---

Benefits Simplification

I, too, will try to be brief because I support the comments of my colleagues on the Work and Pensions Committee, who made good speeches, and I endorse the report, to which I contributed and was happy to sign up to. Before I came here, I was in discussions with my caseworker. The Minister will receive a bit of an angry letter about my constituent, Mr. Brandon of Leyton. He is suffering from cancer and has survived two attacks of C. difficile. I do not say that the Benefits Agency was not trying to be helpful—it was, initially. It offered him benefits for which he might have been eligible. However, in the end, the position was too complex for it and for him. He has written a sad letter saying, ““I now withdraw my claim.”” Yet I can look at the case and say that I am sure that he is eligible for other benefits. That is an example of the complexity of the benefits system. We have a high level of poverty in this country. Indeed, reducing child poverty is one of the Government's targets. There are two main reasons for that: the fact that benefit levels are too low—I want to make a quick point about that while I have the chance—and the complexity in the system. There is a high level of unclaimed benefits, which just go back to the Treasury coffers and are not redistributed to alleviate poverty. Although that money is allocated initially, it makes no impact, which is a great shame. Benefit levels are too low. The Child Poverty Action Group has given as an example of that the category of families with disabled members. Under the heading ““Adequacy””, the group says:"““The poverty line for a couple with children aged 5 and 14 years is £306, but the out of work safety net income is £204.44—just 67 per cent. of the poverty line income. DWP's own research suggests that DLA is insufficient to meet the extra needs of disability.””" Only yesterday the Royal National Institute of Blind People lobbied for higher levels of disability living allowance for blind people. I agree with that and with the point that the hon. Member for Weston-super-Mare (John Penrose) made about child benefit being effective and about its big take-up. That could have an impact on meeting our child poverty targets. I argue—I have the floor, so I have the chance to argue—for a higher level for second and subsequent children, which is also part of an ongoing campaign. On complexity, the main point in my speech is about the case for co-ordinating the criteria, so that organisations such as Citizens Advice can make applications that then link up with each other, and so that if someone is eligible for a benefit, they receive the other benefits for which they are also eligible. When we were in the United States as part of our investigation for the report, we saw that in operation. One particular charity group—the equivalent, almost, of Citizens Advice—had a form on the stocks that could be taken forward and applications made. We are long way from that in this country, which is a great shame. We need to combine a number of the benefits or link the criteria for them. That relates to the other points made by the Child Poverty Action Group, about a rights-based ethos, which would enable decisions to be challenged where they were thought to be wrong and act as"““a powerful lever to improve decision making.””" The group's briefing continues:"““Claimants should have access to the information and advocacy that will help them understand and access their welfare rights.””" I have two more brief points to make, about Help the Aged's representations to us. First, the charity says that there should be more automatic payments of benefits, saying that they should be"““driven forward urgently in order to tackle the problem of low take ups. If implemented well over 500,000 pensioners could be taken out of poverty.””" Help the Aged's other point is that the Pension Service should have"““the investment it needs to offer Pension Credit, Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit to all pensioners over the phone rather than just offering these three benefits to those eligible for Pension Credit.””" The Pension Service currently just has to send out a 28-page form if it thinks that a pensioner could be eligible for those other benefits. We can do a lot more in that field. A lot more can and should be done. The Committee was right to draw attention to the need for a vision and the drive to implement it. I urge the Minister to that end.