Clause 9
Welfare Reform Bill
12:45 pm
Jim Murphy (Minister of State (Work), Department for Work and Pensions; East Renfrewshire, Labour)
In the time available before our interlude, I shall try to respond to the various points that have been made. I shall perhaps address at the start of our next sitting the more substantive points made by my hon. Friend and others.
The hon. Member for South-West Surrey said that this is one of the most important amendments that he has tabled in the proceedings thus far and perhaps will even be the most important in any of our 16 sittings in total. We can have a conversation in our next sitting about why he believes that, but I shall provide clarification now for him and therefore for others. It surprises us sometimes, but other people do read whatever is said here and therefore it is importantto correct the hon. Gentleman when he has unintentionally come to the wrong conclusion on case study 1 and Sarah. It is interesting that we have heard of case study Sarah, Sheffield Dave and Karl Marx all in one conversation.
In respect of case study 1, it is clear that the point is that Sarah’s condition gradually improves. It is not the fact that she volunteered but the fact that her condition improved that is relevant. That is why she would come out of the support group. If someone is in the support group and they volunteer, that does not prove to the Government that the decision to put them in the support group was wrong. It just shows that someone has a spark, a will, a determination, above what would be expected through the assessment, to try and to continue to try—