| Home Page |
Column 1
T H EP A R L I A M E N T A R Y D E B A T E S
OFFICIAL REPORT
IN THE FIRST SESSION OF THE FIFTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND
[WHICH OPENED 27 APRIL 1992]
FORTY-SECOND YEAR OF THE REIGN OF
HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II
SIXTH SERIES VOLUME 219
THIRTEENTH VOLUME OF SESSION 1992-93
House of Commons
Monday 15 February 1993
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[ Madam Speaker-- in the Chair ]
Oral Answers to Questions
SOCIAL SECURITY
Disability Living Allowance
1. Mr. Michael : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the target period within which applicants for disability living allowance should receive a decision ; and what target he has set for responding to representations from hon. Members on behalf of constituents in respect of applications for disability living allowance.
4. Mr. Sheerman : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what new steps he is taking to ensure that the delays in responding to applications for disability living allowance are eliminated.
The Minister for Social Security and Disabled People (Mr. Nicholas Scott) : Current targets are that 60 per cent. of applicants for disability living allowance should receive a decision within 30 days and 95 per cent. should do so within 55 days. However, the latter target is under review. The Benefits Agency has also undertaken to reply to correspondence from hon. Members within an average of 20 days.
I meet the chief executive of the Benefits Agency regularly to review progress. As I have already advised the
Column 2
House, the level of work outstanding on disability living allowance has been reduced to normal levels--60 per cent. of new claims are being cleared within 30 days and older cases are being targeted.Mr. Michael : I have had a rash of letters from the head of the Benefits Agency since I tabled this question, but none met the 20-day target--most of them were replies to letters that had been hanging around on his desk for three months or more. Does the Minister recognise that by the time constituents go to their Member of Parliament they have often been trying to get sense out of the system in person, by letter and by telephone for a year or more? Does he also recognise that these are some of the most vulnerable people in our society? Whom does he want us to blame--the head of the Benefits Agency, for running a sloppy and incompetent administration? Or should we not blame the Secretary of State and seek his resignation?
Mr. Scott : If the hon. Gentleman was present for previous exchanges on the matter, he will know how much the Government and the agency regret the backlog that was caused by the early surge of claims for disability living allowance. I am confident that it is now under control and that targets will be met in future. As for letters, the agency gave priority to the clearance of claims. It is now writing to Members of Parliament with an up-to-date report on the way in which the claim have been decided.
Mr. Sheerman : Is the Minister aware of the widespread anxiety about the quality of decision making by the Benefits Agency on disability living allowance? If the quality of decision making is bad, it will store up a great deal more trouble and anxiety for the vulnerable people who are affected. Will the Minister give two assurances? First, will he thoroughly investigate every allegation in The Sunday Times article yesterday and report to the House? Secondly, will he give a belated Valentine to the people affected and say that no one will lose out as a result of knock-on effects or any other repercussion caused by the disgraceful circus of
disorganisation?
Mr. Scott : No one will lose money, because the payment of any benefit that is awarded will be backdated
Column 3
to the time of the claim. [Hon. Members :-- "What about the knock-on effects?"] As for other backlogs, outstanding letters from Members of Parliament should be cleared by the end of February. I believe that from then on we shall be in a steady state.Mr. Alan Howarth : In considering the administrative practicalities of providing support for disabled people rapidly, sensitively and cost- effectively, as I know is his wish, will my right hon. Friend also look sympathetically at the case for providing cash rather than services to certain severely disabled people who would rather organise their own personal assistance? Is there any reason why the Government should not give a fair wind to the private Member's Bill of my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Kent (Mr. Rowe)?
Mr. Scott : On the latter point, it will rest with local authorities from April this year to provide packages of community care. Local authorities are not enabled to pay cash, but they will be able to provide services. It is the intention of colleagues in the Department of Health that disabled people should be closely involved with the development of those packages. As the House already knows, I intend to legislate in the near future for a successor body to the independent living fund.
Mr. Spring : Will my right hon. Friend confirm that more than 200, 000 people who were not benefiting previously have benefited from the introduction of the new disability living allowance? Is that not striking proof positive that the Government are mindful of the needs of the disabled and of helping constructively in that respect?
Mr. Scott : I well understand my hon. Friend's remarks and I am grateful to him for his support. The concept and, increasingly, the delivery of DLA has been spectacularly successful. Hundreds of thousands of people have benefited from it and the self-assessment system is working extremely well--better than any of the previous arrangements. The staff of the agency are to be congratulated on their achievement.
Mr. Frank Field : For those constituents who come to our surgeries because they are gaining no money from the benefits, could the Minister give us the timetable during which their claims will be met and paid?
Mr. Scott : I have already told the House what will happen to new claims, which will be met within targets. The Benefits Agency intends to ensure that all claims received up to December last year will be handled by April this year.
Mr. Jacques Arnold : May I thank my right hon. Friend for the way in which he responded to the embarrassement of riches in terms of the number of applicants for disability living allowance? Is it not worth pointing out that since 1979 the Government have increased spending on the long-term sick and disabled by 170 per cent?
Mr. Scott : That is true, and DLA will further increase that figure. About 370,000 awards are being made under DLA, which is a great achievement.
Mr. Dewar : Does the Minister accept, as he must on the evidence, that the DLA experience has been a disaster for the many applicants left in limbo and also for the benefits system? The news that many people, some with no money coming in from a benefit source, will have to wait until
Column 4
April will add to the distress. Does the right hon. Gentleman defend the distinction made by the chief executive of the Benefits Agency, who argues that no DLA file has been lost, although some are difficult to find? Has he seen the reports about a DLA filing system which does not fit the files and is 40 miles from the officers who take the decisions? How on earth could something like that arise?Mr. Scott : The remote filing system at Nelson serves not only DLA but a considerable number of other benefits and it seems sensible to keep those files at a central point. I acknowledge that there were delays, which caused considerable distress to a large number of customers during the early days of the benefit. I have apologised to the House for that, and I have acknowledged that the surge in claims at the launch of the benefit caused the problem. We are largely through that, and shall be able to meet targets from now on.
Pensions
2. Mr. Simon Coombs : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was the average value of an occupational pension (a) in 1979 and (b) in the latest year for which figures are available.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Social Security (Miss Ann Widdecombe) : I am sure that my hon. Friend will be pleaseto hear that between 1979 and 1988, the latest year for which figures are available, it is estimated that the average value of occupational pensions in payment rose from £34 per week to £51.80 per week at 1988 prices--this represents an increase of about 52 per cent.
Mr. Coombs : Will my hon. Friend confirm that about 70 per cent. of recently retired people obtain occupational pensions, and that that trend has been rising steadily throughout the past decade? Can she confirm that it remains Government policy to encourage as many people as possible to follow that means of provision?
Miss Widdecombe : Yes, I have pleasure in confirming that my hon. Friend's figures are correct. They exclude the 5 million people who now provide for themselves through personal pensions, which is another sign of the Government's commitment to a proper combination of private and public provision for retirement income.
Mr. Norman Hogg : Is the Minister aware that retired local government officers in Scotland on average receive only £2,014 per annum from occupational pensions? Does she accept that that is below the figure bandied about as the sort of pension paid to retired local government officers? Does that not show that, before the Government start to tamper with the state pension, they should have regard to the fact that many occupational pensions do not pay that much money to their pensioners?
Miss Widdecombe : I was pointing out that occupational pensions pay an increasing amount to their pensioners. The figures are somewhat depressed if one includes in them those who retired when occupational pensions were in their infancy. The hon. Gentleman is perfectly capable of understanding what an average is, however, and that if there is an average pension, some people will receive far more than that and some will get somewhat less.
Column 5
Mrs. Chaplin : Will my hon. Friend confirm that the occupational pensions industry is increasingly equalising the pension age at 65 and that it would be helpful from its point of view if we equalised the state retirement age at 65 as well? I declare an interest in that I fully intend to work until the age of 65 at least.
Miss Widdecombe : I am delighted to hear that my hon. Friend intends to work until she is 65 and I am sure that she will represent her constituents well throughout that time. The Government are entirely committed to equalising the state pension age and our equalisation proposals were set out in a consultation document. Those four options are still under consideration.
3. Mr. Burden : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is his policy on maintaining the value of the basic retirement pension in real terms.
The Secretary of State for Social Security (Mr. Peter Lilley) : Since 1979, we have more than fulfilled our pledge to maintain the real value of the basic state pension.
Mr. Burden : The Secretary of State will recall that since the Government scrapped the link with earnings, single pensioners and married couples are, respectively, about £17.65 and £28 per week worse off. My city of Birmingham has more than 103,000 pensioners living in poverty who are forced to choose between having a decent diet and meeting the cost of rising fuel bills. Some 39 per cent. of them have no central heating and 45 per cent. have no loft insulation. Can the Secretary of State or the Government really be proud of their record of cutting the value of the state pension?
Mr. Lilley : Because we have focused additional resources on the most needy, and because we have encouraged people to make increased provision over and above their basic state pension, the average income of pensioners has risen more every year under this Government than under the five years of the previous Labour Government. So the answer is yes, we are proud of our record and the hon. Gentleman should be ashamed of his.
Mr. Dunn : Will my right hon. Friend condemn a policy that seeks to means-test the state pension as well as to discourage private provision? Is he aware that such a policy is now an official policy of the Labour party?
Mr. Lilley : My hon. Friend is absolutely right--it is a most extraordinary combination for any political party to adopt. The right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith) has specifically required his social justice commission to consider means-testing every universal benefit, including the basic pension. The Opposition are bound to follow such a policy because of their commitment to uprate that pension in line with earnings rather than prices. If they are to get extra resources for the most needy, they will have to means-test that pension and they know it.
Mr. Kirkwood : Notwithstanding the Secretary of State's assurances about the Government's intention regarding price protection for the basic state pension, does he acknowledge that the value of that pension depends to a large extent on fuel bills, food bills and public utility costs? If there is any truth in the rumour that the Treasury
Column 6
is considering imposing value added tax on those items, will the right hon. Gentleman's Department ensure that those costs are made up through the social security system?Mr. Lilley : As the hon. Gentleman knows, we do not answer hypothetical questions, but he will be interested in the fact that if, since 1979, pensions had been raised in line with the pensioners index--the index which looks specifically at the goods and services that pensioners buy--rather than with the retail prices index, as we have done, pensioners would be receiving £6.65 per week less.
Pensions and Benefits (Choice)
5. Mrs. Roe : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what proposals he has for increasing the control and choice individuals have over their social security benefits and pensions.
Mr. Lilley : As my hon. Friend knows, the Government are committed to enabling individuals to take greater control of all areas of their lives. Our policy on earnings-related pension provision is an excellent example of that commitment. Since 1988, 5 million people have taken out personal pensions, in addition to the 11 million people who are members of occupational pension schemes.
Mrs. Roe : Will my right hon. Friend confirm that, since 1979, Conservative Governments have maintained their manifesto pledges to increase the basic pension in line with prices? Does he agree that that clearly demonstrates that Conservatives take their manifesto pledges seriously? Will he therefore take this opportunity to condemn the scaremongering carried out by Labour Members of Parliament who frequently suggest that we are about to break our pledges?
Mr. Lilley : My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The Conservative party has a reputation second to none for keeping its pledges. The uprating statement in the autumn demonstrated that we keep our pledges to pensioners and families, despite the scaremongering by Labour Members which preceded the outcome of that round. The Labour party has a lot to be ashamed of, as it broke its pledges to pensioners, cut the real value of pensions by 60 per cent., cut the Christmas bonus and robbed pensioners through inflation, which wiped out their savings.
Mr. Rooney : Does the Secretary of State realise that social security benefits constitute a two-way package whereby people contribute to the national insurance fund and then, in return, when the time comes, make their claims? In the 13 years of the Conservative Government there has been a 50 per cent. increase in the rate of contribution, but a withdrawal of the earnings-related element, sickness, unemployment and invalidity benefits, widows pensions and a range of other matters. How does the Secretary of State answer that charge?
Mr. Lilley : I do recognise that. As I said to the Select Committee on Social Security, I think that there is more strength in the contributory principle than many intellectuals believe. However, the hon. Gentleman had better have an argument with one such intellectual, the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith) who, in his leadership statement, questioned whether the Labour party should maintain the distinction between national insurance benefits, which are available
Column 7
only on the contribution test, and means- tested benefits. I said that I recognised that issue raised by the hon. Gentleman, but does the Labour party? And will the Labour party keep its long-standing commitment to that principle? It seems not.Mr. Brazier : Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the best ways of encouraging alternative provision, especially occupational pension provision, is the control of inflation, and that no occupational pension fund, however well funded, could cope with the inflation levels that occurred under the last Labour Government?
Mr. Lilley : My hon. Friend is right. We are uprating the pension by 3.6 per cent.--the rate of inflation prior to the uprating statement. The current, most recent, figure is 1.7 per cent.--half that level. That means that during the past 12 months inflation has risen less than it did on average for every month of all five years of the last Labour Government.
Mrs. Golding : Is the Minister aware that the only choice open to many pensioners is to live from hand to mouth? Why does he close his eyes to the desperate plight of those pensioners who are refused additional benefits because they receive tiny occupational pensions?
Mr. Lilley : We have been increasing the amount of resources channelled to pensioners with the lowest incomes. I am sure that the hon. Lady will welcome the fact that in the uprating statement I was able to confirm that, on top of the increase in line with inflation, an extra £500 million would go, through the pensioners' premiums, to those on the lowest incomes.
Mr. Lidington : Is my right hon. Friend aware that thousands of Maxwell pensioners had no choice because membership of the pension scheme was a condition of their employment? Has my right hon. Friend a message for those office holders who are still haggling and delaying the unfreezing of the common investment fund, which should be paid to the benefit of those pensioners in need?
Mr. Lilley : My hon. Friend powerfully makes his point, which I think will have much support on both sides of the House. We hope that Sir John Cuckney's request is successful and that matters will be resolved rapidly. We want those involved--liquidators, solicitors, executives or trustees--to bring about an early settlement and distribute the money so that the pensioners know that they can keep receiving their pensions.
Pensions
6. Mr. Winnick : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what changes he is considering to the state retirement pension.
Miss Widdecombe : We have more than maintained the value of the basic state pension since 1979.
Mr. Winnick : If the Government have really dropped the idea of means-testing state pensions--we do not know for certain whether they have- -is not that only because of the outrage in the country when reports appeared last week, such as the one in The Sunday Times, which clearly showed that that was what the Government intended to do? What possible justification can there be for raising the
Column 8
state pension age for women from 60 to 65? There is no justification : it was not in the Tory election manifesto, and it would be quite wrong to take that step.Miss Widdecombe : On means-testing the basic state pension, the more intelligent Members on both sides will be aware that our manifesto promises are a somewhat better guide than press speculation. Furthermore, actions speak louder than words. As we promised in our manifesto to uprate pensions in line with prices and, despite immense public expenditure pressures, still went ahead and did that in the autumn statement, I find it amazing that the hon. Gentleman has not yet realised that we take our manifesto promises extremely seriously.
Dr. Spink : Will my hon. Friend confirm that the greatest threat to pensioners, particularly those on small fixed incomes, is inflation and that in one year of the Labour party's term of office more than a quarter of the value of the basic pension was wiped out by inflation?
Miss Widdecombe : Indeed--for all the talk by the Opposition about how pensioners would be better off from an earnings link, the fact remains that when the Labour party practised it, not only did inflation wipe out the value of the increases but retirement income actually rose no more throughout the whole time of the Labour Government than it has risen every year during our period of office.
Independent Living Fund
7. Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will make a statement on future arrangements for the operation of the independent living fund.
Mr. Scott : Details of these arrangements will be announced shortly.
Mr. Hinchliffe : Is the Minister aware that, putting it mildly, there seems to be some confusion between his Department and the Department of Health about the arrangements from April this year? Can he clarify the suggestion that there will be a £500 per week maximum for payment from the independent living fund plus the value of local authoriity services to any one client and that clients requiring more than that amount will be expected to enter residential or nursing care permanently? If that is so, and if care capping is to be introduced by the Department, does he accept that that completely undermines the whole process of assessment being introduced in the community care changes with effect from April?
Mr. Scott : I shall certainly not be tempted into commenting on what I understand was a leaked document. As I have already made clear, the time will come when it will be right for me to announce to the House the full arrangements for the assessment and delivery of services, and any additional cash which may be necessary to support independent living for disabled people.
Mr. Bradley : When the Minister considers future arrangements, will he look again at the chaos governing relations between the disability living allowance and applications to the independent living fund? Although he said in an answer to me that the trustees have discretion to take applications from people who have applied for DLA,
Column 9
in practice that discretion has been taken away by the trustees due to lack of funds and they are taking applications only from people in receipt of the old attendance allowance. That is a double blow to people waiting in desperation for their DLA to come through. They are doubly disadvantaged because they will not now be allowed to apply to the ILF. Surely the Government have some responsibility for this chaos and for ensuring that people are not doubly disadvantaged, first by having to wait for the DLA and then by losing out in terms of money from the ILF. Will the right hon. Gentleman look into future arrangements and ensure that people are compensated for the chaos that the Government have created?Mr. Scott : No, I do not believe that that is so. I can only repeat that it would have been open to the trustees of the independent living fund to use their discretion to deem people to be in a position in which they would qualify for a payment from the ILF. We are, in any case, only about six weeks away from the beginning of the next financial year and the launch of the new independent living fund.
Transfer Payments
8. Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what proposals he has to reduce the current levels of public expenditure on social security transfer payments.
Mr. Lilley : Our spending plans were set out in the autumn statement on 12 November 1992.
Mr. Banks : Does the Secretary of State accept that there is something deeply offensive about an evening-suited Prime Minister standing up at the Carlton club and addressing a bunch of well-fed Tories about the possibility of people on benefit having to work to get their benefit? Is not it outrageous that the poorest in our society, particularly unemployed people, should have in effect to pay twice over for the economic incompetence of this most stupid and recalcitrant Government? For the sake of better clarity, will the right hon. Gentleman now make it quite clear that under no circumstances will a Conservative Government means test the basic state retirement pension--yes or no?
Mr. Lilley : The world has been a better place since the hon. Member and his party improved their sartorial appearance. Under the previous Labour Government, whom the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) supported, one condition of receiving benefit was that one did nothing. I agree with my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister that it is more sensible to look for ways of increasing the opportunities and requirements for people to do something--to improve their qualifications, to improve their contact with work and to contribute to the community. I think that that has widespread support. I made it quite clear that, unlike the social justice commission, which was established by the leader of the Labour party, we have no plans to means test the basic pension.
Mr. Peter Bottomley : Does my right hon. Friend recognise that there are no questions about child benefit, because one of the ways of ensuring the welfare of children is for the Government to go on meeting their manifesto pledge, which was also set out in the autumn statement,
Column 10
that child benefit will continue to recognise that when people have children their taxable capacity is reduced but their needs increased? The child cash allowance is more equitable than a child tax allowance.Mr. Lilley : My hon. Friend will know that we have no plans to abandon our manifesto pledge, which we upheld in the autumn statement.
Mobility Allowance
10. Lady Olga Maitland : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many people receive mobility allowance ; and what was the figure in 1979.
Mr. Scott : In 1979 an estimated average of 95,000 people received mobility allowance. By 1992. the figure had risen to 660,000--almost a sevenfold increase. The introduction of disability living allowance has extended help with mobility costs even further.
Lady Olga Maitland : I congratulate my right hon. Friend on those excellent figures. Will he confirm that they show an increase of 173 per cent. in real terms? Does he agree that that is acceptable progress, compared with the carping and jeering of Labour Members, whose party always failed to deliver the same level of support to sick and disabled people?
Mr. Scott : I certainly agree with my hon. Friend. I am particularly glad that, unlike the Labour party, we were able to introduce the disability living allowance in one go rather than having to phase it in over four years. I am delighted at the success of the new lower rates that have been introduced for DLA, which will make a significant improvement in the provision for mobility costs.
Mr. Wigley : May I press the Minister further on the reply that he gave earlier? Is he aware that since he last answered the question four weeks ago, hon. Members have received replies that had been waiting two or three months and that his assurances do not ring all that true? When will all those who are waiting have their cases cleared up, because it is they who are suffering from the Government's subterfuge in staging the introduction of the benefit?
Mr. Scott : I well understand the puzzlement of hon. Members who have received letters informing them of the outcome of claims that were settled weeks ago. It is perfectly understandable for the Benefits Agency to have concentrated on clearing those claims first and then bringing hon. Members up to date. Hon. Members' letters should be cleared by the end of this month. All new Members' letters will now be met within the 20-day target. Last year's claims will be cleared by April, and reviews and appeals should be cleared by May.
Mr. Milligan : I welcome my right hon. Friend's announcement about the speeding up of the payment
Madam Speaker : Order. The hon. Gentleman must ask Question 11.
Disability Living Allowance
11. Mr. Milligan : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what action he is taking to improve the administration of the disability living allowance.
Column 11
Mr. Scott : As I have said before, I take a close, personal interest in the administration of disability living allowance and meet the chief executive of the Benefits Agency regularly to review progress and discuss the improvements in hand. Apart from the steps already taken, the agency is reviewing the procedures for processing claims, setting up additional processing centres and increasing the training for staff.
Mr. Milligan : I welcome the additional announcements that my right hon. Friend has made for speeding up the payment of DLA, which will also be welcome to my constituents. Is he aware that dozens of my constituents have had their applications lost and have waited months without a reply, and that, according to The Sunday Times yesterday, more than 1,400 people are in that situation? Can he explain how that has happened and what measures he is taking to deal with the problem?
Mr. Scott : I say to my hon. Friend as I have said on a number of occasions, both from the Dispatch Box and in other forums, that we recognise that there was an unexpected surge of claims following the successful launch of the new benefit, and particularly as a result of the success of the advertising campaigns. There is no doubt that the agency went through a rough time early on in overcoming the problems. I am sure that it is now in a position to overcome them and that we can look forward to a much smoother path.
Mr. Alfred Morris : Can the Minister or the Benefits Agency now say how many DLA claimants died before their claims were processed and how long they waited in each case?
Mr. Scott : The short answer to the right hon. Gentleman's question is the same as it was when he last asked it--no.
Residential and Nursing Care
12. Ms. Eagle : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what representations his Department has had from care providers regarding the costs of residential and nursing care.
| Next Section
| Home Page |