| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Pensioner Incomes
11. Sir Teddy Taylor (Rochford and Southend, East): If he will restore the link between retirement pensions and average earnings. [111842]
The Minister of State, Department of Social Security (Mr. Jeff Rooker): No, we are committed to raising the basic state pension at least in line with prices. We have kept the basic state pension as the foundation of pensions and maintained its real value. In addition, we have acted to meet pensioners' needs through, for example, winter fuel payments, free eye tests and, of course, from this coming November, free television licences for those aged 75 and over.
Sir Teddy Taylor: Is the Minister aware of the genuine anger of many pensioners who voted Labour? Despite the specific assurance that all pensioners would be better off under Labour, they find that, even if they have saved money or made provision for their retirement, they are faced with the robbing of pension funds, the abolition of the married couples tax allowance, and the scrapping of home income plans and the widows bereavement allowance--instead of an increase.
Although I appreciate that the Government have made some provision for people on limited incomes, does the right hon. Gentleman accept that the majority of pensioners represented by the National Pensioners Convention genuinely feel that they were blatantly misled at the general election and that, if they have done something to help themselves, they will receive no help from the new Government?
Mr. Rooker:
They were not misled and they are better off under our Government--that is the plain, simple truth, as the hon. Gentleman should know. In my reply to the original question, I said that we had retained the basic state pension. I understand that the hon. Member for Havant (Mr. Willetts) is off to New York later this week to commit the Tories to getting rid of the basic state pension as the foundation of pensions policy in this country.
Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire):
When we do positive things for pensioners, such as introducing the winter fuel allowance and the minimum income guarantee, why do we undermine our position by restricting pensions increases to the rate of inflation during a period of low inflation--when there is an opportunity to enhance pensions--and thereby play into the hands of those who use
Mr. Rooker:
I understand the reasons behind my hon. Friend's point, but he should not dismiss the extra things the Government have been able to do precisely because we have kept inflation low. He cannot dismiss extras such as the fivefold increase in the winter fuel allowance, free television licences and free eye tests, and complain that we have only kept pensions in line with prices. We are following the commitment in our manifesto, on which we were all elected.
12. Mr. Howard Flight (Arundel and South Downs):
What the timetable will be for the introduction of the stakeholder pension. [111859]
The Minister of State, Department of Social Security (Mr. Jeff Rooker):
It is currently planned that stakeholder schemes will be available to the public from April next year and that schemes will be able to register from October this year.
Mr. Flight:
Will the Minister assure the House that that timetable will not be delayed as a result of using NIRS2 for recording purposes and other problems with the new national insurance arrangements? May I point out that there have been no new final salary schemes since the Government announced their stakeholder arrangements; and that the number of personal pension schemes has fallen? In other words, since the Government have been dithering over their stakeholder proposals, new pension provision in this country has declined significantly.
Mr. Rooker:
The answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question is yes. I gave an answer that, on current plans, the schemes will be available from April 2001--[Interruption.] I repeat, on current plans--on what else can I base my answer? Under current plans, we intend to introduce stakeholder schemes from April next year and company providers will be able to register from this October. As for the rest of his question, it does not apply to stakeholders; perhaps he will write to me about it.
13. Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West):
What proposals he has to improve the income of the poorest pensioners. [111843]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Social Security (Mr. Hugh Bayley):
The minimum income guarantee has already increased the incomes of our poorest pensioners. This year, it will increase in line with earnings, by £3.45 per week for a single pensioner and £5.35 per week for a couple. We have also given an undertaking that the minimum income guarantee will continue to rise annually in line with earnings throughout this Parliament.
Mr. Flynn:
While I acknowledge the Government's beneficial actions to help pensioners, according to
Mr. Bayley:
I know that my hon. Friend takes a close interest in such matters. During the first three years of this Parliament, pensioners will have received more than £800 million more through winter fuel payments and the minimum income guarantee than they would have received had we merely restored the uprating link to earnings.
On the minimum income guarantee, we do not know the number of people who would be eligible but are not claiming. It is probably between 400,000 and 700,000. I hope that my hon. Friend will agree that the very fact that there is a need to run a take-up campaign shows that take-up campaigns in the past have not succeeded. That is why we need to make sure that we have got it right, and that when we introduce our take-up campaign shortly, it works.
Mr. David Heath (Somerton and Frome):
In supporting the hon. Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn), may I suggest to the Minister that there is a particular problem for many of the poorest pensioners in rural areas? They have cultural problems that prevent them from seeking assistance, they have problems in gaining access to the advice that they should receive, and they are often isolated. Will he look particularly at ways of getting to those poor pensioners, so that they take up the benefits to which they are entitled?
Mr. Bayley:
I acknowledge that there are special problems facing poor people in rural areas. They tend to live in smaller groups of poorer people, often side by side with people on higher incomes, which means that those responsible for politics in poorer areas have often overlooked their needs. I can give the hon. Gentleman an assurance that when we launch a take-up campaign, it will seek to address the needs of people who ought to be claiming a minimum income guarantee, wherever they live--in rural areas, just as in urban areas.
14. Mr. Michael Fabricant (Lichfield):
If he will make a statement on the Government's progress in tackling benefit fraud. [111844]
The Minister of State, Department of Social Security (Mr. Jeff Rooker):
As the hon. Gentleman knows, we are determined to combat fraud and error in the social security system. We have a comprehensive strategy to safeguard the system from the first to the final payment. For example, we are insisting that claimants produce more evidence before income support is paid, which will
Mr. Fabricant:
How can we take that commitment seriously, when the Benefits Agency's own fraud investigation service ran out of money in September 1998, which resulted in less than half the usual number of convictions? Why have the Government abandoned the London organised fraud investigation team, when much fraud occurs in London? One is almost tempted to ask whether it was because the Government did not want the team to investigate the biggest fraud of all--Labour's selection of the London mayoral candidate.
Mr. Rooker:
Buried deep in there were some serious questions about fraud and error in the system. Although they were not asked, I shall do my best to answer them. We do have a strategy, which in some respects will be uncomfortable for right hon. and hon. Members. One aspect of it is data-matching programmes. As a constituent said to me on Friday evening, "Mr. Rooker, the computers are kissing each other." Facts are being found out because computers dealing with one benefit are being data-matched against claims for other benefits. People are being discovered who have forgotten to tell the Government about their savings or their occupational pension, while claiming income support. That can be extremely uncomfortable. We handle it as sensitively as possible, but we are determined to root it out.
Mr. Peter Lilley (Hitchin and Harpenden):
Can the Minister explain why his own study shows that the proportion of people claiming income support and jobseeker's allowance who are proven absolutely or on the balance of probabilities to have defrauded the system has risen under his Government? Is that because they are soft on fraud?
Mr. Rooker:
The situation that we inherited from the right honourable character across the way was that two out of five income support claims were being paid without enough evidence. We have changed that.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |