| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mrs. Margaret Ewing (Moray): As the Minister knows, I have campaigned for many years on this issue. He referred to the automatic payment that emerges from the severe weather payment triggering mechanisms. Does he accept that other countries, such as Ireland, produce an
15 Jan 1997 : Column 284
automatic payment that has nothing to do with the temperature and involves those who are in receipt of certain benefits--I think it applies to about 15 benefits in the Republic of Ireland--over the 17-week period? Such a system, if introduced here, would bring a much greater sense of relief to our pensioners and our vulnerable people than does waiting for the current rather vague mechanisms to come into play. In addition, will the Minister tell us what he plans to say in respect of the Cold Weather Payments (Wind Chill Factor) Bill, which is to be debated this Friday?
Mr. Heald: The advantage of our current system is that it is automatic and well focused, in that weather stations in various areas trigger the payment, not only when there are seven days when the temperature is at or below 0 deg C, or freezing point, but when those conditions are forecast. The process is quick and enables people to turn the heating up in the knowledge that a payment is on its way. It is not a broad-brush measure, but targeted, and it has been effective in quickly delivering a much needed benefit.
There was a comprehensive review of the cold weather payments scheme last summer, during which the Meteorological Office was asked to advise. Its recommendation was that there should be 70 weather centres, which are now on line. It also advised us on the links with postcodes, and its expert advice was accepted in full and implemented.
The Meteorological Office also gave advice in respect of coastal areas, about which my hon. Friend the Member for Waveney is especially concerned. It advised that, although such areas may be windy, they are often warmer than inland areas during the winter months. It is interesting to note that, of the 15 weather stations that have not triggered cold weather payments this winter, 14 are coastal and only one is inland.
As my hon. Friend will be aware, postcodes in his constituency are linked to Coltishall and Wattisham and, so far this winter, Coltishall has triggered cold weather payments twice and Wattisham three times, bringing much needed help to his constituents.
The hon. Member for Moray (Mrs. Ewing) will be aware that the Meteorological Office is advising the Government on wind chill; I do not feel that I can take the matter further today.
Regarding pensioner incomes, my hon. Friend the Member for Waveney pointed to the three key strands of the Government's policy, which are: first, to maintain the value of the basic state pension; secondly, to encourage private provision; and, thirdly, to target help on those who are most in need. This year, an extra £1.2 billion pounds compared with 1988 has been focused on the poorest groups. The result is that pensioners' incomes have, on average, risen by 60 per cent. in real terms since 1979.
My hon. Friend also pointed out that expectations are important--people want a system that will provide them with the sort of retirement that they wish for and expect. In that context, occupational pensions and private pension provision are especially important. Britain has £600 billion invested in private pension assets--more than the whole of the European Union. It is important that our pension assets should not be subsumed in or combined with other European pension assets; the Government are determined to fight that and have the support of the Maastricht treaty in doing so.
15 Jan 1997 : Column 285
The British people's absolute protection is to have a Government who stick up for Britain in European negotiations. I deplore the fact that the Labour party has said that it would scrap our veto and make us join the European social chapter. Those measures would damage our sovereignty and damage the interests of people who work in this country or who want jobs.
The change in occupational pensions has been dramatic. The proportion of people retiring each year with occupational pensions and other savings income has risen to 63 per cent.--[Interruption.] Yes, I am back on the subject of pensions, but that is fair enough in a debate on the welfare of pensioners. The proportion has risen from 43 per cent. in 1979 to 63 per cent. now.
We have fulfilled our pledge to maintain the value of the state pension, and it is proposed that, in April, its value will rise to £99.80 a week for a couple and £62.45 a week for a single person. Of course, the headline figure is not the full story, because underpinning occupational and personal pensions, investment income and the state pension is the commitment to target help on those most in need. For example, our measures ensure that pensioner couples have access to income of more than £100 a week, with their housing costs paid, and with other concessions of the type mentioned by my hon. Friend.
Equalisation of pension ages at 65, as enacted in the Pensions Act 1995, is an important measure to ensure that state pensions are affordable in future. The changes that we have introduced are in stark contrast to those proposed by the Labour party, which would equalise state pensions at the age of 60, but with a reduced pension of only £40. That £40 a week would be for life, so it is no wonder that there are no Labour Members here this morning.
15 Jan 1997 : Column 286
Not only would a Labour Government cut the basic pension by about £20 a week for the single pensioner and £37 a week for a couple, which would do little for the welfare of pensioners, but they would deprive pensioners of income support. Retired people in receipt of that £40 a week would, if single, be treated as being in receipt of £60 a week and, if a couple, £98 a week. To me, that is new Labour, new danger. It is half baked to suggest that people should retire earlier, at 60, on a level of pension that might not be adequate for their future needs--and without the safety net of income support, which the Conservative Government have expanded.
I thank my hon. Friend for bringing these important issues of concern to my attention and, as appropriate, I shall draw my colleagues' attention to them as well. He made the important point that many of our pensioners served during the war and gave valuable service to this country, thereby allowing us the freedoms we now enjoy. Many of them are among the older group of pensioners. They had saved all their lives, but the value of their savings was destroyed between 1974 and 1979. Under the Labour Government, inflation averaged 15 per cent. because they were a tax and spend Government--a spendthrift Government--and they have not changed their spots. When pensioners come to think about how to vote at the next general election, they should remember that new Labour is still the party that wants to spend money it has not got, to borrow and to reduce this country to beggary.
I welcome the opportunity to reply to this debate. In government, the Conservative party has protected the interests of pensioners. It will do more in that respect in future years to enable pensioners to realise their expectations--
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris):
Order. We must now move on.
15 Jan 1997 : Column 287
Mr. William O'Brien (Normanton):
I declare an interest as a joint chairman of the all-party sustainable waste management group. The generation of waste, and its collection and disposal, are of paramount importance to the environment. The Environment Act 1995 was welcome, but the Labour party considered that it could have been strengthened in various ways.
During the passage of the Bill, the introduction of a landfill tax and of packaging recovery regulations was given serious consideration, as were the waste reduction targets set by the European Community and how they should apply to the United Kingdom.
I am interested in landfill because one of the largest landfill and reclamation sites in the United Kingdom, the Welbeck site, is in my constituency. It covers more than a square mile of reclaimed land--reclaimed mostly from colliery spoil and the results of colliery workings. The landfill tax was introduced last October, but a number of questions about it remain unanswered.
The West Yorkshire waste management group of local authorities has raised the matter of the processing of mixed waste from construction sites. The screening and crushing of such mixed waste changes the nature of the material but little. This material can be and is used on waste disposal sites to eliminate the need to quarry new material used for making roads on the sites, to allow vehicles bringing in waste to reach the tips. The material is thus widely sought after.
It is a pity that material from reclaimed or demolition sites which is used for temporary roads is not tax free; it is immensely valuable for this purpose. I hope that the Minister will take up and deal with this point.
It has been the practice for sub-soil used in site restoration, and for waste construction material for site roads, to be provided on landfill sites free of charge. Now, however, we find that building sites are burying unwanted materials, suitably landscaped of course, on their own sites. That means that a source of much valued material for landfill sites is drying up, leading to additional costs. There are also rumours to the effect that fly tipping is on the increase because of the new landfill tax.
The tax was meant to encourage the recycling of waste, because there is not much of a market in the United Kingdom for recyclable materials. The fact that international organisations import low-cost recovered materials means that there is little point in collecting materials here for recycling if they are not eventually to be used. Thus we need to encourage recycling with a stable market in the commodities concerned.
I know of a good example from my constituency. Mr. Steve Gilks, a disabled constituent of mine, got involved in collecting cans, plastics and paper for recycling, using the money raised to help local charities. On 13 December last, he presented a new recording machine to the Normanton talking newspaper for the blind. He told those receiving the gift that it was the result of collecting 300,000 aluminium cans. Between January 1994 and December 1996 he also collected nearly 95,000 tonnes of plastic for recycling.
Mr. Gilks tells me, however, that the bottom is dropping out of this market. He used to get £190 a tonne for plastic; that is now down to £60 a tonne. What is
15 Jan 1997 : Column 288
Can the Minister explain why people like Mr. Gilks are not given more encouragement by the Department to continue collecting waste for recycling?
1 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |