| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
8.30 pm
Mrs. Angela Browning (Tiverton and Honiton): In the spirit of partnership, we are glad to have been of assistance to the Government in enabling them to incorporate this amendment in the Bill before it becomes an Act tomorrow. We are pleased to have been able to modify what we believe to be, in principle, a damaging Bill.
When the Conservatives tabled this amendment in Committee in another place, assurances were given by Ministers. Interestingly, many of the changes to the Bill in another place were due to the fact that Ministers there appeared to have some experience of running businesses, and were therefore much more receptive to many of the Conservative amendments.
In Committee, the Government seemed to support my noble Friend Baroness Miller who tabled the amendment and took it through the other place. Ministers in another place promised that they would bring back a modified amendment on Report. On that basis, the Conservatives were asked to withdraw the amendment. I am pleased that my noble Friend did not do so because it was subsequently put to a vote, which the Conservatives won.
Therefore, the amendment came back here, and only last Wednesday the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry tabled an amendment not to modify the Bill--as promised by Ministers in the Lords--but to overturn the amendment that the Conservatives had won in another place. I accept the contrite tone of the Minister's contribution tonight, but this was a matter of ministerial honour, as has been made clear in another place and here last Wednesday.
Ministers who give their word that they will bring an amendment back on Report or at Third Reading and then fail to do so are duty-bound, as members of the Government, to try to keep their word. I am grateful, now the amendment has come to the Commons, that Ministers have sought to rectify the matter tonight.
Much valuable time could have been saved last Wednesday if Ministers had tabled such an amendment then because, as we know, the Bill was guillotined and yet--quite properly--we had spent some time discussing clause 15 last Wednesday, which is a matter of some concern both here and outside this place.
I am not sure that we would wish to be regarded as partners in this matter, but we are pleased to have been able to advise the Government, and that they have accepted the amendment. We are particularly pleased that honour has been seen to be upheld within the ministerial team.
Mr. David Chidgey (Eastleigh):
I can understand the Minister's feeling of elation tonight, as it has taken some two years to get to this stage. The Liberal Democrats welcome much in the Bill, and we have long argued for many of the issues in it.
If I have a criticism, it is that, in spite of the Bill taking two years, many of the amendments for which we called in Committee have appeared only in the last week or so. Nevertheless, we are grateful to the Minister and his team, who have heard some of the pleas that we have made and incorporated our views in the Bill. For that reason, I am pleased to say that I wish the Bill to go forward. It is a first step--but not the last step--towards fairness at work.
Lords amendment in lieu agreed to.
Angela Smith (Basildon):
I am pleased to present a petition from my constituents in Basildon and East Thurrock. I agree with the petitioners, who ask for the hunting of wild mammals with dogs to be banned because it is cruel and unnecessary and has no place in modern Britain. The petition states:
Mr. Ian Stewart (Eccles):
It is my pleasure to present a petition signed my constituent Sandra Dutson and more than 10,000 other users and supporters of Greater Manchester Accessible Transport Ltd., otherwise known as Ring and Ride. The petition states:
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.--[Mr. Betts.]
Mr. Steve Webb (Northavon):
It has been my happy privilege to conduct several Adjournment debates recently. After the past two, members of the public have sent me copies of letters to the Minister who responded, complaining that the response was inadequate. One was a Trade and Industry Minister and the other, I regret to say, was the Minister who is to respond tonight. The public felt that he had not dealt fully with the complexities of annuities.
Were I a Minister, in normal circumstances I would bring along 12 minutes of material and extemporise for three minutes in response to the speech. Given that we have the best part of two hours in which to explore this issue fully, and that the Minister will have cleared his diary until 10.30 pm, I will flag up for him at the outset the questions to which I seek answers.
The move to the new national insurance recording system, NIRS2, has caused delays in the payment of the state retirement pension. Given the time available, I thought of multiplying my questions, but I have decided to restrain myself to only five. I hope, however, for a full and comprehensive response.
Basic state pensions are paid more or less in full, but there are serious problems with the state earnings-related pension, SERPS, and possibly more than 100,000 pensioners are receiving something based on a clerical calculation. As I understand it, someone at the Contributions Agency has sat down with a pocket calculator, dug out the files and worked out how much the SERPS figure should be. When will those estimates be adjusted so that people receive the correct amount?
My second question is about the interest on the money that people have not yet received. When will it be paid? Some of the delays have been for months and for hundreds of pounds, so there is a problem with the interest that has been foregone. I hope that the Minister will say when it will be paid.
My third question has to do with the future and people eligible for state pension when they reach 60 or 65. By what date will newly retired pensioners get the correct pension amount from day one of their eligibility?
Fourthly, who pays the compensation bills which, if one includes age-related rebates, run into tens of millions of pounds? I hope that the Minister will give us some assurance about the private sector's contribution to the compensation bills.
Finally, what lessons have the Government learned from the pension payments fiasco? I hope that the Minister will tell us about the inquiry that has been launched, who is leading it and what its terms of reference are. When will the inquiry report, and whose head is on the block?
I hope that the Minister will respond point by point to those five headline questions. The matter has been tackled twice by the Public Accounts Committee. The Committee's 22nd report, entitled "Delays to the New National Insurance Recording System", was published earlier this month. Rather alarmingly, given that the
Committee's first investigation was published in June 1998, the July 1999 report found that matters were "much worse".
The Minister may take some comfort from the fact that the contracts were signed by the previous Administration. He may consider the problem to be a Tory bungle, which of course it was. However, the Minister has been in his post for nearly a year, with responsibility for pensions for a significant part of that time. The Public Accounts Committee states that matters have got worse rather than better in the past 12 months, so I am sure that the Minister will say, "Mea culpa", lay his hand on his heart and admit his share of the blame for this worrying matter.
8.35 pm
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons call on the Government to act to end hunting by making a clear commitment by the year 2000 to legislate for its abolition.
To lie upon the Table.
The present system of rebates of fuel duty paid to commercial passenger transport companies who operate scheduled public transport services is not paid to ring and ride or dial-a-ride services. We consider that this system unfairly discriminates against persons with mobility difficulties, to whom these services are the equivalent of normal bus services, which they are physically unable to use.
To lie upon the Table.
8.36 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |