| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Crawley: I sympathise with the noble Baroness. As she can imagine, I asked that when I was being briefed on this Question. I hope that the noble Baroness will be reassured that in the next publication there will be more information about where the public
12 Nov 2009 : Column 900
Enterprise Champion
Question
11.29 am
To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the role of the Government's Enterprise Champion; and how many engagements he has planned in that role.
The Minister for Trade and Investment (Lord Davies of Abersoch): The role of the enterprise champion is to act as an adviser to the Government and small firms. He is providing advice on business support and is helping small firms and entrepreneurs to make the most of the real help available from government and other organisations. He is championing the causes of viable small companies with banks and helping to ensure that the voices of small firms and entrepreneurs are heard by government, suppliers and other entities. He currently has eight forward engagements planned.
Lord Hunt of Wirral: My Lords, is the Minister aware that it has been reported that the noble Lord, Lord Sugar, recently described struggling businessmen as "moaners"? Is he aware that many people rapidly concluded that the First Secretary of State should just summon him and say, "You're fired"? On inquiry with the noble Lord last night, he said that his remarks had been incorrectly reported, adding that there was a recording of them, which I hope he might place in the House of Lords Library to clear this matter up once and for all. Be that as it may, would the Minister please clarify whether the noble Lord, Lord Sugar, is accountable to this House and whether, when he speaks on enterprise matters, he speaks with the full authority of the Government?
Lord Davies of Abersoch: My Lords, with Sir Alan-or, I should say, my noble friend Lord Sugar-you will get sugar and spice. He has a wide-ranging career of business success. He uses colourful language forcefully. He has spoken to over 2,000 businesses across the UK. His events have been a sell-out. I could give the House many quotes complimenting him on his performance. I shall not; I shall give just one: "very open, no hidden issues, very straight responses". I think that it was the Searchers-I am showing my age-who sang "Sugar and Spice", so the Opposition should not search to criticise but should compliment somebody who is doing government business for nothing. I see him regularly and he is doing a good job for the Government.
Lord Razzall: My Lords, to follow up on the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Wirral, is the Minister aware that the so-called business tsar gave an
12 Nov 2009 : Column 901
"They think to themselves, she's young, she's attractive, she's going to get a boyfriend, what's going to happen? Women think about it more than men, in my opinion".
Is that the Minister's opinion? Does the enterprise champion-the business tsar-speak for the Government on this issue? If not, how do they propose to distance themselves from his views on this topic?
Lord Davies of Abersoch: My Lords, my noble friend Lord Sugar employs a number of women in senior positions in his business. He is fully supportive of the women's task force recommendations, as are we. We need more women at the top of the boards of our big companies. We need more women as entrepreneurs. He fully supports that and he is speaking to a number of women's organisations to see how he can help.
Lord Haskel: My Lords, would my noble friend agree that this downturn has caused considerable difficulties for small firms? Noble Lords on all sides of the House have been making this point in recent weeks. Would he join me in welcoming any reasonable help, assistance, advice and encouragement for small firms, irrespective of the source?
Lord Davies of Abersoch: Sugar is the pill. We have 4.8 million SMEs in the UK. They are the lifeblood of the economy. The Government's interventions, whether through the enterprise finance guarantee scheme or through a range of things such as delaying tax payments, have had a huge impact. It is clear that the banks need to be there as the economy recovers with access to finance. Therefore, experienced businesspeople, such as my noble friend Lord Sugar, provide huge assistance in helping small businesses. He is doing it for nothing. He is accountable to me and he is providing great assistance.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, will the Minister be good enough to reconsider his answer to the question asked by my noble friend Lord Hunt: when the noble Lord, Lord Sugar, speaks, does he speak with the authority of the Government?
Lord Davies of Abersoch: My Lords, I should make it clear that he is accountable to me. I see him consistently. He is not a policy-maker; he is an adviser. A number of other advisers are helping us. We need advisers to help because, at the end of the day, small businesses need individuals just like the noble Lord, Lord Sugar, to help them.
Lord Tebbit: My Lords, will the Minister now answer the question that has now been asked twice of him? Does the noble Lord, Lord Sugar, speak with the authority of the Government or not?
Lord Davies of Abersoch: I have answered that question. He is accountable to me. I am a Minister; he is not a policy-maker but an adviser.
Lord Dykes: My Lords, does the noble Lord, Lord Sugar, speak with the authority of the Government?
12 Nov 2009 : Column 902
Baroness Byford: My Lords, the Minister referred to Sir Alan being an adviser. How many advisers do the Government currently have?
Lord Davies of Abersoch: Let me be clear: he is an adviser not a policy-maker. He is giving his time for nothing. He is a hugely experienced businessman. We have a range of businesspeople, such as James Caan and Tim Berners-Lee, all providing assistance to the Government to help small businesses, which after all are the lifeblood of this economy. We need to provide them with experience and help, which is exactly what we are doing.
Business of the House
Announcement
11.36 am
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, immediately after consideration of Commons amendments to the Welfare Reform Bill, my noble friend Lord Adonis will repeat as a Statement an urgent Question allowed in the other place on passenger services on the First Capital Connect route from St Albans to London.
It may also be helpful to the House if I say a few words about the expected timing of Prorogation today. The House will adjourn after the Statement and resume at around 4 pm to receive a message from the other place. The timing of Prorogation will of course depend on decisions of the other place, but I will ensure that timings are displayed on the Annunciators in due course.
Ministry of Defence Police (Conduct) Regulations 2009
Ministry of Defence Police Appeals Tribunals Regulations 2009
Motions to Approve
11.37 am
Relevant document: 22nd Report from the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments, considered in Grand Committee on 9 November.
Rail Vehicle Accessibility (Networks) Exemption Order 2009
Motion to Approve
Moved By Lord Faulkner of Worcester
Relevant document: 22nd Report from the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments, considered in Grand Committee on 9 November.
12 Nov 2009 : Column 903
Welfare Reform Bill
Bill Main Page
Copy of the Bill
Explanatory Notes
Amendments
Commons Amendments
11.38 am
That the House do not insist on its Amendment 2, to which the Commons have disagreed, and do agree with the Commons in their Amendment 2A in lieu and their consequential Amendment 2B-
2A: Page 12, line 45, at end insert the following new Clause:-
"Parliamentary procedure: regulations imposing work-related activity requirements on lone parents of children under 7(1) This section applies to regulations made under any relevant provision which impose a requirement on any lone parent of a child under the age of 7 to undertake work-related activity (within the meaning of the regulations).
(2) In subsection (1) "relevant provision" means-
(a) section 2D(1) of the Social Security Administration Act 1992,
(b) section 18B of the Jobseekers Act 1995, or
(c) section 13 of the Welfare Reform Act 2007.
(3) A statutory instrument containing regulations to which this section applies (whether alone or with other provision) may not be made at any time during the period of 5 years beginning with the day on which this Act is passed unless a draft of the statutory instrument has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament.
(4) If subsection (3) applies to any regulations, any provision of an Act under which a statutory instrument containing the regulations would be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament does not apply."
2B: Page 51, line 37, at end insert-
"section [Parliamentary procedure: regulations imposing work-related activity requirements on lone parents of children under 7];"
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Communities and Local Government & Department for Work and Pensions (Lord McKenzie of Luton): My Lords, during the Commons' consideration of Lords amendments in the other place, honourable Members accepted all the amendments made in your Lordships' House with the exception of Amendment 2. This amendment would have placed a requirement in primary legislation that financial sanctions should not be imposed on a single parent with a youngest child under five for failing to undertake work-related activity. In the other place, a government amendment to make affirmative the regulations to which this clause applies was agreed in place of Amendment 2.
I shall take a moment to reiterate our position on lone parents and the safeguards that we have incorporated following the valuable discussions that we had in this House. Noble Lords will be aware that our policies for lone parents rely on two key tenets; namely, that work is the best route out of poverty and that parents, especially lone parents, must be allowed to fulfil their responsibilities to their children.
We have continued to invest heavily in evidence-based policies over the past 10 years. The changes we have debated in this Bill are a further step forward along that path. We know that combining programmes such
12 Nov 2009 : Column 904
Over a period of time, lone parents will be prepared for the time when they are able to engage with the labour market and be actively available and looking for work. The gradual steps which we will expect people to take will ensure that preparation for paid work becomes a natural progression by helping lone parents gradually prepare for the workplace by improving their skills and undertaking work-related activity.
We feel that preparing for work should become the norm for lone parents with younger children. Indeed, it would be unfair not to encourage them to do so and would risk them being unprepared for the time they start looking for work when their children are older. Lone parents with a youngest child aged under one will be in the "no conditionality" group and will not be required to undertake any mandatory activity unless they want. Lone parents with a youngest child aged between one and two will be required to attend six-monthly mandatory work-focused interviews. We made amendments in this House, which were supported in the other place, to ensure that this policy intention was secured in primary legislation.
When the lone parent's youngest child is aged between three and six, they will be expected to attend three-monthly work-focused interviews and agree an action plan with their adviser which will detail mandatory work-related activity. This action plan will set out their individual route-way to prepare them for work when it is appropriate for them, and will take into account the well-being of their child. We expect that some lone parents with a youngest child aged between three and six will be among the hardest to help, some distance from the labour market and with multiple barriers to employment. If it is to be most helpful, work-related activity should therefore be interpreted broadly to meet their needs.
Lone parents and advisers will work together to agree appropriate work-related activity. Given the broad spectrum of activities that count as work-related activity, we would hope that in most cases customers and advisers would be able to agree suitable activity and that these activities can be easily undertaken by lone parents. I should stress that work-related activity is not intended to be an onerous requirement. There will be no daily, or even weekly, requirement to undertake activity; but a minimum of one activity to be undertaken between work-focused interviews, or every three months. This will allow advisers and lone parents flexibility in drawing up the action plans and allow activities to be tailored to take into account not only their individual needs but also the well-being of the child.
The nature of the work-related activity will vary with the age of the child and the situation of the parent. For example, after their discussion a parent
12 Nov 2009 : Column 905
Throughout this process, lone parents will not be required to undertake any activity that cuts into time where their child is not normally at school or in formal childcare. For lone parents with a youngest child aged three or four, this would mean that they could restrict the times they can undertake work-related activity to within the hours that locally provided free part-time nursery places are available. However, if a lone parent fails or refuses to undertake such activities without good cause, we would want, as a last resort, the ability to impose a sanction until they comply.
11.45 am
As noble Lords are aware, sanctions are very much a last resort and we have outlined on many occasions the sanctions regime we wish to test as part of the progression to work model, which moves away from those currently present in jobseeker's allowance and income support to include a more upfront, in-depth method of engagement with lone parents before a financial sanction is imposed. This will provide extra opportunities for personal advisers to gather further information which may have been missed or not volunteered by the lone parent, and then adapt work-related activity accordingly. This should encourage participation and ensure that lone parents understand what they need to do and the consequences for not doing it.
If a lone parent initially fails to take part in a work-focused interview, or to undertake or complete work-related activity without good cause, there will be no financial sanction. Instead, the adviser will discuss any issues the lone parent may have and give them another opportunity to engage. If a lone parent misses two work-focused interviews or has failed to carry out the minimum agreed work-related activity in their action plan over three months, they will be given an opportunity to explain good cause, renegotiate the action plan, or begin the work-related activity. If they fail or refuse to do so, a formal written warning will be issued.
After three missed interviews or three failures to take up agreed work-related activity, an individual case review will be done as the next stage of compliance action. This could include home visits for parents and, where necessary, compliance checks. The purpose of this stage is to provide a more in-depth review of the lone parent's circumstances and the reasons for their failure to comply. Only after this fourth stage will a financial sanction even be considered if they fail to comply, with initial sanctions at a significantly lower level than currently applied. Those lone parents for
12 Nov 2009 : Column 906
This model will provide lone parents with more opportunities to comply with the requirements and ensure that they will not face a financial penalty before a full review of their circumstances has been carried out. As now, lone parents will have the opportunity to ask for the sanction decision to be reconsidered, and to appeal the decision. Overall, this approach will provide lone parents with every opportunity to engage with work-related activity and lead to fewer financial sanctions but will provide the necessary backstops to ensure engagement and progression.
As I hope noble Lords will agree, requiring lone parents to undertake work-related activity will benefit them and their children in the long-term. It is for this reason that, in the other place, the Government laid an amendment that overturned the amendment made by the noble Lord, Lord Freud. That amendment amended the Bill so that financial sanctions could not be imposed upon a "single" parent in receipt of income support with a child under five if they failed to undertake work-related activity. This amendment would not achieve the purpose I believe it was intended to achieve. "Single" is not defined in social security legislation and as such there is a risk that it could be interpreted to mean a non-resident parent rather than the lone parent who has caring responsibility for the child. Furthermore, the amendment applies only to lone parents on income support. It would not preclude financial sanctions being applied to lone parents on employment and support allowance or the modified jobseeker's allowance regime. This seems like an anomaly that could confuse people and make the administration of the system difficult.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |