Welfare Reform Bill — Clause 51 — Employment and Support Allowance for Those Ill or Disabled Since Their Youth — 1 Feb 2012 at 14:30

The majority of MPs voted against those who have been ill or disabled since their youth recieving Employment and Support Allowance on the same basis as if they had made sufficient National Insurance contributions to qualify for a contribution based allowance.

MPs were discussing the Welfare Reform Bill 2013; the House of Lords had added provisions to the Bill in relation to this class of person which MPs were divided on whether to agree with or not. The motion which was voted on was:

  • That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 15.

The text of amendment in question[1] reads:

  • Page 36, line 16, after “2007” insert “, and subject to section (Condition relating to youth (No. 2)),”

Minister Chris Grayling indicated during the debate that his view was the amendment, which was the subject of the vote, had no effect saying:

  • Lords amendment 15 was simply a paving amendment that had no effect.

Clause 51 of the Bill was being amended; it originally read:

  • 51 Period of entitlement to contributory allowance
  • (1)After section 1 of the Welfare Reform Act 2007 there is inserted—
  • ...

The rejected amendment would have changed this to:

  • (1)After section 1 of the Welfare Reform Act 2007 and subject to section (Condition relating to youth (No. 2)) there is inserted—

The condition referred to is included in the amendment sheet[1]. It reads:

The effect of the amendment; when combined with the related new section, is to give those who became ill or disabled while under 20 (or in some circumstances under 25) an ongoing Employment and Support Allowance as if they had enough National Insurance contributions to qualify for contribution based Employment and Support Allowance.

An impact assessment of the government's proposals[4] states they are expecting, as a result of their intended changes, to save around £11m per year; the comparison of options made in the assessment is similar to the choice presented to MPs via this vote.

Test change

Debate in Parliament | Source |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your (UK) electricity and/or gas to Octopus Energy or tip us via Ko-Fi.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con280 (+1 tell) 0091.8%
DUP0 80100.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Lab0 235 (+2 tell)091.9%
LDem44 (+1 tell) 8093.0%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 30100.0%
SNP0 5083.3%
Total:324 264092.1%

Rebel Voters - sorted by vote

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

Andrew GeorgeSt IvesLDemno
Mike HancockPortsmouth Southwhilst LDemno
John LeechManchester, WithingtonLDemno
Greg MulhollandLeeds North WestLDemno
Alan ReidArgyll and ButeLDemno
Bob RussellColchesterLDemno
Adrian SandersTorbayLDemno
Ian SwalesRedcarLDemno

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive