:00:29. > :00:36.Urgent question. John Healey. Thank you Mr Speaker. To ask the Minister
:00:37. > :00:40.if she will make the impact on homelessness of the government's
:00:41. > :00:45.plans to remove automatic entitlement to housing benefit for
:00:46. > :00:51.18-21 -year-olds. Minister Caroline Nokes. From the 1st of April
:00:52. > :00:57.automatic entitlement for housing cost will be removed for some 18-21
:00:58. > :01:01.-year-olds. This was a Conservative manifesto commitment and was
:01:02. > :01:04.formally announced in the summer budget 2015. This removes the
:01:05. > :01:09.perverse incentive for young adults to leave the family home and pass on
:01:10. > :01:13.the cost of the taxpayer. This is about stopping young people slipping
:01:14. > :01:18.straight into a life on benefits and brings parity with young people in
:01:19. > :01:22.work but who may not be able to leave the family home while an
:01:23. > :01:26.unemployed person can. This policy will have a comprehensive set of
:01:27. > :01:30.exemptions to make sure the most vulnerable continue to have the
:01:31. > :01:33.support they need, so the policy will only affect those who have no
:01:34. > :01:38.barriers to work and are unable to return safely to their parental
:01:39. > :01:41.home. There is a time limited exemption for those who have
:01:42. > :01:45.recently been in work. The policy will only apply to those in
:01:46. > :01:52.universal credit full service areas to make new claims or whose earnings
:01:53. > :01:55.drop the lady in work threshold. The policy will be implemented at the
:01:56. > :02:01.same time as the new youth obligation. With new support
:02:02. > :02:05.available under the youth obligation, more young adults will
:02:06. > :02:11.move into work, significantly improving their current living
:02:12. > :02:16.standards and future prospects. Mr Speaker my urgent question, and the
:02:17. > :02:20.concerned to members on all sides, was what assessment has been done of
:02:21. > :02:23.the impact of these cuts on homelessness? With respect to the
:02:24. > :02:28.minister, she's made her statement when she could have told the House
:02:29. > :02:34.is the answer in one word which is none. There was no impact assessment
:02:35. > :02:38.published with these regulations on Friday, why not? And how many young
:02:39. > :02:49.people will now be denied all help with housing benefit? I say to the
:02:50. > :02:52.Minister, there are 1741 18-21 -year-olds in Hampshire claiming
:02:53. > :02:57.housing benefit. How many of these will still get help next month? And
:02:58. > :03:02.how many will get nothing? The Minister may have done no assessment
:03:03. > :03:11.but the charities who work day in, day out in our constituencies to
:03:12. > :03:19.help the homeless have said 9000 young people will be put at risk of
:03:20. > :03:25.homelessness. Shelter have said there is no way this is not going to
:03:26. > :03:30.lead to an increase in rough sleeping. And Crisis has said this
:03:31. > :03:36.runs entirely counter to the aims of that Bill, and it could spell
:03:37. > :03:41.disaster for many vulnerable young people rightly entitled to help.
:03:42. > :03:45.Surely the Minister does not think these charities are wrong? And if
:03:46. > :03:48.she knows they are right, surely the government isn't going to go ahead
:03:49. > :03:54.with these cruel and counter-productive cuts? Members on
:03:55. > :03:58.all sides have really deeply held concerns about the rapidly rising
:03:59. > :04:04.level of homelessness in our country. Other Minister accept none
:04:05. > :04:09.of the arguments she's made today really stack up? This is about
:04:10. > :04:14.levelling the play on the field they say but these young people, who are
:04:15. > :04:18.old enough to marry, work, pay taxes, fight for our country, will
:04:19. > :04:23.now be denied the same right to basic help with housing costs as any
:04:24. > :04:26.British adult. Ministers have said the exemptions will protect the
:04:27. > :04:38.vulnerable but the National landlords Association declared, all
:04:39. > :04:42.18-21-year-olds are no longer entitled to housing benefit, they
:04:43. > :04:46.just won't consider them as a tenant. Once the knock-on costs to
:04:47. > :04:51.other services are taken into account the saving will fall to only
:04:52. > :04:56.?3.3 million. As far as the manifesto, this was a commitment to
:04:57. > :05:00.remove automatic entitlement, claimants already have to pass
:05:01. > :05:05.multiple checks so there is nothing automatic about young people getting
:05:06. > :05:08.housing benefit. Will the Minister recognised the government has the
:05:09. > :05:13.opportunity tomorrow in the budget to reverse this counter-productive
:05:14. > :05:17.policy. Wilshere leave the House this afternoon and told the
:05:18. > :05:20.Chancellor, if he does so, he will have the full support from the side
:05:21. > :05:28.and I suspect from all sides of this House. The honourable gentleman
:05:29. > :05:31.raised the issue of those across the country although he specifically
:05:32. > :05:35.mentioned Hampshire who are already in receipt of housing benefit. They
:05:36. > :05:39.will have transitional protections and will not be affected. When he
:05:40. > :05:44.asks how many will have their benefit withdrawn, the answer is
:05:45. > :05:48.none, the same as it is for every county across the country. He also
:05:49. > :05:52.raised the case of those serving in the Armed Forces, taxpayers, those
:05:53. > :06:01.who have children. If you looked at the list of exemptions published on
:06:02. > :06:06.Friday, all of those are included. Sir Oliver Letwin. Does my
:06:07. > :06:11.honourable friend agree that in light of all the exemptions there
:06:12. > :06:16.are, what we're talking about are the responsibilities of the parents.
:06:17. > :06:18.We not seeing a reassertion of the responsibilities of parents for
:06:19. > :06:25.unemployed young people under the age of 21? I thank my right
:06:26. > :06:30.honourable friend for that question, he makes an important point. This is
:06:31. > :06:33.about encouraging family responsibility, about enabling and
:06:34. > :06:38.helping those young people who have the choice to remain at home to stay
:06:39. > :06:42.there. Those who cannot stay at home, there is a significant
:06:43. > :06:45.exemption written in for those whom it is inappropriate to stay in the
:06:46. > :06:53.family home will be exempted from this policy. Yesterday SNP MPs
:06:54. > :06:57.joined others to know this ludicrous legislation. This government seems
:06:58. > :07:02.to be working on the incorrupt assumption that young people can
:07:03. > :07:07.stay at home when parents have no obligation to house their adult
:07:08. > :07:10.children -- incorrect assumption. The SNP have consistently opposed
:07:11. > :07:14.the legislation but under the powers of the Scottish Parliament the
:07:15. > :07:17.Scottish Government cannot provide an exemption for Scotland. Does the
:07:18. > :07:21.Minister agree it is simply ridiculous that young people should
:07:22. > :07:26.suffer purely because this government is obsessed with imposing
:07:27. > :07:32.austerity? Can she tell us how many young people who will be affected
:07:33. > :07:36.who don't qualify for exemption, and doesn't she think a young person is
:07:37. > :07:42.more likely to find work if they have a stable address? Will they
:07:43. > :07:44.exempt the Scottish from the impact of these regulations and allow the
:07:45. > :07:50.Scottish Government to provide housing support on their behalf? The
:07:51. > :07:54.Scottish Government already has a wide range of powers which would
:07:55. > :07:57.enable them to alleviate the changes proposed and our government is
:07:58. > :08:00.committed to working with the Scottish Government on a whole range
:08:01. > :08:07.of issues in the portfolio to make sure they have the power and the
:08:08. > :08:10.strength to implement those powers. What is the government doing to
:08:11. > :08:15.ensure this policy supports young people who are in work? My
:08:16. > :08:20.honourable friend is right to mention young people in work.
:08:21. > :08:28.Anybody who is working 16 hours a week or more will be exempt. I think
:08:29. > :08:31.we should call this for what it is, it's a nasty vindictive policy that
:08:32. > :08:35.will make injustice worse, from a government who said they would
:08:36. > :08:39.tackle injustice. We'll be honourable lady answer the question
:08:40. > :08:44.that my right honourable friend asked, which is no impact assessment
:08:45. > :08:48.has been published for this measure, inexplicably in my view. Will she
:08:49. > :08:52.now tell the House what advice she has received from her officials
:08:53. > :08:59.about the impact on homelessness of this proposal? The department has of
:09:00. > :09:06.course met all of its requirement under the public sector equality
:09:07. > :09:12.duty. A quality assessment has been shared with the advisory committee
:09:13. > :09:16.who chose not to consult on this. Young people in their first jobs
:09:17. > :09:19.can't afford their own accommodation, so they share with
:09:20. > :09:26.other young people or they stay at home. Why should it be different for
:09:27. > :09:31.each people who are out of work? He makes exactly the point that
:09:32. > :09:34.underpins this policy. We want young people in work and young people out
:09:35. > :09:40.of work to be making the same choices about where they are going
:09:41. > :09:43.to live. I think anyone listening to this urgent question will be
:09:44. > :09:49.appalled by the response we've had so far from the Minister. She hasn't
:09:50. > :09:54.answered any of the questions. Can she tell us why the equality impact
:09:55. > :09:58.assessment hasn't been published and will she bring it forward so we can
:09:59. > :10:03.see what the rationale is behind this ridiculous policy? I think I
:10:04. > :10:07.have answered that. The department has engaged extensively at
:10:08. > :10:13.ministerial and official level with stakeholders. There is no duty on us
:10:14. > :10:21.to share the impact assessment with the House, but we did share it with
:10:22. > :10:23.the Social Security advisory. Will the Minister confirm that care
:10:24. > :10:30.leavers will not be affected by these changes? My honourable friend
:10:31. > :10:36.makes a really important point and absolutely they are exempt from this
:10:37. > :10:40.policy. One of the exemptions in the regulations where housing benefit
:10:41. > :10:43.can still be paid is if in the opinion of the Secretary of State it
:10:44. > :10:49.is inappropriate for them to live with each of their parents. Does the
:10:50. > :10:52.Secretary of State it assume this will be automatically applied
:10:53. > :11:00.whether parents refuse to have their child living with them? Absolutely
:11:01. > :11:02.and that is a point. There is an important exemption included, so
:11:03. > :11:05.where it is inappropriate that a parent cannot accommodate their
:11:06. > :11:14.child they will be exempt from this policy. The key point about nipping
:11:15. > :11:17.the dependency culture in the bud at the earliest opportunity is
:11:18. > :11:22.important. Once it takes hold it can be very damaging. Young people can
:11:23. > :11:27.be forgiven, they may think this is fair, but when we do this and we
:11:28. > :11:32.protect every single penny going to pensioners including a Winter fuel
:11:33. > :11:37.allowance for millionaires, they will be forgiven for thinking we
:11:38. > :11:41.aren't playing fairly to everybody. What we are trying to do is place
:11:42. > :11:44.early for those young people who are in work and having to make the
:11:45. > :11:52.decision that they cannot afford to leave the family home and stay
:11:53. > :11:56.living with their parents. Can the minister explained the rationale for
:11:57. > :11:59.denying young adults access to housing and support while providing
:12:00. > :12:03.it for older adults? On the face of it and from the minister 's
:12:04. > :12:08.comments, it appears nothing other than demonisation of young people.
:12:09. > :12:13.This is not about demonisation of young people, this is about
:12:14. > :12:15.encouraging young people to make sensible and rational choices about
:12:16. > :12:22.where they are going to live, whether they are in work or not. As
:12:23. > :12:26.a parent of two children between 18 and 201I would be appalled if I felt
:12:27. > :12:31.they were going to leave home to live a life on housing benefits
:12:32. > :12:34.while they still got a bed in my house. Will the Minister confirm
:12:35. > :12:42.that there will be support made available for those with complex
:12:43. > :12:47.needs or who are vulnerable? Absolutely, yes. For those who
:12:48. > :12:50.cannot live with their parents, for those in receipt of disability
:12:51. > :12:57.benefits, they will be exempt from this policy. Further to the question
:12:58. > :13:01.from right honourable friend, can the Minister confirm what I believe
:13:02. > :13:07.she said which is the only thing that is necessary for a young person
:13:08. > :13:10.to demonstrate before being entitled to the housing element of universal
:13:11. > :13:15.credit is for their parent to say they cannot live at home?
:13:16. > :13:20.If it is inappropriate for a young person to live at home with their
:13:21. > :13:27.parents then, yes, they will ks exempt from this policy.
:13:28. > :13:32.YMCA tell me from April they may not be able to house those young people
:13:33. > :13:36.with complex needs of addictions and mental health. For those that may
:13:37. > :13:39.not be able to earn or learn, they can't or won't stay at home, or
:13:40. > :13:42.indeed access temporary accommodation. Can the Minister
:13:43. > :13:46.confirm that in relation to supporting housing for vulnerable
:13:47. > :13:50.people which is at stake, that she can clarify the scope of ex-emeggs
:13:51. > :13:55.and otherwise defer the application of this impact on those at most risk
:13:56. > :13:58.of homelessness until the outcome of the supported housing review. I
:13:59. > :14:03.thank my honourable friend for that question. The YMCA has been part of
:14:04. > :14:09.the consultation process and I have, as I believe I said last night at an
:14:10. > :14:12.event downstairs, they are always a trusted advisor who provide
:14:13. > :14:15.excellent advice and information but absolutely yes, those with complex
:14:16. > :14:21.needs, with mental health conditions will be exempt from this policy.
:14:22. > :14:26.Can the Secretary of State tell me if she's made any assessment of the
:14:27. > :14:28.impact of these changes to the excellent small charities that help
:14:29. > :14:33.young people who find themselves unable to continue to live at home?
:14:34. > :14:38.I have received a great deal of information and had round tables
:14:39. > :14:41.with a number of providers, charities, some smaller ones
:14:42. > :14:44.included. We have been clear, for those for whom it is inappropriate
:14:45. > :14:49.to live at home they will be exempt from this policy. The principle
:14:50. > :14:55.reason why young people become homeless is because of relationship
:14:56. > :14:58.breakdown with their family. Can my honourable friend assure the House
:14:59. > :15:02.that it will be decisions taken by the Secretary of State, not by local
:15:03. > :15:06.decision-makers, who may discriminate against young people
:15:07. > :15:10.when they can in the live with family? I thank my honourable friend
:15:11. > :15:17.for that question and commend him for the compel lent work he has done
:15:18. > :15:21.on the home lszness reduction bill. This will and question of young
:15:22. > :15:24.people informing someone, whether it's a trusted medical professional,
:15:25. > :15:27.of their inability to live at home because their relationship with
:15:28. > :15:32.their parents has broken down and in those cases they will receive the
:15:33. > :15:36.exemption. Given that the Minister has conceded that there is an impact
:15:37. > :15:40.assessment and said she hasn't published it because she doesn't
:15:41. > :15:46.need to, would she care to just think again in view of the concern
:15:47. > :15:51.there is and publish that impact assessment? We did look careful le
:15:52. > :15:54.hly under the duty at the impacts this policy would have and shared
:15:55. > :16:01.that information with the social security advisory committee. I am
:16:02. > :16:04.under no obligation to publish it. Can the Minister confirm how the
:16:05. > :16:10.policy will apply to young people on apprenticeships who may be earning
:16:11. > :16:15.below the national living wage? The honourable gentleman makes a really
:16:16. > :16:23.important point and apprentices will be exempt from this policy. As part
:16:24. > :16:28.of the work I am doing, I went round the streets and city centre of
:16:29. > :16:34.Manchester and was shocked to see the risks young people face from
:16:35. > :16:37.substances and violence. Does the honourable lady not understand this
:16:38. > :16:41.is going to make significantly more young people forced to rough sleep
:16:42. > :16:44.in our country and is going to make those young people increasingly
:16:45. > :16:48.vulnerable, is this not the return, the personification of the return of
:16:49. > :16:51.the nasty party? The honourable gentleman makes the
:16:52. > :16:55.assumption that this will increase homelessness. What we expect to
:16:56. > :16:59.happen is behavioural change and young people, where they can, to
:17:00. > :17:02.stay living with their parents. Where they can not stay living with
:17:03. > :17:09.their parents, then they will be exempt from this policy.
:17:10. > :17:12.At a time when the public is increasingly fed up with politicians
:17:13. > :17:16.who don't do what they say they'll do at election time, can I
:17:17. > :17:19.congratulate my honourable friend on the audacity of sticking to a
:17:20. > :17:24.Conservative manifesto commitment and can she confirm that actually
:17:25. > :17:29.youth unemployment continues to fall and week by week more and more young
:17:30. > :17:33.people have the security and dignity of taking a wage back home. My
:17:34. > :17:37.honourable friend is right to point out that there are 197,000 more
:17:38. > :17:41.young people in work than there were in 2010. He is right, this was a
:17:42. > :17:47.manifesto commitment. This was in the summer budget of 2015. We are
:17:48. > :17:50.delivering a commitment. Thank you. The vast majority of my young
:17:51. > :17:54.constituents who need to access housing benefit are doing so in the
:17:55. > :17:58.private rented sector, already facing crippling costs and great
:17:59. > :18:05.insecurity. Why can the Minister not see that this policy across the
:18:06. > :18:07.board for young people simply makes precarious situations more
:18:08. > :18:11.precarious, it stigmatises young people and is nothing short of a
:18:12. > :18:13.kick in the teeth. Why is the Government ignoring overwhelming
:18:14. > :18:19.evidence from those who work with young people that this policy will
:18:20. > :18:23.make homelessness worse and why will she not drop it? As the honourable
:18:24. > :18:28.lady will have heard, we have put in place a long list of exemptions to
:18:29. > :18:31.protect those who are most vulnerable and able those who need
:18:32. > :18:34.the support to still receive it. She makes a really important point. We
:18:35. > :18:38.are there to support the most vulnerable and we are also there to
:18:39. > :18:43.make sure that there is an even playing field when those in work and
:18:44. > :18:46.those who are not. One of the most straightforward ways in which to be
:18:47. > :18:52.exempt from this policy is to be working for 16 hours a week or more.
:18:53. > :18:55.Like the Minister I am a great supporter of the YMCA, but can the
:18:56. > :18:59.Minister confirm what impact the measures will have on these young
:19:00. > :19:03.people who benefit in many amazing ways from organisations like the
:19:04. > :19:07.YMCA? Well, organisations like the YMCA,
:19:08. > :19:10.are one of the best and training leading providers in the country.
:19:11. > :19:14.They're also a significant housing provider. We are determined to work
:19:15. > :19:17.with stakeholders like them to make sure those young people who are
:19:18. > :19:22.exempt from the policy receive that exemption and are still supported to
:19:23. > :19:30.make sure they're in the training to move into work that they need. My
:19:31. > :19:35.constituency has full service before most other constituencies, a
:19:36. > :19:43.temporary homeless accommodation framework is ?175 a week and before
:19:44. > :19:49.universal credit my constituent had ?7 extra to find. Now it's 60 #3dz.
:19:50. > :19:55.Much more than he gets, even before he pays for food, light, heat,
:19:56. > :19:57.anything else. How is that fir? I think what the honourable
:19:58. > :20:01.gentleman didn't indicate was how old his constituency was. What is
:20:02. > :20:05.really important is that we are focussing support on those who need
:20:06. > :20:09.it most and when it comes to young people we are obliging them to make
:20:10. > :20:11.the same sort of choices that his constituents who are in work for 16
:20:12. > :20:15.hours a week or more are also making.
:20:16. > :20:17.Can the Minister confirm that this Government is doing everything
:20:18. > :20:20.possible to prepare young people for the world of work so that fewer
:20:21. > :20:26.young people are at risk of falling into a life on benefits?
:20:27. > :20:29.I thank my honourable friend for that question. Of course what the
:20:30. > :20:32.Government is bringing forward in April is also the youth obligation
:20:33. > :20:36.which is about making sure that young people who are not in work are
:20:37. > :20:41.in the appropriate training or apprenticeships to put them in the
:20:42. > :20:46.best position to move into work. Could I return to the definition of
:20:47. > :20:51.inappropriate to return, would it include the situation I have with a
:20:52. > :20:54.young man who was kicked out business his step-father for being
:20:55. > :20:58.gay but could return home if he denied his sexuality?
:20:59. > :21:01.Yes, and I think bef been very clear on that. Where a young person would
:21:02. > :21:05.find it impossible, inappropriate to return home and I think the
:21:06. > :21:14.situation she outlines is absolutely one we have considered. Yes, they
:21:15. > :21:18.would receive the exemption. How is it in the case of my honourable
:21:19. > :21:21.friend just now, who is going to make those decisions, because
:21:22. > :21:24.similar exemptions exist for victims of domestic violence and legal aid
:21:25. > :21:29.where they need a letter from a doctor, a specialist agency and 37%
:21:30. > :21:33.of women still report not being able to access legal aid so how does the
:21:34. > :21:40.Minister propose this is going to work, how much is it going to cost,
:21:41. > :21:43.and then what will it save? The anticipation is that over the
:21:44. > :21:46.period of this parliament the policy will save in the region of ?105
:21:47. > :21:50.million. We are absolutely committed to making sure that those who are
:21:51. > :21:53.victims of domestic violence are exempt from this policy and
:21:54. > :21:59.recognise the impact on young women who have been victims of domestic
:22:00. > :22:03.violence and the importance they're supported. The Young people she
:22:04. > :22:08.describes bear no resemblance to the young people I used to work with at
:22:09. > :22:11.the youth homelessness charity Centrepoint, many of whom had
:22:12. > :22:14.experienced horrendous physical mental and emotional abuse which
:22:15. > :22:19.meant they understandably no longer had a relationship with their
:22:20. > :22:22.families. How does she expect those young people to prove that they can
:22:23. > :22:26.not return home, they can't simply pick up the phone to their parents,
:22:27. > :22:30.they shouldn't be forced to recount to a stranger again and again those
:22:31. > :22:35.stories about what has happened to them. What is she going to do to
:22:36. > :22:37.make sure young people are not subjected to reliving that
:22:38. > :22:42.horrendous abuse they've already suffered?
:22:43. > :22:45.Those who have reported abuse to a stakeholder, a trusted professional
:22:46. > :22:50.will be exempt from this policy. It is our intention to make sure that
:22:51. > :22:53.we establish a long list of stakeholders who can take that
:22:54. > :23:01.reporting. It should of course be the case they should only have to
:23:02. > :23:04.report it once. Yet again due to idea logical reasons the Tories have
:23:05. > :23:11.identified a problem that doesn't really exist. Less than 1% of
:23:12. > :23:15.18-21-year-olds claim jobseeker's allowance and housing benefit at the
:23:16. > :23:22.same time. We have already heard this will save ?105 million if it
:23:23. > :23:28.works as planned. Can the Government Minister tell me, one stakeholder
:23:29. > :23:32.that agrees this will help young people into long-term stable work?
:23:33. > :23:36.We put this in our manifesto for the 2015 election and included it in the
:23:37. > :23:39.summer budget 2015. We have been clear this is about providing
:23:40. > :23:42.fairness for those in work as well as those out of work and making sure
:23:43. > :23:51.that young people have the same decisions to make about the
:23:52. > :23:55.affordability of their housing. This is the most shameful policy that
:23:56. > :23:59.they've brought forward on the most vulnerable, not to produce an impact
:24:00. > :24:02.statement is an absolute disgrace. When the Minister talks about
:24:03. > :24:07.getting people back into work, let's talk about what the Government have
:24:08. > :24:11.done for wages for young people. ?3. 50 an hour as an apprentice wage,
:24:12. > :24:13.how can that person get to work when they're denied assistance they'll
:24:14. > :24:18.need for housing if they can not work near their place of home?
:24:19. > :24:22.As I said earlier in response to my honourable friend, apprentices will
:24:23. > :24:27.be exempt. I have come across many reasons why
:24:28. > :24:33.18-21-year-olds have left home but never I have to say have I seen
:24:34. > :24:39.claiming housing benefit as an incentive. Given the long list of
:24:40. > :24:41.exemptions isn't it easier if the Minister scraps this policy
:24:42. > :24:48.altogether? The Government included this as a manifesto commitment and
:24:49. > :24:51.it is determined to deliver it. The Minister talks about an even
:24:52. > :24:55.playing field. If she's so confident this is fair, why won't she publish
:24:56. > :24:59.that impact assessment, what has she got to hide?
:25:00. > :25:03.There wills absolutely nothing to hide, I have considered carefully
:25:04. > :25:05.the public sector equality duty and the assessment was shared with the
:25:06. > :25:21.social security advisory committee who chose not to consult on this.
:25:22. > :25:24.She's almost there, she said this policy - could she confirm it's in
:25:25. > :25:27.the region of 10,000, is it less or more?
:25:28. > :25:34.The policy is expected to affect 5,000 young people in the first year
:25:35. > :25:37.and 10,000 a year in steady state. Given that the number of people
:25:38. > :25:41.rough sleeping in this country has more than doubled since 2010, does
:25:42. > :25:44.the Minister think this policy which singles out young adults is going to
:25:45. > :25:49.make that shameful statistic better or worse?
:25:50. > :25:53.As I have said repeatedly we have put in place a long list of
:25:54. > :25:56.exemptions to prevent homelessness, those unable to return to the family
:25:57. > :26:05.home will be exempt from this policy and we do not expect to see an
:26:06. > :26:08.increase in homelessness. The impact assessment is scandalous, can the
:26:09. > :26:12.Minister tell us what impact was measured on the vulnerable young
:26:13. > :26:16.person who has had to leave home due to difficulties or abuse who's been
:26:17. > :26:21.asked to prove that abuse just so they can get house support they need
:26:22. > :26:23.to live away from their family? A vulnerable young person who has
:26:24. > :26:30.had to leave home because of abuse will of course be exempt.
:26:31. > :27:03.Order. MrSpeaker, I beg to move that legal
:27:04. > :27:05.be given to