division_name: Justice &#8212; Jobseekers (Back to Work Schemes) Bill
motion: <p class="" pid="a.826.2/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.</p>
  
  <p class="" pid="a.826.2/2" pwmotiontext="yes">I hope that I conduct this debate in a workman-like way, as I did the debate on the allocation of time motion. The Bill will ensure that following the recent Court of Appeal judgment in the case of Wilson and Reilly <i>v. </i>the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the taxpayer will not have to repay to claimants the benefits lost because of their failure to take part in mandatory back-to-work programmes. It will also enable the Government to impose benefit sanctions on those who fail to participate in a mandatory programme where a decision has been put on hold because of the Wilson and Reilly case.</p>
  
  <p pid="a.872.4/1" pwmotiontext="yes"><i>Question put, </i>That the Bill be now read a Second time.</p>
  
  <p class="italic" pid="a.872.4/2" pwmotiontext="yes">The House divided:</p>
  
  <p pid="a.872.4/3" pwmotiontext="yes">Ayes 277, Noes 57.</p>