect of this Bill. I want to know from the Minister what consultation has already been undertaken with the authorities in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and what consultation with them is planned. The amendment provides a peg to ask those questions, for us to discuss this issue and, I hope, for us to get some answers from the Minister. I beg to move.