My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister if he is saying that what is being contemplated in effect replicates what currently exists. When an appeal is outstanding, the assessment period rate, which I think is the JSA rate, applies. If that is what is going to be replicated in the new world, I understand that and can see that the article was misleading on that basis. Broader questions are raised, however, given that there is going to be a universal credit, components of which would in due course be held back during an appeal. If we are talking just about the work-related activity equivalent components, I can understand parity with the existing situation, but obviously other components will go into that, including housing issues. However, I am happy to leave that debate for when we reach Clauses 99 and 100, supposing that we do reach them at some stage in our deliberations. I think the Minister has dealt fairly with the principal concern that the article generated, and I beg leave to withdraw.
Amendment 34ZA withdrawn.
Amendment 34A
Moved by
Welfare Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord McKenzie of Luton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 18 October 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Welfare Reform Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
731 c53GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 21:07:36 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_774426
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_774426
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_774426