| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
All-work Test
3. Mr. Stephen Day (Cheadle): If he will make a statement on his proposals to reform the all-work test. [88024]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Social Security (Mr. Hugh Bayley): There is a provision in the Welfare Reform and Pensions Bill to replace the all-work test with the personal capability assessment. The personal capability assessment will determine entitlement to benefit in the same way as the all-work test has done hitherto. In addition, it will provide constructive information about what a person's medical condition or disability would allow them to do and advice on practical measures which might improve their chances of returning to work. This will enable personal advisers to help people identify and overcome the barriers that they face and take steps back into employment.
Mr. Day: Is the Minister telling the House that there will be no change to the criteria applied by the new system, as opposed to the all-work test? Will there be a change in the frequency of the periodic review? Will the information that claimants have to provide change in any significant way?
Mr. Bayley: I am surprised by the hon. Gentleman's question. It is clear that he has not been following the debate. We have made it clear time and time again that the functional ability tests which existed in the all-work test will be repeated in exactly the same way in the personal capability assessment, so that entitlement to incapacity benefit will not change in any way. However, there will be a change in that the test will stop ghetto-ising
people into incapacity benefit and will start examining the way to get them off benefit and into work. That is the difference.
Ms Rosie Winterton (Doncaster, Central): Will my hon. Friend say how the new tests will assist people who have mental health problems? People with mental health difficulties sometimes feel that the present system does not meet all their needs because their needs may be less tangible than those of people with physical incapacities. In my constituency, the benefits advice and tribunal unit feels that the presence of a qualified psychiatrist at an assessment would be helpful in recognising the needs of people with mental health difficulties.
Mr. Bayley: I welcome my hon. Friend's question. She is right that concerns have been expressed about the way in which the test deals with people suffering from mental health incapacities. We are not changing in any way the threshold of entitlement to benefit, and people who currently meet the criteria will in future receive the benefit. The special procedures that apply to people with mental health problems will continue. Claimants suffering from a severe mental illness will in future, as in the past, be wholly exempt from the all-work test.
It would not make sense to ensure that the test for certain groups of people was undertaken by a consultant psychiatrist, but it makes absolute sense to ensure that all the doctors conducting the all-work test are trained to deal with the psychological and psychiatric conditions presented to them. We are introducing better training for the doctors who undertake those tests, and in collaboration with the Royal College of Physicians we are introducing for the first time ever a qualification in disability assessment management, which will lay a benchmark of good practice that will be used within the service.
Madam Speaker:
I notice that the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr. Day), who put the original question, has already left the Chamber, before hearing the final answer. I hope that hon. Members will note that that is not the way to behave.
Mr. Elfyn Llwyd (Meirionnydd Nant Conwy):
The Minister knows that recently the composition of appeals tribunals hearing all-work test appeals was changed to allow for one professionally qualified chairman and no lay people. Will the new system encompass the fairer, older system? The change to one legally qualified chairman is seen as rubber-stamping a larger number of appeals being turned down.
Mr. Bayley:
I can reassure the hon. Gentleman that, under the new regime, which is now fully operational, a minimum of two people will be required. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will agree that it was vital to speed up the appeals process, because justice delayed is justice denied. Many people had to wait months to have their appeal heard. That was unfair, so it was necessary to reform the system, which the Government have done.
4. Mr. Paul Goggins (Wythenshawe and Sale, East):
What progress he is making with the introduction of a second pension for carers. [88026]
The Minister of State, Department of Social Security (Mr. Stephen Timms):
There has been a wide welcome for our manifesto pledge, now confirmed in the pensions Green Paper, to allow carers to build up a second pension. We are working on the details at present. We expect 2 million carers to qualify for credits each year. We are aiming for legislation in the next Session and for credits to commence in 2002, when the state second pension is due to be introduced.
Mr. Goggins:
I agree with my hon. Friend that the announcement of a carers pension is popular. May I press him on the situation of carers who should qualify for a second pension because they have been awarded invalid care allowance? The Green Paper states that qualification is automatic for carers who are in receipt of invalid care allowance, but in practice some carers who are awarded invalid care allowance do not actually receive it because they are in receipt of other contributory benefits, such as widows benefit or incapacity benefit. Will my hon. Friend confirm that the award--and not necessarily the receipt--of invalid care allowance will lead to entitlement?
Mr. Timms:
My hon. Friend raises an important point, and the answer is yes. Credits will, as he says, go to recipients of invalid care allowance and to those receiving child benefit in respect of children under five, and credits will also go to people in the circumstances that he described--people providing care for people receiving attendance allowance and the middle and higher rates of disability living allowance, but who do not actually receive invalid care allowance, in many cases for the reasons that my hon. Friend outlined. It is an important step forward for carers and recognises the immense contribution that they make.
Mr. Steve Webb (Northavon):
In the reform of pensions for carers and others, does the Minister believe that simplicity is a virtue?
Mr. Timms:
Indeed I do. That is why the state second pension is being reformed, to ensure that on retirement, everyone who has worked and contributed throughout his or her life will be delivered an income above the means-tested threshold. That is a simple goal which has been widely welcomed and which the entire House will recognise as the right way forward.
5. Mr. Ben Chapman (Wirral, South):
What action his Department has taken to improve the situation of poorer and working families. [88027]
The Secretary of State for Social Security (Mr. Alistair Darling):
In April, we increased child benefit by the largest amount ever. In October, the working families tax credit will be introduced, helping an extra 500,000 families and providing an income guarantee for every family in full-time work of at least £200 a week. Those reforms, together with other tax changes, will mean that a family on £13,000 a year will be better off by up to £2,500 a year.
Mr. Chapman:
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the situation we inherited when the Tories left power--
Mr. Darling:
I agree with my hon. Friend, which is why we have been increasing child benefit by large amounts--a record amount last year and this. In addition, the working families tax credit, which the Conservatives are pledged to abolish, will mean that, because of the Labour Government, a family on £13,000 a year will be £2,500 better off than they would otherwise have been. That measure makes the case for welfare reform: it will make work pay, provide security for those people about whom we ought to be concerned and ensure that we eradicate child poverty within a generation. The Tories did absolutely nothing about that when they were in government.
Mr. Julian Brazier (Canterbury):
Will the Secretary of State confirm that the working families tax credit will have an impact on families also drawing housing benefit, whatever his long-term plans for benefit reform may be? Hundreds of thousands of families will face a combined tax and benefit withdrawal rate of 89 per cent. Such conditions will hardly encourage them to help themselves.
Mr. Darling:
The hon. Gentleman--unwittingly, I suspect--makes the point that further reform is necessary. The working families tax credit reduces the effect of marginal rates of taxation for poorer families, but he is quite right: housing benefit also needs to be reformed--not only because its administration is inefficient and expensive and because it is open to fraud and abuse, as all of us know, but because it acts as a disincentive to many people who ought to be in work. Unfortunately for him, he is making the case for further reform of the benefits system. I repeat what I said earlier: we have made a start, but there is a great deal more to do to ensure that the benefits system, as well as providing security for those who cannot work, makes work pay.
Ann Clwyd (Cynon Valley):
I think I can anticipate my right hon. Friend's reply, but I shall ask my question nevertheless. There is a real sense of grievance among my constituents who previously received reduced earnings allowance, which, as we know, was abolished by the Tories. In opposition, we made strong criticisms of that abolition, and there is a real sense of betrayal--I do not think I am putting it strongly enough--among the people who came to my surgery this weekend saying that they are £30 to £40 worse off as a result of that. Will my right hon. Friend look at this matter again?
Mr. Darling:
I am well aware of the point that my hon. Friend makes. She is quite right that, suddenly and unexpectedly, the Conservatives cut the rate of REA, which miners thought they would receive after had they retired. The problem is that that benefit was meant to replace people's income when they were in work. That is clearly difficult for people who have entered into commitments. I say my hon. Friend, as I have said to many of her colleagues, that I am prepared to look at this matter, as I am prepared to look at all parts of the benefits
Mr. David Rendel (Newbury):
Does the Secretary of State accept that it is particularly important for poor working families that their children should remain dependent for as brief a time as possible and should get jobs as soon as possible after they finish their education? Does he not therefore think that it is time he did something about the young people who are sometimes held up for five months before they receive national insurance numbers, thanks to the failure of the NIRS2 system? A number of businesses are refusing to give those young people jobs until they have national insurance numbers.
Mr. Darling:
Many young people go straight into jobs on leaving school, but we want to ensure that many more go into higher education to achieve better skills and qualifications. Secondly, the new ONE service, which will bring together the Employment Service and the Benefits Agency, will mean, for the first time, that someone of working age will receive advice immediately on entering the system.
Thirdly, I am well aware of NIRS2 problems, which we inherited from the Tories--[Hon. Members: "Oh, come on."] The Tories signed the contract, and they must take complete responsibility for a system that did not work. The problems are being overcome. I am glad to hear that the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. Rendel) supports our general thrust; that is why I find it hard to understand why he wants to take his party into closer allegiance with the Conservative party.
Mr. Frank Roy (Motherwell and Wishaw):
On the point about working families, my right hon. Friend will know that Scottish schools are on holiday. While teachers are paid during the holidays, cleaners and dinner ladies are not--and nor are they entitled to jobseeker's allowance or any other benefit. Does the Secretary of State have any plans to redress that unfair anomaly?
Mr. Darling:
I am fully aware that Scottish children are on holiday--and that we are not. I am aware of the problem to which my hon. Friend refers. About two months ago, a commissioner's decision stopped the Department of Social Security paying benefit to the dinner ladies in question. The case has been appealed to Scotland's supreme court, the Court of Session, and we should receive a definitive ruling before too long. Many dinner ladies may be entitled to some help from the Benefits Agency, and if they are in any doubt, they should contact the local agency. I shall keep the situation under review, particularly once we have received the Court of Session ruling.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |