This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/blog/2012/feb/01/welfare-benefits

The article has changed 16 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 4 Version 5
Welfare reform bill - benefit cap Commons live debate Welfare reform bill - benefit cap Commons live debate
(40 minutes later)
2.17pm: Labour MP Kerry McCarthy tweets a handy guide to this afternoon's welfare reform bill agenda in the Commons (@KerryMP):
Speaker's selection of amendments for #wrb. Employment Support Allowance till 2.30, benefit cap till 5pm, remaining amdts till 7pm.
She adds:
So that means votes c.2.30pm, 5pm and 7pm btw. Very little time for debate in between.
2.08pm: I'm grateful to @3pSteve for directing me to the Scottish government's report into the impact of the social housing "underoccupation" clause of the welfare reform bill north of the border.
In summary it states:
S[cottish] G[overnment] analysts estimate that 95,000 households in the social rented sector in Scotland could be affected by the measure to penalise under-occupancy of the social housing stock, losing on average between £27 and £65 per month, (removing over £50 million a year directly from the Scottish Economy) if there is no reaction.
It adds:
In summary, analysis shows that the main clause represents poor value for money with a negative overall impact at the UK level from the measure in Scotland.
It conlcudes that the Lords amendment - which the government intend to reverse would mitigate some of that impact:
The Lords amendment, whilst still imposing costs on Scotland and causing practical and policy issues, does result in a positive overall outcome at the UK level from the Scottish component of the change, and is clearly superior on economic grounds.
1.57pm: Lots of support on Twitter for Dame Anne Begg's intervention against MPs who implied that disabled claimants were making a "lifestyle choice":
@Suey2y tweets:
Brilliant @annebegg Having to point out 2 Gov what disability benefits r actually FOR!! It's disgraceful really awful. #wrb #spartacusreport
@TonyCowin tweets
BRILLIANT Anne Begg separating the COST of being disabled from the income to actually have a life.
1.47pm: Dame Anne Begg, a Labour MP criticises opposition MPs for implying that sick and disabled people on benefits are "making a lifestyle choice."1.47pm: Dame Anne Begg, a Labour MP criticises opposition MPs for implying that sick and disabled people on benefits are "making a lifestyle choice."
A Northern Ireland MP - I'm sorry I don't know who - points out that the bill punishes those people who have made the right "lifestyle choice" - who have saved, or who have paid into national insurance expecting it would pay out if they fell ill.A Northern Ireland MP - I'm sorry I don't know who - points out that the bill punishes those people who have made the right "lifestyle choice" - who have saved, or who have paid into national insurance expecting it would pay out if they fell ill.
1.41pm: An interesting contribution below the line on how the government chooses to present its welfare reform policies to different people in different ways Hunterkiller:1.41pm: An interesting contribution below the line on how the government chooses to present its welfare reform policies to different people in different ways Hunterkiller:
It's interesting the way the government shift back and forth between two differing stories. Sometimes it's about cutting the deficit, other times it's about making work pay or 'retargeting resources at those who need it most.' What argument they pitch seems to come down to which audience they are pitching this mess at.It's interesting the way the government shift back and forth between two differing stories. Sometimes it's about cutting the deficit, other times it's about making work pay or 'retargeting resources at those who need it most.' What argument they pitch seems to come down to which audience they are pitching this mess at.
When they're trying to sell it to the public, notice how they always emphasise the deficit and how the country cannot afford. In a sense, always trying to appeal to people's fear of the financial crisis.When they're trying to sell it to the public, notice how they always emphasise the deficit and how the country cannot afford. In a sense, always trying to appeal to people's fear of the financial crisis.
Yet come to the house of lords or interacting with the people likely to be affected, and generally it's all about supporting those who need it most, making incentives for those not in work and retargeting what resources they haven't taken a poleaxe to towards the deserving disabled.Yet come to the house of lords or interacting with the people likely to be affected, and generally it's all about supporting those who need it most, making incentives for those not in work and retargeting what resources they haven't taken a poleaxe to towards the deserving disabled.
They want to have the argument both ways when neither are particularly inclusive. Is the country cutting a deficit while throwing money at highspeed railway lines, golden jubilees and an olympics that is not needed, or is this an ideological matter being performed at the whim of politicians completely out of touch with those beneath them.They want to have the argument both ways when neither are particularly inclusive. Is the country cutting a deficit while throwing money at highspeed railway lines, golden jubilees and an olympics that is not needed, or is this an ideological matter being performed at the whim of politicians completely out of touch with those beneath them.
That's true. It has also presented policies as ways of "changing behaviour" for the better (meaning, encouraging people to work and come off benefits), and, strangely, because the reform simplifes the administrative process.That's true. It has also presented policies as ways of "changing behaviour" for the better (meaning, encouraging people to work and come off benefits), and, strangely, because the reform simplifes the administrative process.
1.32pm: The National Deaf Children's Society has left a comment below the line. It says the bill will impact harshly on deaf children and their families:1.32pm: The National Deaf Children's Society has left a comment below the line. It says the bill will impact harshly on deaf children and their families:
The Prime Minister has previously promised he "would never do anything to harm disabled children" yet this bill will result in a massive cut for many parents of deaf children.The Prime Minister has previously promised he "would never do anything to harm disabled children" yet this bill will result in a massive cut for many parents of deaf children.
Financial support for deaf children and their families is vital in helping them overcome the challenges that deafness presents in everyday life and to meet the unavoidable extra costs that come with deafness, such as specialist equipment and transport to and from medical appointments.Financial support for deaf children and their families is vital in helping them overcome the challenges that deafness presents in everyday life and to meet the unavoidable extra costs that come with deafness, such as specialist equipment and transport to and from medical appointments.
1.28pm: Stephen Timms is now onto the youth condition. This relates to around 15,000 children.1.28pm: Stephen Timms is now onto the youth condition. This relates to around 15,000 children.
He attacks the government's proposal as a "spiteful policy towards disabled children."He attacks the government's proposal as a "spiteful policy towards disabled children."
The net annual saving from this cut would be less than £10m a year - equivalent to a quarter of the state owned RBS bonus pot for this year, says Timms.The net annual saving from this cut would be less than £10m a year - equivalent to a quarter of the state owned RBS bonus pot for this year, says Timms.
The independence of disabled young people is being threatened, he argues.The independence of disabled young people is being threatened, he argues.
1.22pm: Frank Field intervenes to wonder what message the limits on contributory ESA is sending out to people who worked hard, "played by the rules" and paid into national insurance.1.22pm: Frank Field intervenes to wonder what message the limits on contributory ESA is sending out to people who worked hard, "played by the rules" and paid into national insurance.
Timms says it will result in "financial catastrophe" for many cancer patients.Timms says it will result in "financial catastrophe" for many cancer patients.
Labour - in line with the Lords amendment - is arguing for a minimum two year limit on contributory ESA. Timms sums up:Labour - in line with the Lords amendment - is arguing for a minimum two year limit on contributory ESA. Timms sums up:
"What the government is trying to do is shameful and we should throw it out.""What the government is trying to do is shameful and we should throw it out."
1.13pm: Stephen Timms, the shadow employment minister, says the ESA time limiting proposal is indefensible.1.13pm: Stephen Timms, the shadow employment minister, says the ESA time limiting proposal is indefensible.
The change will start to impact at the beginning of April. Around 100,000 will lose contributory benefit then, with another 100,000 set to lose it over the following 12 months.The change will start to impact at the beginning of April. Around 100,000 will lose contributory benefit then, with another 100,000 set to lose it over the following 12 months.
Timms points out that the Lib Dems conference voted to oppose the "arbitrary nature" of the 12 month limit - but their MPs will vote for it today.Timms points out that the Lib Dems conference voted to oppose the "arbitrary nature" of the 12 month limit - but their MPs will vote for it today.
Labour does not disagree with contributory time limits in principle, he says, but a year is not enough, especially for cancer patients.Labour does not disagree with contributory time limits in principle, he says, but a year is not enough, especially for cancer patients.
1.04pm: An interesting tweet from my colleague Michael White on an intervention at PMQ's earlier:1.04pm: An interesting tweet from my colleague Michael White on an intervention at PMQ's earlier:
#PMQs DUP's leader, Nigel Dodds, joins SDLP in bashing welfare cuts, this time on cancer patients. If assorted Nats all vote No Cam cd lose#PMQs DUP's leader, Nigel Dodds, joins SDLP in bashing welfare cuts, this time on cancer patients. If assorted Nats all vote No Cam cd lose
1.03pm: Grayling now tackles the "youth condition" - this is the amendment that would allow young people unable to work when these reach adulthood would qualify for contributory ESA despite having not paid into national insurance.1.03pm: Grayling now tackles the "youth condition" - this is the amendment that would allow young people unable to work when these reach adulthood would qualify for contributory ESA despite having not paid into national insurance.
In the Lords this was:In the Lords this was:
• Amendment 36a: Protects young disabled people's eligibility for contributory Employment Support Allowance (ESA)• Amendment 36a: Protects young disabled people's eligibility for contributory Employment Support Allowance (ESA)
Grayling says it is not right that a claimant who has individual means - who inherits a substabntial sum for example - a should be able to access support indefinitely from the state.Grayling says it is not right that a claimant who has individual means - who inherits a substabntial sum for example - a should be able to access support indefinitely from the state.
He says 90% of those presently receiving ESA on youth grounds will continue to do so.He says 90% of those presently receiving ESA on youth grounds will continue to do so.
12.57pm: MPs are talking about employment support allowance time limits. The key relevant amendments were:12.57pm: MPs are talking about employment support allowance time limits. The key relevant amendments were:
• Amendment 38: Raises to 24 months the proposed 12-month limit on claiming contributory ESA.• Amendment 38: Raises to 24 months the proposed 12-month limit on claiming contributory ESA.
• Amendment 38a: Exempts cancer patients from the contributory ESA limits• Amendment 38a: Exempts cancer patients from the contributory ESA limits
A Tory MP - sorry I don't know who - refers to the need to crack down on benefits as "a lifestyle choice." A Labour MPs calls the bill "obnoxious".A Tory MP - sorry I don't know who - refers to the need to crack down on benefits as "a lifestyle choice." A Labour MPs calls the bill "obnoxious".
Meanwhile, the employment minister Chris Grayling says that the ESA time limits are the "correct approach." It balances the rights of those who have paid in through national insurance to receive ESA, and the rights of the taxpayer.Meanwhile, the employment minister Chris Grayling says that the ESA time limits are the "correct approach." It balances the rights of those who have paid in through national insurance to receive ESA, and the rights of the taxpayer.
On the cancer patient "opt out" Grayling says it would invidious to exempt patients just because the have a specific condition.On the cancer patient "opt out" Grayling says it would invidious to exempt patients just because the have a specific condition.
He says the government wants to see a "presumption" that cancer patients would be placed in the ESA support group - meaning they would not be expected to seek work.He says the government wants to see a "presumption" that cancer patients would be placed in the ESA support group - meaning they would not be expected to seek work.
12.46pm: MPs are now onto the welfare reform bill. The employment minister Chris Grayling says he disagrees with the Lords amendments.12.46pm: MPs are now onto the welfare reform bill. The employment minister Chris Grayling says he disagrees with the Lords amendments.
He says that the government has listened carefully to the Lords and taken on board their concerns. But he cannot accept them.He says that the government has listened carefully to the Lords and taken on board their concerns. But he cannot accept them.
It cannot be denied that we are in extremely difficult financial timesIt cannot be denied that we are in extremely difficult financial times
He defends the "vital principles" on which the reform is based - it's not just about finances, but making work pay.He defends the "vital principles" on which the reform is based - it's not just about finances, but making work pay.
12.41pm: Is the public as supportive of welfare reform as ministers claim? Rethink mental health charity has published a survey, of 2,800 adults, carried out earlier this month.12.41pm: Is the public as supportive of welfare reform as ministers claim? Rethink mental health charity has published a survey, of 2,800 adults, carried out earlier this month.
It asked:It asked:
Q1. From what you already know, to what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statement?
The Coalition Government's proposed changes to the welfare system are fair		Q1. From what you already know, to what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statement?
The Coalition Government's proposed changes to the welfare system are fair
The survey found:The survey found:
Strongly agree 11%
Tend to agree 23%
TOTAL AGREE 34%
Neither agree nor disagree 17%
Tend to disagree 18%
Strongly disagree 20%
TOTAL DISAGREE 37%
Don't know 12%		Strongly agree 11%
Tend to agree 23%
TOTAL AGREE 34%
Neither agree nor disagree 17%
Tend to disagree 18%
Strongly disagree 20%
TOTAL DISAGREE 37%
Don't know 12%
12.35pm: MPs have just finished prime minister's question time. There were a few tame questions form Conservative MPs designed to allow David Cameron to remind Labour about the benefit cap and "hard working families."12.35pm: MPs have just finished prime minister's question time. There were a few tame questions form Conservative MPs designed to allow David Cameron to remind Labour about the benefit cap and "hard working families."
A ten minute rule bill debate is planned (about the needs rights of disabled people who have to pass through airport security) before MPs cut to the welfare reform bill. That could be any time around 12.45.A ten minute rule bill debate is planned (about the needs rights of disabled people who have to pass through airport security) before MPs cut to the welfare reform bill. That could be any time around 12.45.
I'm watching the commons debates hereI'm watching the commons debates here
12.15pm: Some excellent comments coming in below the line. My colleague Laura Oliver asked for your thoughts on the government's proposed concessions.12.15pm: Some excellent comments coming in below the line. My colleague Laura Oliver asked for your thoughts on the government's proposed concessions.
Wishface responds:Wishface responds:
• Families affected by the £26,000 welfare cap will be given at least nine months "grace period" to adapt to the loss of benefits, by fiinding a job or moving house.• Families affected by the £26,000 welfare cap will be given at least nine months "grace period" to adapt to the loss of benefits, by fiinding a job or moving house.
Because of course they aren't already looking for work, whilst managing families and the needs therein of children.Because of course they aren't already looking for work, whilst managing families and the needs therein of children.
• A discretionary fund will be established for local authorities to use in "difficult cases" - such ensuring a family is not forced to move when a child is at a critical stage in its schooling.• A discretionary fund will be established for local authorities to use in "difficult cases" - such ensuring a family is not forced to move when a child is at a critical stage in its schooling.
Surely all stages are important?Surely all stages are important?
Who will fund this movement? Where will they go? To the magic land of social housing?Who will fund this movement? Where will they go? To the magic land of social housing?
• The lowest income single parents seeking support from the Child Support Agency will not be charged a fee (the current plan proposes a £50 fee for parents on out of work benefits)• The lowest income single parents seeking support from the Child Support Agency will not be charged a fee (the current plan proposes a £50 fee for parents on out of work benefits)
Why not charge no-one a fee. All this does is further the divide.Why not charge no-one a fee. All this does is further the divide.
Meanwhile Hunterkiller is bemused by David Cameron's comments in the Sun this morning in which he conjures up the image of workshy benefit scroungers lying in bed every morning with their curtains closed.Meanwhile Hunterkiller is bemused by David Cameron's comments in the Sun this morning in which he conjures up the image of workshy benefit scroungers lying in bed every morning with their curtains closed.
Every time they trot out that line about people laying in bed with their curtains shut, I can't help but think of my street. My street where everybody leaves their curtains and blinds shut, especially when they're at work, because they don't want people looking in and deciding their homes are an easy mark for burglary. Of course, Cameron does not have this problem because he always has a police officer outside his home. I expect the concept of keeping your curtains shut for security and privacy has never once entered his head.Every time they trot out that line about people laying in bed with their curtains shut, I can't help but think of my street. My street where everybody leaves their curtains and blinds shut, especially when they're at work, because they don't want people looking in and deciding their homes are an easy mark for burglary. Of course, Cameron does not have this problem because he always has a police officer outside his home. I expect the concept of keeping your curtains shut for security and privacy has never once entered his head.
12.01pm: The government's proposals to reduce housing benefit payments for social tenants deemed to be "under-occupying" their property - the so-called "spare room tax" - will have devasting effects on local communities, according to new research by the UK's four largest housing associations.12.01pm: The government's proposals to reduce housing benefit payments for social tenants deemed to be "under-occupying" their property - the so-called "spare room tax" - will have devasting effects on local communities, according to new research by the UK's four largest housing associations.
The policy, which will affect 670,000 people when it is introduced in April 2013, is being considered today as the welfare reform bill returns to the Commons. It intended to cut the housing benefit bill and free up scarce social housing for families currently in overcrowded or temporary accommodation.The policy, which will affect 670,000 people when it is introduced in April 2013, is being considered today as the welfare reform bill returns to the Commons. It intended to cut the housing benefit bill and free up scarce social housing for families currently in overcrowded or temporary accommodation.
But the research warns that working age tenants who fall foul of the government's "bedroom standard" - meaning they have more rooms than they need, would lose an average £14 a week under the proposal. Many will be forced to move as a result, and where they don't, critics say it is a recipe for overcrowding.But the research warns that working age tenants who fall foul of the government's "bedroom standard" - meaning they have more rooms than they need, would lose an average £14 a week under the proposal. Many will be forced to move as a result, and where they don't, critics say it is a recipe for overcrowding.
The Lords passed an amendment watering down the impact of the "underoccupation" rule back in December - the first of the seven defeats suffered by the government on the bill.The Lords passed an amendment watering down the impact of the "underoccupation" rule back in December - the first of the seven defeats suffered by the government on the bill.
The government says it will overturn the amendment today. But according to the housing associations - who are grouped under the Housing Futures Network (HFN) banner - say it is poorly targeted and may trigger a series of adverse unintended consequences.The government says it will overturn the amendment today. But according to the housing associations - who are grouped under the Housing Futures Network (HFN) banner - say it is poorly targeted and may trigger a series of adverse unintended consequences.
Here are the main HFN findings :Here are the main HFN findings :
• The reductions will have a significant impact on household incomes, affecting some of the poorest in the country. For single people on Job Seekers' Allowance this reduction – of around £14 per week - would represent nearly 30% of disposable income, after allowing for other household bills.• The reductions will have a significant impact on household incomes, affecting some of the poorest in the country. For single people on Job Seekers' Allowance this reduction – of around £14 per week - would represent nearly 30% of disposable income, after allowing for other household bills.
• The cuts will have a significant impact on tenant behaviour. Contrary to Government expectations, up to a third of affected tenants may seek to move. However in most areas, social landlords have a very limited supply of one bedroom properties, and in some neighbourhoods, it would take between six and eight years to accommodate those looking to downsize. A more likely move is into the private rented sector, where rents and benefit levels are higher – which could cost the Government more.• The cuts will have a significant impact on tenant behaviour. Contrary to Government expectations, up to a third of affected tenants may seek to move. However in most areas, social landlords have a very limited supply of one bedroom properties, and in some neighbourhoods, it would take between six and eight years to accommodate those looking to downsize. A more likely move is into the private rented sector, where rents and benefit levels are higher – which could cost the Government more.
• Those who can't move or want to stay put will be in danger of running up rent arrears. Over four in ten households affected could end up in arrears. At the neighbourhood level this will have a very significant impact on local management budgets, prejudicing the delivery of important services. Scaled up to national level social housing providers could face an annual loss of income of £171 million – the equivalent of the grant required to build over 8,000 new affordable homes each year.• Those who can't move or want to stay put will be in danger of running up rent arrears. Over four in ten households affected could end up in arrears. At the neighbourhood level this will have a very significant impact on local management budgets, prejudicing the delivery of important services. Scaled up to national level social housing providers could face an annual loss of income of £171 million – the equivalent of the grant required to build over 8,000 new affordable homes each year.

According to HFN spokesman Hugh Owen:
According to HFN spokesman Hugh Owen:
The research shows the devastating impact this proposal is likely to have on local communities and economies. The policy is poorly targeted, meaning that the wrong people could move. Those who need a bit of extra space and flexibility to support family life will have to move or face a significant cut to their income, whilst older people wanting to downsize, won't get a look in.The research shows the devastating impact this proposal is likely to have on local communities and economies. The policy is poorly targeted, meaning that the wrong people could move. Those who need a bit of extra space and flexibility to support family life will have to move or face a significant cut to their income, whilst older people wanting to downsize, won't get a look in.
11.31am: The government's concessions to the House of Lords are paper thin, reckons my colleague Randeep Ramesh, the Guardian's social affairs editor. He writes:11.31am: The government's concessions to the House of Lords are paper thin, reckons my colleague Randeep Ramesh, the Guardian's social affairs editor. He writes:
Although Iain Duncan Smith, the welfare secretary, has listened to the upper house he has not heard the message. His first compromise for those families affected by the welfare cap to be given a "grace period" is just a sop to buy off the Liberal Democrats who shift nervously when asked after the effects on poverty.Although Iain Duncan Smith, the welfare secretary, has listened to the upper house he has not heard the message. His first compromise for those families affected by the welfare cap to be given a "grace period" is just a sop to buy off the Liberal Democrats who shift nervously when asked after the effects on poverty.
The department used the same measure to quell dissent over the housing benefit caps. The discretionary fund will be small - and as the Guardian's own work shows - is often not spent by councils.The department used the same measure to quell dissent over the housing benefit caps. The discretionary fund will be small - and as the Guardian's own work shows - is often not spent by councils.
As for the Child Support Agency, this is an intergenerational war between Tory grandees. Duncan Smith sees himself as refashioning welfare in moral terms. Thatcherites such as Lord Mackay dismiss this. Lord Lawson walked through the no lobby against the proposals muttering to those around him "not in my day".As for the Child Support Agency, this is an intergenerational war between Tory grandees. Duncan Smith sees himself as refashioning welfare in moral terms. Thatcherites such as Lord Mackay dismiss this. Lord Lawson walked through the no lobby against the proposals muttering to those around him "not in my day".
As for the rest of the amendments, not a whiff of a concession from DWP. Yet a new YouGov poll of 2,032 people for Macmillan Cancer Support shows 72% of respondents said there should not be a time limit on the amount of time that someone suffering from cancer or the side-effects can receive benefits.As for the rest of the amendments, not a whiff of a concession from DWP. Yet a new YouGov poll of 2,032 people for Macmillan Cancer Support shows 72% of respondents said there should not be a time limit on the amount of time that someone suffering from cancer or the side-effects can receive benefits.
Rethink, the mental health charity, points out that Liberal Democrats overwhelmingly voted against the time limit at their party conference.Rethink, the mental health charity, points out that Liberal Democrats overwhelmingly voted against the time limit at their party conference.
Duncan Smith jealously guards his departmental fiefdom from the prying eyes of Downing St. He's all too aware of what happened in another big-spending department, health, when Downing Street got involved.Duncan Smith jealously guards his departmental fiefdom from the prying eyes of Downing St. He's all too aware of what happened in another big-spending department, health, when Downing Street got involved.
So the trick here for the cabinet minister is to paint his opponents as being on the wrong side of the public. He is making his concessions tiny and his cuts big. Given the Commons whipping operation this may work with MPs.So the trick here for the cabinet minister is to paint his opponents as being on the wrong side of the public. He is making his concessions tiny and his cuts big. Given the Commons whipping operation this may work with MPs.
But it is unlikely to assuage peers who have felt that they owe their seats in the upper house to no one but their consciences.But it is unlikely to assuage peers who have felt that they owe their seats in the upper house to no one but their consciences.
11.04am: The prime minister David Cameron has written a piece for the Sun explaining why he'll "fight all the way" for a benefit cap:11.04am: The prime minister David Cameron has written a piece for the Sun explaining why he'll "fight all the way" for a benefit cap:
The cap has caused a lot of debate so far. Bishops in the House of Lords voted to dilute it. Labour tried to obstruct it. Others have critcised it.The cap has caused a lot of debate so far. Bishops in the House of Lords voted to dilute it. Labour tried to obstruct it. Others have critcised it.
I respect their concerns, but this is a plane I'm prepared to battle all he way - for three reasons. First it would restore fairness in our country.I respect their concerns, but this is a plane I'm prepared to battle all he way - for three reasons. First it would restore fairness in our country.
I've lost count of the number of people who've said: "I go to work early in the morning and on the way I pass neighbours with their curtains closed, lying in because they've chosen to live on benefits." This infuriates people - and with good reason.I've lost count of the number of people who've said: "I go to work early in the morning and on the way I pass neighbours with their curtains closed, lying in because they've chosen to live on benefits." This infuriates people - and with good reason.
Second the cap is going to help us crack welfare dependency. The last Government poured eye-watering amounts into welfare benefits. The result? Millions of people stuck out of work for years on end.Second the cap is going to help us crack welfare dependency. The last Government poured eye-watering amounts into welfare benefits. The result? Millions of people stuck out of work for years on end.
Third, this is right because it ensures proper protection for the poorest. So I passionately believe this is right.Third, this is right because it ensures proper protection for the poorest. So I passionately believe this is right.
10.45am: To recap, here are the seven amendments to the bill passed in the Lords over the past two months:10.45am: To recap, here are the seven amendments to the bill passed in the Lords over the past two months:
• Amendment 12: Protects housing benefit for social tenants deemed to have un-needed spare rooms• Amendment 12: Protects housing benefit for social tenants deemed to have un-needed spare rooms
• Amendment 36a: Protects young disabled people's eligibility for contributory Employment Support Allowance (ESA)• Amendment 36a: Protects young disabled people's eligibility for contributory Employment Support Allowance (ESA)
• Amendment 38: Raises to 24 months the proposed 12-month limit on claiming contributory ESA.• Amendment 38: Raises to 24 months the proposed 12-month limit on claiming contributory ESA.
• Amendment 38a: Exempts cancer patients from the contributory ESA limits• Amendment 38a: Exempts cancer patients from the contributory ESA limits
• Amendment 59: Excludes child benefit from the £26,000 household benefit cap.• Amendment 59: Excludes child benefit from the £26,000 household benefit cap.
• Amendment 62c: Drops the proposal to charge single parents for using the Child Support Agency.• Amendment 62c: Drops the proposal to charge single parents for using the Child Support Agency.
• Amendment 1: Passed last night, this drops proposals to cut disability living allowance payments by up to £1,400 a year for around 100,000 children.• Amendment 1: Passed last night, this drops proposals to cut disability living allowance payments by up to £1,400 a year for around 100,000 children.
10.30am: Welcome to Day Twelve of the welfare reform bill live blog. After a possibly unprecedented seven defeats in the Lords, the bill today returns to the House of Commons, where the government has vowed to overturn a raft of amendments passed by peers.10.30am: Welcome to Day Twelve of the welfare reform bill live blog. After a possibly unprecedented seven defeats in the Lords, the bill today returns to the House of Commons, where the government has vowed to overturn a raft of amendments passed by peers.
Ministers face a tough challenge: they have the Commons majority to push the bill back to the Lords - assuming the Lib Dems don't rebel - but they may have to show that they have listened to the Lords' concerns that the potentially negative impact of the bill - on disabled adults and children, cancer patients, single mothers, and disadvantaged families - must be ameliorated.Ministers face a tough challenge: they have the Commons majority to push the bill back to the Lords - assuming the Lib Dems don't rebel - but they may have to show that they have listened to the Lords' concerns that the potentially negative impact of the bill - on disabled adults and children, cancer patients, single mothers, and disadvantaged families - must be ameliorated.
According to my colleague Patrick Wintour, the work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith is offering just three concessions:According to my colleague Patrick Wintour, the work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith is offering just three concessions:
• Families affected by the £26,000 welfare cap will be given at least nine months "grace period" to adapt to the loss of benefits, by fiinding a job or moving house.• Families affected by the £26,000 welfare cap will be given at least nine months "grace period" to adapt to the loss of benefits, by fiinding a job or moving house.
• A discretionary fund will be established for local authorities to use in "difficult cases" - such ensuring a family is not forced to move when a child is at a critical stage in its schooling.• A discretionary fund will be established for local authorities to use in "difficult cases" - such ensuring a family is not forced to move when a child is at a critical stage in its schooling.
• The lowest income single parents seeking support from the Child Support Agency will not be charged a fee (the current plan proposes a £50 fee for parents on out of work benefits)• The lowest income single parents seeking support from the Child Support Agency will not be charged a fee (the current plan proposes a £50 fee for parents on out of work benefits)
The government, says Patrick, is preparing to play hardball on the bill:The government, says Patrick, is preparing to play hardball on the bill:
Labour will resist the coalition's efforts to overturn the amendments, but there is little likelihood that Liberal Democrat MPs will join Labour in substantial numbers on Wednesday, thereby ensuring victory for the government.Labour will resist the coalition's efforts to overturn the amendments, but there is little likelihood that Liberal Democrat MPs will join Labour in substantial numbers on Wednesday, thereby ensuring victory for the government.
The bill, restored to its original form, will then be returned to the Lords in the next few days and peers, especially a critical group of crossbenchers, will have to decide whether to have a trial of strength over the reforms by sticking to their guns.The bill, restored to its original form, will then be returned to the Lords in the next few days and peers, especially a critical group of crossbenchers, will have to decide whether to have a trial of strength over the reforms by sticking to their guns.
The government is determined to ensure the bill is on the statute book this month, and intends to tell peers they are not going to win any substantial changes since the measures are necessary to cut the deficit.The government is determined to ensure the bill is on the statute book this month, and intends to tell peers they are not going to win any substantial changes since the measures are necessary to cut the deficit.
Labour, meanwhile, has proposed a regional benefit cap and is calling for tighter regulation of "profiteering" private landlords.Labour, meanwhile, has proposed a regional benefit cap and is calling for tighter regulation of "profiteering" private landlords.
Patrick notes that:Patrick notes that:
[Lib Dem leader Nick] Clegg is facing internal pressures of his own from campaigners demanding that Liberal Democrats vote to support most of the big six amendments to the welfare bill forced through by peers over the past fortnight.[Lib Dem leader Nick] Clegg is facing internal pressures of his own from campaigners demanding that Liberal Democrats vote to support most of the big six amendments to the welfare bill forced through by peers over the past fortnight.
But will the Lib Dems join with Labour in the Commons?But will the Lib Dems join with Labour in the Commons?
The Commons debate is expected to start later this morning after prime minister's question time. The bill could return to the Lords today, and if peers insist that ministers make more concessions we could be in for a stand off.The Commons debate is expected to start later this morning after prime minister's question time. The bill could return to the Lords today, and if peers insist that ministers make more concessions we could be in for a stand off.
We welcome your contributions to the blog. Leave comments below, or tweet me at @patrickjbutlerWe welcome your contributions to the blog. Leave comments below, or tweet me at @patrickjbutler