House of Commons Hansard Debates for 1 May 1995

Dr. Spink: Will my hon. Friend confirm that occupational pensioners have seen an increase of about two thirds in the amount, on average, that they receive from their occupational pensions since 1979? Will he also confirm that the very poorest pensioners, who probably do not receive occupational pensions, will from April this year, as a couple, receive a minimum of £100 a week, with all their housing costs being paid? Does not that show how the Government care for the welfare of poor pensioners?

Mr. Arbuthnot: My hon. Friend is right. On average, newly retiring pensioners have an occupational pension of about £100 a week over and above the state retirement pension.

Disabled People (Civil Rights)

12. Mr. Skinner: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what recent meetings he has had with disabled people to discuss civil rights questions. [20130]

Mr. Hague: I have met, and shall continue to meet, disabled people and members of their organisations to discuss a wide variety of issues.

Mr. Skinner: Is the Minister aware that on Friday hundreds of disabled people--some in wheelchairs, some on sticks--came to Parliament hoping to see the Civil Rights (Disabled Persons) Bill pass its Committee stage and be passed into law? They were met by a stony-faced Government who swamped the Bill in Committee with more than 100 amendments, many of which the Minister was responsible for. The net result was that those people were turned away at the gates and the Government kicked their crutches away. No wonder the people out there treat this Government with contempt.

Mr. Hague: Later this year, disabled people will have a great deal to celebrate because the Disability Discrimination Bill, which has been passed by the House and is now in another place, will spell the end of discrimination against disabled people in this country. It is a Conservative Government who will have placed on the statute book a working piece of comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation.

Elderly People (Residential Care)

13. Ms Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many people living in residential or nursing home care are being supported financially

Column 13

by his Department; and if he will forecast the number he expects to be in these categories in three, five and 10 years' time. [20132]

Mr. Roger Evans: The latest figures show that 280,000 people in residential care or nursing homes are being supported financially by my Department through income support, either through preserved rights to higher limits or through income support, including residential allowance. In three, five and 10 years' time, the figures are estimated to be 294,000, 303,000 and 327,000.

Ms Coffey: Is the Minister aware that, in Stockport, residential grant from the Department of Social Security is £30 lower than the grant available from the local authority to people who were admitted to residential and nursing care after 1993? Is he further aware that that is causing enormous problems in respect of the personal allowances being used by elderly people to top up that grant, and that relatives, who can ill afford it, are having to contribute? Will the Minister review the DSS grant to bring it into line with the actual charges of care and so prevent some of the humiliation and distress to my constituents? After all, it is not their fault that the Government have privatised health care for the elderly.

Mr. Evans: Of course the income support limits under preserved rights are reviewed annually. The limits have risen substantially in real terms since 1985. In nursing homes, the rise is 38 per cent. and for the elderly in residential care homes the rise is 16 per cent. in real terms. However, no Government could meet all fees, however high. In many parts of the country, fees are as high as £1,000 a week.

DUCHY OF LANCASTER

Special Advisers

27. Dr. Goodson-Wickes: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what consultations he has recently had on the terms of appointment, and pay of, special advisers to Departments. [20146]

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. David Hunt): None.

Dr. Goodson-Wickes: Does my right hon. Friend agree that special advisers have highly unusual terms and conditions of service? Not only are their salaries arbitrarily linked to the remuneration that they received before they took their posts, thus causing the ridiculous differential between a merchant banker and an academic, but there is no scope for performance-related pay thereafter. Of more concern, perhaps, is the fact that about 50 per cent. of special advisers earn more than the Ministers they advise. Is it not about time that this ludicrous situation was sorted out?

Mr. Hunt: My hon. Friend makes a number of important points on an area of responsibility that passed from my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to me and my Department last month. I should be grateful if my hon. Friend could give me time to ponder the significance of some of them. I will then certainly consider reviewing the policy in the way that he has suggested.

Mr. Madden: Will the Chancellor find out whether there is a special adviser at the Department of

Column 14

Employment? If there is, will he send him or her to my constituency to find out why and how the Allerton outreach team has had such remarkable success in placing unemployed people in jobs and full-time training? Will the adviser then go back to London and persuade the Secretary of State for Employment to ensure that the team's funding, which has come from the Department over the past few months, is continued so that its remarkable success may continue and the unemployment toll in my constituency be significantly reduced?

Mr. Hunt: I will raise with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment the points that the hon. Gentleman has made, but I hope that he will recognise that there has been a significant fall in the number of unemployed people in this country, with 1,000 people coming off the dole every day for the past two years. It is about time that Opposition Members realised the facts, which are appreciated widely throughout the country: that the Government are responsible for the economic policies that are reducing the rate of unemployment.

Institute of Virology

28. Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what response he is sending to the representations he has received concerning the dismissal of the director of the Institute of Virology in Oxford by the Natural Environment Research Council; and if he will make a statement. [20147]

The Parliamentary Secretary, Office of Public Service and Science (Mr. John Horam): This is a matter for the Natural Environment Research Council, under its royal supplemental charter. However, I am aware of the hon. Gentleman's concern about this matter, and I will write to him shortly.

Mr. Dalyell: Is a perfunctory three days to clear one's desk and leave really an acceptable response to an internationally distinguished scientist on whose personal behaviour there is no blemish? Is that really the way in which the NERC should behave?

Mr. Horam: As the hon. Gentleman knows, at the bottom of the dispute is a difference of view about future research between the Institute of Virology and the NERC. The matter was discussed over a year, and an independent review came down on the side of the NERC. It was impossible to resolve the dispute, and Professor Bishop, the director, was given six months' notice and quite a generous package. It was clearly impossible to continue on the wrong direction for research, so he received three days' notice. None the less, I assure the hon. Gentleman that no aspersion is cast on the ability of Professor Bishop, who remains a distinguished and eminent virologist.

Government Policy

29. Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what additional measures are required to improve the co- ordination and effective presentation of Government policy. [20148]

Mr. David Hunt: We are always looking at ways of doing even better.

Mr. Prentice: Will the Chancellor comment on reports in this morning's The Guardian that he is a leading doubter of the wisdom of rail privatisation and that he

Column 15

wants to see it shelved this side of the election because the policy is too difficult to sell to the general public? Is there any truth in that? What are the presentational advantages, supposed or otherwise, of the privatisation of Nuclear Electric?

Mr. Hunt: I am very happy immediately to tell the hon. Gentleman that there is no foundation to those reports; they are groundless and incorrect. As for the hon. Gentleman's general point, the concept of privatisation has swept the world, with the sole exception of the Labour party. There is an international queue at the Government's door asking how to go about the privatisation process and how to go about improving public services. Privatisation and the citizens charter are the tip of a formidable iceberg. All that I will say about Labour councils and the Labour party is that the Labour party is heading for that iceberg.

Mr. Dunn: As the Labour party finds it hard to distinguish fact from fiction, does my right hon. Friend agree that the red rose party is the red nose party--a party of comic relief?

Mr. Hunt: I am very grateful that my hon. Friend gives me an opportunity to reiterate that what we respect in the House of Commons--in this Chamber--is the fact that politics should be about policies, not about soundbites. It is about time that the Labour party learnt that lesson.

Mr. Pike: As the people of this country will once again show their view of the Government's policies on Thursday, and as the Chancellor is responsible for the presentation of Government policy, is he or the Prime Minister to be blamed for the Government's failures?

Mr. Hunt: The hon. Gentleman has forgotten once again that at the last general election the Conservative party secured a larger number of votes than any political party had ever secured before. It is about time that the hon. Gentleman remembered that.

Charters

30. Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what plans he has to introduce further charters; and if he will make a statement. [20150]

Mr. Horam: New charters for further and higher education in Northern Ireland will be published later this year, as well as revised charters for council tenants and court users. A revised contributors charter for national insurance payers was published last week.

Mr. Greenway: I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Will he confirm that British Gas has been put on probation for a year in relation to its charter mark--it could be taken away if it does not improve--and that that is an excellent use of charter marks? Will he further confirm that, despite its endless hollow boasting, the Labour party will never qualify for a charter mark?

Mr. Horam: I entirely agree with my hon. Friend, and he is particularly right in the light of the press releases that Labour has released today on consumers. The point about charter marks is that they are designed to be the Oscars of public service, and a mark of quality for someone who is doing well. It does not matter whether we are talking about British Gas or a local library--if it does not live up to its promises, it should have its charter

Column 16

mark removed. British Gas has another nine months to come up to the mark. If it does not do so, we will take its mark away.

Mr. Henderson: Does the Minister accept that if bosses of utilities such as British Gas cannot self-regulate their snouts out of the trough, someone else must protect the public interest? Does he further agree that there is a need to revise the legislation that governs the powers of the regulator in gas and in other utilities so that the regulator can intervene where bosses fail to meet acceptable public standards in pay and conditions, which may be true of British Gas?

Mr. Horam: The Labour party would wrap everything up in more regulation and red tape. The hon. Gentleman does not seem to be aware that this matter is being considered by the Greenbury committee. Members on both sides of the House would wish to support the purpose of charter marks, which is to improve the quality of public services. As my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy said with regard to privatisation, the Government are ahead of every other Government in the world in improving public service.

Foresight Process

31. Mrs. Gillan: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many representations he has received from industry scientists and other interested parties during the foresight process. [20151]

Mr. David Hunt: A great many. The technology foresight programme has been based on very extensive consultation, reaching out to more than 10,000 people through the work of panels, conferences, seminars, surveys and workshops.

Mrs. Gillan: I congratulate my right hon. Friend on what must be the most thorough and comprehensive consultation process that has ever taken place on science research and development in this country, which will result in the identification of opportunities in markets for our businesses in the next 10 or 20 years. When will the process be completed, and when will the entire foresight programme be drawn together by the steering group? When we can expect some action plans?

Mr. Hunt: We expect to publish the final report in the second half of this month, and we are responding to many of the reports with new research programmes. For example, the programme on applied biocatalysis, which I announced at the relaunch of the LINK programme on 14 March, focuses on a generic theme spotlighted by three of the foresight panels. The Government will contribute £4 million to the programme, with matching funds coming from industry. I agree with my hon. Friend that the 15 reports on technology foresight in "Progress Through Partnership" are examples of a programme that is beating the rest of the world. We intend to follow up that programme with clear initiatives that respond to the imaginative ideas that have been put forward.

Dr. Bray: Is the Chancellor of the Duchy aware that many of the recommendations of the foresight panels go far beyond the laissez faire policies of the Government? Does the right hon. Gentleman have the support of his colleagues in pursuing the recommendations?

Column 17

Mr. Hunt: It would have assisted me had the hon. Gentleman told me to which of the 15 reports he was referring. The President of the Board of Trade and I have announced an extension to the LINK programme, which is determined to follow up many of the initiatives proposed in the panel reports. The whole technology foresight programme has been a remarkable success, and I hope that the hon. Gentleman will join with many others throughout the country in welcoming the reports. We must ensure that the Government and all the relevant parties--in particular, industry--respond in the best way possible.

Mr. Battle: I welcome technology foresight in principle, but what is the point of the exercise when the recommendations in the various reports are undermined by the current actions of other Departments? The Department of Transport is privatising the Transport Research Laboratory, which undermines proposals in the transport report. The Department of Trade and Industry is pushing on with the privatisation of AEA Technology, despite the recommendations of the energy foresight report to extend and use our nuclear clean-up expertise. How can the Chancellor and his Department credibly claim to be co-ordinating the Government's science policy when other Ministers are undermining their work day by day? Where is the joined- up thinking?

Mr. Hunt: The hon. Gentleman has got the facts wrong again. I have read through the 15 reports. The transport report to which he refers contains some imaginative thinking, to which the Government will respond after very careful thought. As for all Government Departments, we will consider with colleagues how best to respond to the reports. The hon. Gentleman failed to refer to the fact that the science budget, which underpins all this work, reached a record level in the last financial year. In this financial year, the record cash figure of £1,281,675,000 will be spent. That is more than enough to ensure that we follow up many of the recommendations, in partnership with other Departments.

Citizens Charters

32. Mr. Jacques Arnold: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what examples he has of improvements influenced by the citizens charters. [20152]

Mr. Horam: Many. They include hospital waiting times, passport applications, first-class letter delivery, driving licence applications, publication of school, police and local authority performance tables and guaranteed minimum standards for gas, water and electricity.

Mr. Arnold: Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the spin-offs of the citizens charter is a bringing together of jobcentres and unemployment benefit offices, which ensures that people who are unfortunate enough to be unemployed can receive the full employment services that they need to get back into a job?

Mr. Horam: Yes, I am delighted to agree with my hon. Friend. Not only that, but the agencies in question now see 98 per cent. of people within 10 minutes of their going to the office.

Mr. Flynn: Under which charter can the people of Wales and England complain on this glorious spring day because they have been denied their traditional May day

Column 18

bank holiday, which is being enjoyed by the lucky people in Scotland? When will the Government stop mucking about with May day?

Mr. Horam: I really do not think that we need to keep the red flag flying on this day.

Engineering

33. Mr. John Marshall: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what plans he has to meet the Institute of Civil Engineering to discuss the role of engineering. [20153]

Mr. Horam: In the last year my senior officials met engineering bodies on six occasions. I look forward to continuing this close relationship.

Mr. Marshall: In view of the importance of engineering to the economy, can my hon. Friend state that a Minister as well as officials will meet officials of the industry in future?

Mr. Horam: Absolutely. My right hon. Friend met engineering institutions three times in January, four times in February and three times in March. I have also met many engineers at all levels of--

Madam Speaker: Order. I would be much obliged if the Minister would use the microphone not only so that we can hear him but so that I can see him.

Mr. Horam: I was turning away, perhaps out of excessive politeness, to deal with my hon. Friend's question.

The results of yesterday's race at Imola, which Damon Hill won, and the fact that no fewer than nine of the 10 Grand Prix cars used were British- built by British engineering, shows the quality engineering that we have in Britain, which we should support.

Mrs. Dunwoody: Would the Minister like to astonish himself on one of the occasions when he or his newly found colleagues address the engineering institutions by recommending some way in which new jobs can be created in engineering so that we might begin to get back to the state in which we compete as engineers and do not have to import other people's goods?

Mr. Horam: I am afraid that the hon. Lady is behind the times. Manufacturing in this country has strengthened considerably in the past few years, particularly in vehicle manufacture, which she knows all about in her constituency. Engineering in Britain is on a high now. That is partly as a result of the interest of the Government and partly as a result of the inward investment that the Government have successfully encouraged in the past five or 10 years. The hon. Lady should come up to date.

Mr. Brandreth: Will my hon. Friend confirm that, as from next year, technology will be part of the national curriculum for all young people from five to 16 and that over the next three years the Government are committed to putting in an additional £10 million to top up bursaries for top-flight undergraduates studying technology?

Mr. Horam: Yes. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for those facts. The Royal Academy of Engineering is getting another £400,000 this year, which will bring up to £2.6 million the contribution that we are making to that body. As a result of science being in the school curriculum for

Column 19

the first time on a comprehensive basis, about 1.6 million pupils are now taking science subjects at GCSE level. That is more than double the figure of five years ago and is the result of the first group of children coming through the new science curriculum.

Women's Issues

34. Mr. Bayley: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement about the work of the Cabinet Sub-Committee on women's issues in the past year. [20154]

Mr. David Hunt: The ministerial Committee on women's issues plays a key role in developing and monitoring policy on issues of special concern to women. As I explained to the House on 7 March, the Government have introduced a range of measures that have improved the position of women in our society.

Column 20

Mr. Bayley: Has the right hon. Gentleman read the Government Actuary's report on the Pensions Bill, which says that in the first year in which the Bill comes fully into force--if it does come into force--pensions paid to women will fall in value at today's prices by £4,600 million in that year alone? Has the Cabinet women's Committee considered the Pensions Bill and the disastrous effect that it will have on women? If so, what advice has it given the Cabinet?

Mr. Hunt: The issues that the hon. Gentleman raises are very much matters for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security. Of course the ministerial Committee considers a range of issues affecting the position of women. As we said in the debate on 7 March, we have a very impressive record on ensuring that the position of women in society continues to improve.

Next Section (Debates)

Home Page