My Lords, not really. This is a prime area in which we have automaticity without any payment system. This is one of the areas where we are very vulnerable so it makes enormous sense to look at it now and as it comes up. Therefore, I would not agree with that point. Shall I rattle along?
Amendment 46 would create considerable and unwanted uncertainty for claimants and operational difficulties for the department. A claimant would need to claim ESA and go through the assessment phase without any entitlement to ESA at all until the question of limited capability for work-related activity was determined at their WCA. This is because, under Amendment 46, only claimants who were found to have limited capability for work-related activity at the end of the assessment phase would be entitled to ESA on the grounds of youth. As I have already said, the amendment would save rather less—£17 million until 2016-17. The discrepancy is in the SAR, which is covered by a very similar amendment, to pick up the point of the noble Baroness, Lady Lister.
I confirm that the Government see Amendment 46 as linked to Amendment 36A, but none of the amendments in this group is consequential on any other. We would expect the House to make a decision on each individually. In due course I will move the amendment in my name, Amendment 45A, and I urge noble Lords not to press theirs.
Welfare Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Freud
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 11 January 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Welfare Reform Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
734 c146 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 14:50:07 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_799185
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_799185
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_799185