Welfare Reform Bill — Clause 51 — Employment and Support Allowance for Those With Cancer — 1 Feb 2012 at 14:45
The majority of MPs voted not to make an exception for those with a cancer diagnosis or undergoing cancer treatment from the 365 day limit on receiving contribution based Employment and Support Allowance. After the limit is reached individuals may be moved to the income related Employment and Support Allowance.
Chris Grayling MP moved the motion which was the subject of the debate:
- That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 18.
During the debate Mr Grayling explained the effect of the Lords amendment which MPs eventually decided to disagree with:
- Lords amendment 18 would mean that no time limit would be applied to contributory ESA for those claimants receiving treatment for cancer if they have or are treated as having limited capability for work, or they have or are treated as having limited capability for work as a consequence of a cancer diagnosis
The wording of the rejected Lords amendment 18 is as follows
- Page 36, line 21, at end insert “except—
- (a) where a person is receiving treatment for cancer when entitlement shall continue for so long as the person has (or is treated as having) limited capacity for work; or
- (b) the person has (or is treated as having) limited capacity for work as a consequence of a cancer diagnosis.”
Prior to any amendment clause 51 began:
- 51 Period of entitlement to contributory allowance
- (1)After section 1 of the Welfare Reform Act 2007 there is inserted—
- “1A Duration of contributory allowance
- (1)The period for which a person is entitled to a contributory allowance shall not exceed, in the aggregate, 365 days in any period for which his entitlement is established by reference (under the second condition set
out in Part 1 of Schedule 1) to the same two tax years.
The exception for cancer treatment / diagnosis present in the rejected amendment would have been added below that.
An official impact assessment states on average the net income of those moving from contributory to income based Employment and Support Allowance would reduce by around £36 per week. Had the change proposed by this amendment been made the amount government would be spending would increase as they would be paying more people a contribution based allowance for longer.
-  Chris Grayling (Epsom and Ewell, Conservative), House of Commons, 1 February 2012
-  Lords Amendments as of 1 February 2012
-  Page of Welfare Reform Bill Version HL Bill 75 containing clause which the amendment would have affected
-  Impact assessment covering effect of moving from contributory to income based Employment and Support Allowance
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.
|Party||Majority (Aye)||Minority (No)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||285 (+1 tell)||0||0||93.5%|
|Lab||0||240 (+2 tell)||0||93.8%|
|LDem||43 (+1 tell)||4||0||84.2%|
|Menzies Campbell||North East Fife||LDem (front bench)||no|
|Mike Hancock||Portsmouth South||whilst LDem (front bench)||no|
|John Leech||Manchester, Withington||LDem (front bench)||no|
|Bob Russell||Colchester||LDem (front bench)||no|