| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Retired People
4. Mr. Andrew Mackinlay (Thurrock): What further measures are proposed to increase services and disposable income for retired people. [63185]
The Secretary of State for Social Security (Mr. Alistair Darling): Through our Government strategy for older people, we are co-ordinating a number of cross-Government initiatives to ensure that the needs of older people are better understood and that their quality of life is improved. A consultation paper, "Building a Better Britain for Older People", was published on 23 November 1998. The paper sets out what has already been achieved and, above all, what needs to be done.
Mr. Mackinlay: I acknowledge the initiatives taken by the Minister, and his Green Paper proposals, of which most hon. Members in the Chamber will be beneficiaries. I ask the Minister to agree that there is an immediate problem regarding the income of existing pensioners. Bearing in mind the appallingly low take-up of some income-related benefits, and bearing in mind the fact that the minimum income guarantee will depend on people getting income support, what will he do to spend energies comparable with those spent on combating fraud, on encouraging people to take up their entitlement, to ensure that they have an adequate income? Will he comment on Age Concern's report, which says that a modest but adequate income for retired people would be about £150 a week, and that only a quarter of pensioners are anywhere near that figure?
Mr. Darling: On the latter point, the whole point of the Government's long-term strategy is to ensure that as
many people as possible retire on an adequate pension. That is the rationale that underpins our approach, which is set out in the Green Paper published on 15 December 1998.
My hon. Friend is quite right. We have inherited a situation where far too many pensioners are living on a low income. We reckon that between 400,000 and 700,000 pensioners who might be eligible for income support or other benefits are not claiming. My hon. Friend knows that, last year, we ran a pilot project in nine areas to find out why those people were not claiming. We visited them; we telephoned them; we wrote to them--
Mr. Mackinlay:
What is the answer? [Interruption.]
Mr. Darling:
The answer is not a laughing matter. Many such people are living in very difficult conditions. It is clear that some who did not know that they were entitled to benefits are now receiving them. Others, for reasons that are not at all clear, are eligible for benefits but will not claim. We do not know whether that is because they do not want to claim or because they receive other family support.
My hon. Friend asked me what action the Government will take on entitlement commensurate with that on fraud. We are planning to mount a take-up campaign later this year to encourage people to claim the benefits to which they are entitled. Take-up and fraud are equally important because every penny that is taken from the social security system through fraud is not available to those who genuinely need help.
Mr. Steve Webb (Northavon):
The Secretary of State has pledged in the long term to link the so-called income guarantee to earnings rather than prices. Does he accept that, with two thirds of recipients already over the age of 75, the long term is a difficult concept? Will he therefore pledge to link the income guarantee to earnings at the earliest possible opportunity?
Mr. Darling:
The hon. Gentleman will recall that we said in the Green Paper that it was our intention to increase the minimum pension guarantee by linking it with earnings, consistent with prudent management of the economy. He will be aware that we have increased the money available under the present minimum pension guarantee so that the poorest pensioners receive the maximum possible help--£75 for a single person or £116.60 for a married couple. We are doing a great deal to help pensioners. On top of that, for the first time many pensioners are this winter receiving the winter fuel payment. The hon. Gentleman can shrug his shoulders at that, but it is real help going into the hands of every pensioner household--something that never happened under the previous Government. I understand the hon. Gentleman's reticence, because Liberal Democrats--at least down here in London--seemed to be against such a policy. I can tell him, however, that Liberal Democrats north of the border seemed to be in favour of it.
Mr. Peter L. Pike (Burnley):
Although my right hon. Friend is rightly making pledges on the future of the basic pension, the second pension will be increasingly important in the next century. Will he guarantee that scandals such as that in the Bellings pension fund, from which a great deal of money was swindled seven years
Mr. Darling:
My hon. Friend raises an important point. Over the past few years there have been several pension scandals. It is particularly galling for employees to pay into a fund and then discover, for one reason or another, that the money is not available. There is legislation on the matter on the statute book. If it needs to be changed or strengthened, the Government will address the problem.
Mr. Howard Flight (Arundel and South Downs):
The Secretary of State referred to reductions in fraud. Will he confirm that the Government have not in any way backed down from their pledge to investigate, to the fullest extent, housing benefit fraud? What initiatives are the Government taking in pursuing the curbing of housing benefit fraud?
Mr. Darling:
On housing benefit fraud, which is not the subject of the question, but which, if Madam Speaker will allow me, I shall address--
Madam Speaker:
Order. I should not have allowed the question to be asked.
Mr. Darling:
The Government announced just before Christmas an initiative to invest about £100 million in ensuring that local authorities that administer the payment of housing benefit make far better and more efficient checks. The hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Mr. Flight) is right to say that housing benefit is prone to fraud; it has been for many years. We decided at an early stage to take action to cut such fraud by better checking of data. Local authorities are now able to check someone's entitlement with the Benefits Agency. We want better evidence before we pay housing benefit. The Government recently introduced another initiative whereby the Post Office will not redirect housing benefit cheques. That will prevent people from claiming housing benefit for one address while living somewhere else.
I think that the hon. Gentleman will agree that the Government are taking action across the board on housing benefit and, indeed, on fraud generally. We are already beginning to see results. One of the reasons why the growth of social security spending in this Parliament is less than half that of the previous Parliament is that we are taking such initiatives to ensure that accurate payments are made and fraud is cut.
5. Mr. David Rendel (Newbury):
When the benefit integrity project will be abolished. [63188]
14. Mr. Andrew Dismore (Hendon):
If he will make a statement about the future of the benefit integrity project. [63201]
The Minister of State, Department of Social Security (Mr. Stephen Timms):
The benefit integrity project will be replaced by a new system of review which will be sensitive to people's circumstances and fair, as it will
Mr. Rendel:
May I be the first to congratulate the Minister on his promotion to his new position? We welcomed the news that the benefit integrity project was to be cancelled, but surely it is unnecessary to wait until the new system is in place. The Secretary of State said in his original announcement that the project had been a failure and that it had caused great anxiety to disabled people, so should it not go straight away? The benefit integrity project should be cancelled today.
Mr. Timms:
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his congratulations. We shall end the benefit integrity project as soon as we have a replacement that is acceptable. The Social Security Committee, which is chaired by the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood), has done some excellent work on the subject and has suggested--rightly, in my view--that the Department should be much more active in reviewing the benefit once it is awarded. It would therefore be a backward step if, as the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. Rendel) suggests, we were to end all checking for a period and go back to the position that prevailed before last April, when nothing was checked at all.
We want to continue checking, but to make sure that we have a new arrangement. We have had one meeting already with the working group of the disability benefits forum which has been set up to consider the matter. That meeting was extremely useful, and I am hopeful that by April, and possibly before, we will have a checking system that commands widespread support, as the benefit integrity project did not.
Mr. Dismore:
I, too, congratulate my hon. Friend on his promotion. Many of my constituents with disabilities will welcome the Government's commitment to getting rid of the benefit integrity project. I look forward to its going in April, but there is some concern about what will replace it. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is important that whatever replaces the benefit integrity project aims at providing the right amount of benefit, which on review may mean benefits going up or down? Can my hon. Friend give my constituents an assurance that the Benefits Agency staff will be properly trained to administer the system fairly and effectively?
Mr. Timms:
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his congratulations and also for drawing attention to the widespread support for the Government's announcement ending the benefit integrity project. I can confirm that the emphasis of the new system will be on correctness--on making sure that the benefit paid is correct at the outset, and that it continues to be maintained correctly thereafter. That means that benefit payments will be increased if entitlement warrants it, and not simply decreased, as was overwhelmingly the case under the benefit integrity project. I agree with my hon. Friend that the training of
Mrs. Angela Browning (Tiverton and Honiton):
Does the Minister understand that the average number of cases going to appeal in my constituency show that three out of four people get the mobility component of disability living allowance under the benefit integrity project restored on appeal? What will the Government do about the people who lost their Motability cars and have now had that benefit legally restored, but can no longer find the money to put down the deposit on a car to replace the one that they lost?
I welcome the Minister to the Front Bench and hope that he will give me a better answer than the Prime Minister gave to the same question in July. I circulated the Prime Minister's reply to my constituents going to appeal, and they were not at all impressed with his answer.
Mr. Timms:
I thank the hon. Lady for that part of her question which was good wishes and welcome. She makes a fair point that, under the arrangements put in place by the previous Government for the benefit integrity project, many reductions in benefit were overturned on appeal. I am pleased to tell her, however, that the rate of appeals that are upheld has consistently increased because of the steps taken by this Government to improve the evidence available to adjudication officers. Motability has put in place an arrangement that allows people to keep their cars while a reduction in benefit is under review. That has been a helpful measure. If it is established that someone is not entitled to the high Motability component, it is not appropriate to continue payment of that benefit and the car that goes with it.
Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich):
My hon. Friend will be aware that any period of doubt about disability payments is of great concern to those involved. It is tremendously important that the Department does everything accurately. Is he totally satisfied that the information technology available and the new systems coming on stream are capable of handling the detailed work that is essential to the fairness of such decisions?
Mr. Timms:
My hon. Friend is absolutely right about the importance and sensitivity of those matters. We must ensure that we get them right. We undoubtedly need to introduce improvements in information technology and the Accord programme--the access to corporate data procurement project--on which we have embarked will enable us to do that. I am confident that increasingly we shall be able to offer the active, modern service to which the Government aspire in order to meet the aspirations of my hon. Friend's constituents and people throughout the country.
Mrs. Margaret Ewing (Moray):
I welcome the Minister to the Dispatch Box and the announcement of the abolition of the benefit integrity project, which has been widely despised and has caused much stress to individuals throughout the country. Does the Minister have figures that show the administrative costs of running the project so far? What savings does he think have been
Mr. Timms:
I should be happy to write to the hon. Lady with those figures, which have been published and are readily available. I agree about the importance of training, and we are paying great attention to training for the new system. I am confident that we shall have the resources that we need to get that right so that our checking system commands widespread support, not least among disabled people and the organisations of and for disabled people. The benefit integrity project manifestly did not command that support.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |