MHAIRI Black’s attempt to make it harder for poor families to face benefit sanctions was “talked out” in Parliament yesterday, as heartless Tory MPs rejected any softening of the brutal and ineffective regime.
The Paisley MP and National columnist was trying to bring a Private Member’s Bill in Westminster that would have introduced a code of conduct for jobcentre staff to follow before they sanctioned a jobseeker.
Black told MPs this would mean “an individual’s personal circumstances must be taken into account before any sanction can be applied.”
Explaining, she said: “A single mother or a carer, for instance, might have an appointment, but their child or dependant might be sick, or they might be called to school to collect their child.
“The Bill would recognise their caring commitment to that child, and it would mean that they should not and could not be sanctioned.
“Similarly, if a mother has an appointment at 8.30am and cannot attend, there should be a formal code of conduct so that jobcentre staff can see that, between the hours of seven and nine, she is getting the weans to school, so, of course, she cannot go for a job interview.”
Black, who sits on the Westminster Work and Pensions Select Committee, said her Bill would also make sure jobcentre staff tell those being sanctioned that they could appeal and how to access hardship funds.
Paula Sherriff, the Labour MP for Dewsbury, told of her constituent who was sanctioned after missing an appointment because his baby daughter was rushed into hospital.
She said: “He came to my office when looking for the nearest food bank. As a nation, should we not be absolutely ashamed that this sort of thing is happening, and should not the government hold their head in shame?”
Defending the policy, Tory MP Conor Burns argued sanctions were part of any healthy unemployment system, saying: “It is the reciprocal arrangement between the benefit claimant and the taxpayer, who is supporting that person in distress, that underpins the social contract that is at the core of our society,” he said.
He added: “The current sanctions reflect the conditionality, in that longer periods of sanction are imposed for the most serious failures, such as giving up work voluntarily, refusing to apply for a suitable job, or not taking up the offer of a suitable job. Less serious failings, such as missing an appointment or not updating a CV, of course, incur a shorter sanction.”
SNP MP Tommy Sheppard said he was confused that the Tory was “trying to defend the principle of conditionality, when there is nothing in this Bill that says that conditionality would be removed.”
“Does he not understand that there is a difference between people being required to look for work if they are in receipt of benefit and removing people’s method of staying alive if they miss an interview by 10 minutes because their child was sick or because they had a personal catastrophe? We should be looking at the individual and not treating people as a bloc,” the Edinburgh East MP argued.
A report by the National Audit Office this week said freezing or reducing a jobseeker’s benefits causes “hardship, hunger and depression” and that sanctions were being imposed on people despite “limited evidence” on how well they work.
Speaking after the debate, Black said she would continue the fight against the “deeply flawed and cruel sanctions regime”, adding: “with this Bill Parliament had a real opportunity to make a difference and stop some of the misery and hardship caused by sanctions. Sadly this opportunity was wasted.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel