| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Greenway: If I heard correctly, the Minister said that there will be a review of News 24. Can she confirm when that will take place?
Janet Anderson: I cannot give a precise date, but the hon. Gentleman will be aware that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has made it plain that we shall review the digital services because we want to ensure that the public get value for money. I hope that that helps to answer the question asked by the hon. Member for Worthing, West (Mr. Bottomley).
The Government will commission independent scrutinies of the BBC's fair trading policies and financial reporting and publish the resulting reports. The BBC will also be required to have its fair trading and financial audits carried out by different auditors. The fair trading auditor's full report on compliance and risk will in future be published by the BBC. Periodic examinations of the systems and controls in place to ensure fair trading and of the nature and extent of the financial systems will also be carried out by independent consultants. Those will of course be available to be considered and questioned by the Select Committee. Finally, I reassure the hon. Member for Ryedale that we shall also review the public service role and governance of the BBC in the forthcoming broadcasting and communications White Paper.
On concessions, we have already gone beyond the Davies panel's recommendation on assistance for pensioners with the announcement of free licences for the over-75s. The concession will start on 1 November, subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary legislation. The regulations provide that, from 1 April, those who will be 75 or over on 1 November, or who turn 75 after that date but before their licence would expire, will be able to buy a short-term licence lasting until 1 November. From 1 November, refunds will be available in respect of licences already paid for.
The hon. Member for Ryedale is, I am sure, aware that, in tabling a motion to annul the regulations, he is opposing the proposal to allow pensioners aged over 75 to purchase short-term licences. [Interruption.] That is the effect of the motion.
Mr. Greenway:
How many times have Ministers in successive Governments said in Committee that a negative resolution with regard to statutory instruments provides the mechanism whereby Parliament can debate some important matters, of which this is one?
Janet Anderson:
The hon. Gentleman should be clear about the effect of the motion. He wanted the regulations to be annulled. If he had been successful--of course he does not have the majority--[Interruption.]
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Lord):
Order. That is enough interruption from a sedentary position by hon. Members on both sides of the House.
Janet Anderson:
Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
We have accepted the Davies panel's recommendation that registered blind people should be entitled to a 50 per cent. reduction in the television licence fee. That will come into force from 1 April via a separate determination by the Secretary of State.
We have also accepted the recommendation that subtitling of programmes for the deaf and hard of hearing be further developed, so that 50 per cent. of BBC digital programmes are subtitled within five years, and 100 per cent. within 10. The regulations provide that, as recommended by the review panel, the collection arrangements under the cash easy-entry easy-payment scheme are made more equitable.
The accommodation for residential care concessionary scheme is, as we all know, far from perfect. The majority of the current beneficiaries are over 75 and will receive free licences. About 130,000 younger pensioners and mentally and physically disabled people will be left in the scheme. Notwithstanding the drop in the number of people benefiting from the scheme, we propose to keep the arrangement for concessionary licences, but the regulations introduce a minor change to bring within the scope of the provision all retired persons aged 60 years or more, removing the current element of discrimination inherent in the reference to pensionable age. That provision will have the additional benefit of safeguarding the entitlement to the concession of residents in sheltered housing schemes with male residents aged between 60 and 64. I hope that that, too, will be supported by Conservative Members.
The hon. Member for Worthing, West asked where the efficiency savings of £490 million would come from. They will come from increased efficiency, reductions in bureaucracy and increased commercial revenue.
Mr. Steve Webb (Northavon):
I will not detain the House for long, but it is important to put on the record the Liberal Democrats response to the statutory instrument. I welcome the fact that the regulations set out the practicalities of how constituents aged 75 or over will obtain their partial licences up to the point when the scheme comes in.
Some months ago, the issue was raised with me by constituents who heard the announcement and wondered what would happen from April. It is good that the regulations now clarify the position. It would have been even better if the original announcement had been accompanied by some explanation, as it has caused some anxiety. Occasionally, however, announcements are made rather hurriedly, as they need to be rushed through without the detail being thought through. Nevertheless, it is welcome that we now have the detail. I also welcome extension of the residential accommodation concession to men aged 60 to 64. There was an anomalous situation in which a woman over 60 might be covered by the concession, whereas a man over 60 might not be. Some levelling between those groups seems quite appropriate.
I have two reservations about the regulations. The first is that the concession for the over-75s reveals confusion in the Government's approach to supporting pensioners.
Just a few months ago, the Government rejected an amendment that I moved to the Welfare Reform and Pensions Bill that would have provided for an across-the-board pensions rise for the over-75s. Ministers argued that such a provision would be poorly targeted. However--except in relation to one or two-pensioner households that do not have a television--a free concessionary television licence has exactly the same properties as the proposed provision.
Liberal Democrat Members have been arguing for months, if not years, that older pensioners are poorer pensioners, and that targeting by age is very effective. I am puzzled why it is right to target older pensioners in the regulations on television licences, but not right to do so for pension enhancements.
I cannot develop that point much further without straying from the regulations, but the point demonstrates both the Government's confusion and their convenience. When an action such as providing free television licences is politically attractive, arguments against targeting go out of the window, whereas our pension proposals could not be allowed--
Mr. Syd Rapson (Portsmouth, North):
It must not have been a political decision, then.
Mr. Webb:
It was a political decision.
On the "Today" programme, when discussing free television licences, a Minister was asked, "Why not just give them the £101?" There is really no answer to that question. If pensioners wanted to spend the money on the licence, they would; if not, they would not. They would have the choice. Nevertheless, we live in a political world, and we have to accept that a free television licence is the way in which the Government have chosen to help older pensioners. Given that we have long argued that older pensioners should be the priority, we welcome that decision.
Liberal Democrat Members are concerned about the increase in the licence fee from £101 to £104. Although £3 may not be a significant sum for hon. Members, for pensioners receiving 75p from the Government in April, it is a month's pension rise. Four weeks-worth of the pension rise will have to go on paying the television licence increase. Although older pensioners will receive the licence free, for those who are aged 65 to 74, a month's pension rise will be eaten up by the regulations. Although hon. Members talk about the percentage increase involved and about hundreds of millions of pounds, we should remember the context of this increase. For many pensioners, £3 is not a trivial sum, and we should not lightly pass the regulations.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |