Benefit Cap Defeated By Lords On Bishops Amendment After Labour Flip-Flop

Benefit Cap Defeated Lords

The Huffington Post UK   First Posted: 23/01/2012 19:03 Updated: 23/01/2012 22:47

The government has been defeated in the House of Lords after Bishops succeeded in amending the Welfare Reform Bill to exempt child benefit from a maximum cap.

The Church of England Bishops - who sit in the House of Lords - tabled an amendment to the government's plans to cap benefits to households at £25,000 a year.

They were joined in the division lobbies by Labour peers, who earlier lost their own separate amendment which would have seen those at risk of homelessness being exempt from the cap.

To a rather unusual cheer in the Lords, the Bishops amendment was carried by 252 to 237.

Ministers insist that the Bishops' amendment would have the effect of raising the cap to £50,000 a year, something they say would be useless as a deterrent to people remaining on welfare and not getting a job. It is highly likely that the government will seek to overturn the amendments in the Commons.

Earlier in the debate the minister in the Lords trying to get the flagship reforms through, Lord Freud, told peers that the reforms were about encouraging families to go out to work, and that the Bishops' amendment would: "take the pressure away from those families, they will go on in the same way that they have been, we will not have the behavioural change that we want and we need from those families."

On Monday morning work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith had insisted that the welfare reforms would not push anyone into poverty, but this is disputed by Lib Dems who say it could force people to leave their homes if they lose their jobs.

However some in the government are said to believe the knock-on costs of the cap would outweigh the benefits, even though polls suggest a majority of the public think £26,000 a year is quite enough for benefit claimants to live on.

Labour's position on the benefit cap can be seen as something of a flip-flop. Despite their earlier claim to support the benefit cap in principle, they supported a separate amendment in an attempt to derail the Bill.

Earlier in the Commons the work and pensions minister Chris Grayling accused Labour of "tabling a 'wrecking amendment' on the cap", suggesting Labour were claiming to support the changes, whilst simultaneously supporting an amendment which would block it.

The House of Lords was unusually crowded, with former Lib Dem leader Lord Ashdown telling peers that he could not support the government on the cap, because ministers had failed to outline a decent transition to the new scheme.

Ministers were supported by former Ulster Unionist leader Lord Empey, who said in order to change the welfare system, it wouldn't be possible to avoid upsetting one section of society or another, and that welfare reform was necessary.

Lib Dem peer Baroness Hussein-Ece told the the Lords that the price of social housing had "shot up" in many parts of London, thanks to much of it having been sold off and managed by the private sector. She said that areas of central London had extremes of wealth, and suggested that forcing families out of their homes would create "ghettos" similar to those seen in the outlying areas of Paris.

To widespread murmurs of approval, she added she deplored the claim that some families were deliberately having children just to claim more benefits.

"Some of the women from these communities are not in a position to make those kinds of choices," she added, saying many lacked the education to make family planning decisions.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK POLITICS

The government has been defeated in the House of Lords after Bishops succeeded in amending the Welfare Reform Bill to exempt child benefit from a maximum cap. The Church of England Bishops - who s...
The government has been defeated in the House of Lords after Bishops succeeded in amending the Welfare Reform Bill to exempt child benefit from a maximum cap. The Church of England Bishops - who s...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 151
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
12:57 PM on 01/24/2012
This new rule will totally shatter our ability to employ ancillary staffs fom our two homes in Chelsea and Islingon. It does make it harder to find local people to take on the tasks such as housekeeper, maid or even a butler.

The government seem to be trying to make inner London like a ghost town where there will be no potential to employ those who we require to keep our households ticking over. We could of course employ those from Eastern Europe etc, who because they are willing to reside in one bedroom flats with 15 others effectively reduce their own living costs but the potential damage that can be done when they have to talk to guests together with the fact that such staffs lower our social standing, does make such international recruitment unwelcome.

We could also utilize a weighting factor with our pay to help pay for the travel of those who reside outside of London but this does mean that we cannot have such staffs at our Beck & Call.

