Clause 35
2:30 pm
Mark Harper (Shadow Minister, Work & Pensions; Forest of Dean, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment 32, in clause 35, page 41, line 37, leave out subsection (3).
The provision in clause 35 that caught my eye was subsection (3), which states:
“Any power of the Secretary of State to make regulations under section 31 is exercisable only with the consent of the Treasury”—
why?
I can understand why the Treasury would want to give approval when regulations made under section 31 would apply to the whole country, because clearly that could have significant public expenditure implications and it is supposed to be the Treasury’s job to control public expenditure, although it has not being doing a super job of that in the past few years, given the state we are in, but we will leave that to one side. The flaw is that regulations to run the pilot schemes are also made under clause 31. Therefore, subsection (3) says that, even to run the pilot schemes, the Treasury has to say yes. The Minister told us that £5 million would be available for the pilot schemes, so it is already approved. I am confused why, if the £5 million has been okayed, the Treasury is still interfering.
As we have said, individual budget pilots deliver better outcomes at lower cost. What is the nature of the Department’s conservations with the Treasury? Where is the Treasury coming from? Is it nervous because it secretly thinks that the provision will cost a huge amount? Is that why it is retaining control? What has already been agreed with the Treasury, given the £5 million budget that was talked about? To be clear, when the Minister talked about the enthusiasm of the Department, he was obviously speaking for the Government. We do not want to see that everyone is gung-ho for the proposal only for the Treasury to come along and say, “No you can’t do it, not even the pilot scheme.” The Committee would welcome some reassurance on that, which was the reason why I tabled the amendment.