Proceeding contribution from Mike O'Brien (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 5 December 2007. It occurred during Ministerial statement on Benefits Uprating.
Benefits Uprating
It is interesting to read what the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Waterson) said last year and compare it with what he says today. In the past, he said that the Government would do nothing about the Turner report, but we passed one Bill in July and are about to introduce a further Bill. He claimed that nothing would be done about the Child Support Agency, but we have just taken through legislation in relation to it. We made it absolutely clear that we would reduce pensioner poverty, and the whole statement is about ensuring that. We are putting an extra £11 billion into helping pensioners. That money would not have been in the system had the Conservatives maintained office in 1997. Two million pensioners have been lifted out of poverty, and 1 million out of relative poverty. Those are enormously good figures. Had the Conservatives stayed in power, pensioners would be on £69 week. Instead, no pensioner need be on less than £119 a week, and that figure will rise next April to £124 for a single pensioner. The hon. Gentleman asked me about a number of issues, including those in relation to fraud. We are committed to protecting the integrity of the benefits system and ensuring that we pay our customers the right benefits at the right time. May I make it clear that fraud in income support and jobseeker's allowance has been reduced by about two thirds since we took over from the Conservatives? It is down from 7.2 per cent. to 2.1 per cent., and is now the lowest ever recorded. Since 1997, our Department has put enormous effort into reducing fraud in the benefits system, with great success. Fraud now stands at its lowest level—down from an estimated £2 billion in 2001. As well as changing the way in which fraud is dealt with, we are addressing error in the system through benefit simplification. Today's announcements will help in that process. The hon. Gentleman also asked how we would ensure that people were able to claim pension credit. Our officials are ready today to accept telephone calls from pensioners who wish to claim pension credit. I know that the changes announced today will be welcomed by some of the pensioners' organisations, as they have asked for them in their conversations with me for some time. The whole basis of those changes is to ensure that take-up of pension credit increases and that people get help with their council tax. Those who are on low income and struggling with council tax, many of whom did not fill in the form that they got from the Pension Service, and did not send it on to their local authority and get the benefit to which they were entitled, will no longer have to sign that form. Many of them thought that the form was confusing and did not want to sign it. In future, that form will be dealt with automatically by the Pension Service, and pensioners will not have to worry about it, sign it or pass it on to local councils. That will not only be a saving for local councils; I hope that it will ensure that more people who are entitled to help with their council tax get it. The hon. Gentleman asked about losers in relation to the backdating. There will be no actual losers, as we are redistributing the money within the budget—[Interruption.] I see that Opposition Front-Bench Members are chortling. Overall, there will not be losers, as the money will be redistributed within the budget. During the next nine months, we will encourage some people to make the application before the change is introduced. There need be no losers in the long term either. We want those who are entitled to claim the backdating for 12 months to make that claim before next October. We will therefore work with some of the pensioners' organisations to ensure that we support their campaign to get more people to apply. The hon. Gentleman also asked about the Young report in relation to the financial assistance scheme. We hope to receive the Young report shortly—I have not yet seen a copy of it, but I hope to get it within days. We will then consider it, and I hope to announce in due course our response to that report. The hon. Gentleman mentioned proposals in relation to risk-sharing, which he said that he supported. We have looked into that and we could look at it more broadly, but I am not anxious to rewrite the whole of pensions and trust law in order to bring it in. That would not be helpful. The hon. Gentleman might find it worth talking to some leading figures in the CBI, as some are a little concerned that it might lead to a movement from defined benefit schemes into the new system, as some companies are not prepared to go straight from such defined benefit schemes into defined contribution schemes. The issues around this subject should be examined with great care, but I do not want to rush into this just yet. The hon. Gentleman said that his party supported Turner and automatic enrolment and, indeed, wanted to ensure that it was a success. I accept the hon. Gentleman's good faith in saying that, because I think he has been broadly supportive. I have to say, however, that his colleague, the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling), has not filled me with any confidence that he takes that view; neither is it the case, I also have to say, that he has adopted the same role as his predecessor in supporting personal accounts. I have seen the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell take every opportunity to run down the whole idea of personal accounts. I think he needs to be really careful, as we have built a consensus on it. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Eastbourne for contributing to it, but I warn him that the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell takes every opportunity, as I said, to undermine it. We are now looking at another example, as the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell has raised questions about the chairman of the Personal Accounts Delivery Authority, Mr. Paul Myners. He has a record for dealing with issues in the City, which meant that when he was appointed by a perfectly proper procedure, he was been broadly welcomed by stakeholders as a serious figure with a strong record. He has a world-class business record and extensive knowledge of financial services. Judged in a fair and open competition as the best man to lead PADA, his appointment has been widely welcomed by the industry, yet the hon. Gentleman has now attacked him. I ask myself whether this is yet another example of that hon. Member taking the opportunity to have a go—[Interruption.] ... I know that Paul Myners has written to the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell, pointing out that while that hon. Member may not find his company of the sort that he would want, it appears that the Opposition spokesman on trade and industry matters invited Mr. Myners to dinner after ““Question Time””. We seem to have a slight split on the Tory Front Bench there. I hope that the hon. Member for Eastbourne will continue to support personal accounts and perhaps put the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell back in his box.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 468 c845-7
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Council tax benefits Children Housing benefit Jobseeker's allowance Income support Pension credit Pensioners Workplace pensions Pension rights Overseas residence Social security benefits State retirement pensions Young people Telephone services Uprating Pension Service
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 23:30:58 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_427229
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_427229
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_427229