I would like to see a nice Tory government provide subsidies for those who wish to employ domestic staffs and it has been proposed before. Now, would that not be a nice return to what Maggie said when she mentioned, "A Return to Victorian Values"?
11:22 AM on 01/24/2012
EAT THE RICH
10:49 AM on 01/24/2012
I welcome the Lords amendments to the Welfare Reform Bill - depressingly, it appears that the government will ignore them when the Bill returns to the Commons for Report Stage.
When you consider their reforms and the toothless proposals by VInce Cable to curb Executive Pay, it's clear that the legacy of the coalition government is going to be increased poverty and widening inequality.
It's very depressing.
Read on for further comment and analysis: http://www.allthatsleft.co.uk/2012/01/the-coalition-bringing-poverty-and-inequality-to-a-town-near-you/
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Daviejohn
All the world's a stage,
09:29 AM on 01/24/2012
Take this amendment on board and the Prolls will be breeding even faster than they do now.This privileged elite band of unelected liberal thinkers have no concept on how these peoples minds work, close one door and they will find another to open and scrounge from.
08:53 AM on 01/24/2012
Careful, some of you are falling into into Camoron's trap.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SATCHMAN99
08:00 AM on 01/24/2012
She deplores the claim that women have children to get more beneifts eh!! You had better open your eyes thenand do some travelling. There have been plenty using this scam for yearsto get more money and move up the housing lists to get better accomodation! Some people live in their own little worlds.
01:18 PM on 01/24/2012
you do don't you.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SATCHMAN99
01:31 PM on 01/24/2012
No I live in the real world..Open your eyes you might learn something!!
07:39 AM on 01/24/2012
All politicians are totally missing the point with unemployment and benefits in this country. THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH JOBS TO GO AROUND!! FACT!!
There are people being forced into work who clearly don't want to be there, whether because they just don't like the job, or they don't like work.
There are as many people being FORCED to sit at home and claim benefits who would give their right arm to have those jobs that are being squandered by the lazy or disfunctional who even when they turn up for work only give 20% at best of their heart to the job, whereas those with a positive drive would be FAR more valuable to the employers and the economy as a whole.
ANSWER?? ..... Pay those who don't want to or who CAN'T work to stay at home while those who really DO WANT to work can get back to the life the love which is working in their preferred profession/vocation.
I GUARANTEE that if their was a referundum on the subject that common sense would prevail and the hard working majority would much rather prefer to pay the lazy and inadequate, or those who simply can't for health or other valid reasons to stay at home and let them get back into the workplace where they can work as hard as they like because THAT is their vocation.

Cameron & Co - Sort it out and do yourself a BIG!!! favour at the same time.
01:19 PM on 01/24/2012
no jobs and no affordable houses to rent. Blame govt policy not those caught in this trap.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Saint wright
Dyslexic old chippy
07:30 AM on 01/24/2012
well my wife and i have to manage on £14k after 45 years of bloody hard work. I wouldnt mind £32k before tax for doing nothing?
02:23 PM on 01/24/2012
you don't get it in your hand most of it goes to a private landlord.
06:52 AM on 01/24/2012
David Cameron is a nasty, nasty man. He is trying to manipulate people so that he can get rid of the welfare state. This is why he is portraying all people on benefits as scroungers who could work if they want to. It would be quite easy to sort out the people who abuse the system without decimating the welfare state. Most people in receipt of benefit do not get £26,000 per year-he is using this example to inflame people-and it's working! And all this coming from a man who has a personal fortune of 30 million. We all know that there aren't enough jobs for everyone, and on top of this Cameron is going to make around 700,000 public sector workers unemployed. Cameron wants a society where too many people looking for too few jobs-that way, his business mates can pay us want they want and the only ones who will gain out of this will be shareholders,directors etc. The working man wont be able to earn a living wage-we'll be lucky if we can afford our mortgages,rents, food,petrol, heating etc. I am on a very low wage but I am happy to pay tax to help those who live in areas where there are no jobs, or to help people who cant work because of a disablity. That's the kind of society I want to live in. We are being conned, big-time, by the tories.
08:38 AM on 01/24/2012
The real scroungers are those companies who are going to pick up the riches from the NHS privatisation.
06:12 AM on 01/24/2012
There is argument that some people may have to uproot and move to another part of the country away from their family, distressing the children through school changes and loss of friends. Hmmmm... some of the nicest and happiest people I knew when at school were the children of service personnel who were constantly moving. The ones who I stayed in touch with all seemed to do ok.
12:45 PM on 01/24/2012
I've chased jobs around this country for 25 years, had 23 different addresses, my kids have and are doing well in work and school, the downside, is ending up on a sink estate while trying to look after a very ill wife, if I could have seen how we'd be treated by this shower of crap government I'd have done what many of my fellow miners did, sat and claimed for the rest of my days, you get no rewards for hard work in this country and through no fault of my own I'm now labelled a scrounger, pretty much how DWP will be thinking about our disabled veterans once back from the middle east.
05:49 PM on 01/24/2012
.... Yep, I understand how you feel; the whole issue is very complicated and not going to be sorted out by heartless people who simply haven't a clue!
01:22 PM on 01/24/2012
Their parents had jobs though didn't they. You can move to cheaper housing but you will also be in a position were there is less chance of you getting a job. Blame govt who force people to rent from profiteering private landlords instead of building council houses.
06:05 AM on 01/24/2012
"....... many lacked the education to make family planning decisions."

But in the case of those abusing the system, not lacking the ability to make decisions using children as a source of free cash; courtesy of the tax payer.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
danrothesq
Unrestricted brilliance.
05:56 AM on 01/24/2012
Plus I want a hot woman too.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
danrothesq
Unrestricted brilliance.
05:55 AM on 01/24/2012
I demand a fair wage of 87,000
05:02 AM on 01/24/2012
Time for the bishops of the C of E to be excluded from law making.Not elected and not representative in any way.
08:15 AM on 01/24/2012
With ever declining Church attendances, you would think the Bishops should concentrate on Religious matters. They however feel it's their duty to get involved in Politics and mess the Country up as well.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
obeliskpress
Muddy water, let stand, becomes clear.
03:52 AM on 01/24/2012
While the CEO of the people's bank, RBS, mulls a bonus of millions, for overseeing a 50% loss of share value over the financial year.