| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Housing Benefit Fraud
2. Mr. Peter Brooke (Cities of London and Westminster): If he will make a statement on progress in combating housing benefit fraud. [120937]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Social Security (Angela Eagle): Countering housing benefit fraud continues to be a high priority for us.
The housing Green Paper, published on 4 April, sets out our plans and proposals to improve housing benefit and tackle fraud. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State recently wrote to all council chief executives warning them to remedy weaknesses identified by the benefit fraud inspectorate. He made it plain in that letter that, if the BFI reports a local authority's persistent failings, we will direct the standards to be achieved by that authority with time scales for improvement and enforce them rigorously.
Mr. Brooke: Does the Minister recognise that those vanguard local authorities that have invested in fraud prevention measures may be unfairly penalised if the weekly benefits savings targets do not accurately reflect the success that they have achieved in prevention?
Angela Eagle: We changed the way in which the weekly benefits savings subsidy system worked in response to concerns expressed by the National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee, which showed that it was an inaccurate test of the savings achieved. Weekly benefits savings are now much more accurately assessed, but, to recognise the change from the old system to the new, early this year we announced a change in the way in which we would pay subsidy, which included new incentives for local authorities to prosecute fraudsters and incentives for those local authorities that participate in the verification framework.
Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North): Will my hon. Friend extend her examination of benefit fraud to the non-delivery of benefit to legitimate claimants? Is she aware that in Hackney and Islington, the service is provided by a company called IT Net, and that, as a result of its inefficiency and incompetence, thousands of legitimate claimants have been threatened with the loss of their homes--council, housing association or private? Is not it also a fraud against them if their perfectly correct claim for a benefit is not met by the service and they end up being homeless as a result?
Angela Eagle: We are well aware of the problems being experienced in my hon. Friend's constituency and are keeping a close eye on them. I sympathise very much with the points that he made. It is clearly the case that those who are entitled to housing benefit should receive it in a timely fashion, but I must point out that under the framework of law left to us by the Conservative party,the legal responsibilities for delivering housing benefit lie with the local authority.
Mr. Eric Pickles (Brentwood and Ongar): Does the hon. Lady recall press releases being issued early this year, trumpeting the success that the Government claim on housing benefit fraud? When they were released, was she aware that the situation on the ground was exactly the reverse? Is she aware that successful prosecutions for housing benefit fraud are down by 50 per cent. and that 40 per cent. of local authorities have no formal prosecution policy?
What action will she take to ensure that the Department correctly briefs Ministers on the true facts of housing benefit fraud? Given that the right hon. Member for
Birkenhead (Mr. Field) described the Government's fraud policy as nothing more than
- the normal roller-towel press release . . .
Angela Eagle: An awful lot of nonsense about housing benefit fraud appears in the press. A recent example of that was in The Sunday Times this week, which produced a hotchpotch of misinterpretation, misrepresentation and muddle. One of the figures that it came up with was that
- the proportion of housing benefit fraud cases won . . . had collapsed from 38 per cent. to 18 per cent. in the space of a year.
Champion for Older People
4. Ms Linda Perham (Ilford, North): If he will make a statement on his role as the champion for older people. [120939]
The Secretary of State for Social Security (Mr. Alistair Darling): We are determined that people over the age of 50 should have the same range of opportunities and chances as everyone else. Too many of the over-50s are written off. The cost to society is substantial; the cost to individuals is immense. Life should begin at 50, not end there.
Ms Perham: I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, and congratulate him on his appointment as the champion for older people. Does he agree that that will give a higher profile to the inter-ministerial group on older people, and impetus to the agenda in the performance and innovation unit report, "Winning the generation game", which is about improving the prospects of older people aged 50 to 65? Does he further agree that age discrimination is a great barrier to many older people at work? If the code of practice on age diversity in employment does not work, will the ministerial group consider legislation on that issue?
Mr. Darling: My hon. Friend makes a good point. In 30 years' time, almost half the population will be over the age of 50, so we need to change the way in which we think and the way in which individuals and the Government prepare for that enormous change in the demography of this country. Moreover, almost a quarter of the population will be over retirement age, which is why it is necessary to make changes now for long-term pension provision.
My hon. Friend's main point is about the workplace. It is a fact that many people over the age of 50 have retired not because they wanted to, but because they wereforced out of employment. Unfortunately, for them discrimination is a fact of life. We have made it clear that if the code of practice that we published last year does not work, we will have to reconsider the matter. I am sure that every one of us would like to think that, if we are
over the age of 50, we have exactly the same chances and choices as people younger than that. Age discrimination is as unacceptable as any other form of discrimination.
Mr. Archy Kirkwood (Roxburgh and Berwickshire): I cannot help but observe that "Champion" was a wonder horse--the Secretary of State may be too young to remember that. It was a wonderful television programme, but it is a terrible description of an important job. In his new role, will the right hon. Gentleman assume responsibility for and take forward the pilot projects in the initiative on better government for older people, which have been extremely valuable? My area was one of the pilot areas. The money to mount these programmes to consult older people is running out. Is it the Government's intention to find the finance to enable them to continue and to be rolled out nationwide?
Mr. Darling: I am not sure I remember "Champion the Wonder Horse"; my mum and dad were reluctant to get us a television set. It could be that the hon. Gentleman, despite his youthful looks, is much older than I am, and that is why he remembers it.
One of my jobs is to examine pilot projects to discover whether they work. If they do not work, we will not continue with them. If they do work, and they ensure that older people are more involved in work, leisure activities or education, we want to encourage them. The object of this process is to ensure that Government and individuals focus on the fact that in the not-too-distant future almost half the population will be over the age of 50. That means that there has to be a seismic change in the way in which we all think about how to deal with what I believe is not a problem, but a great opportunity for this country.
Mr. Lawrie Quinn (Scarborough and Whitby): May I urge my right hon. Friend to give particular consideration to the plight of older people living in rural communities such as Scarborough and Whitby, who are somewhat remote from the facilities usually found in urban areas? Will he use his new post to take account of that significant group?
Mr. Darling: My hon. Friend makes an important point, especially about transport. As he will know, one of the steps we have taken is the extension of concessionary travel to people who have retired, because we think they should have access to services and facilities. Our object must be to make opportunities for the over-50s as real in the country as they are in cities and towns.
Mr. David Willetts (Havant): I join the hon. Member for Ilford, North (Ms Perham) in congratulating the Secretary of State on his new role as champion for older people. He said in the speech to the ABI that he did not prepare, or did not deliver, or whatever it was, that his job was
- to get people to think seriously about the challenges we face to ensure that everyone has the options and opportunities to make the most of their later lives.
Is not the truth that the right hon. Gentleman's target should not be Victor Meldrew, but closer to home? His target should be his colleagues, who abuse pensioners and therefore should not be surprised that pensioners are losing confidence in them.
Mr. Darling: The hon. Gentleman's opportunism knows no bounds. He was a member of a Government who increased VAT on fuel, which hurt older people more than most. He was a member of a Government who did absolutely nothing to deal with the problems faced by older people who were often thrown out of work through no choice of their own. He is now a member of an Opposition who are against the new deal for the over-50s--he would deny help to people who need it. He is in no position to present himself as somehow being on the side of older people or pensioners.
We are the party that, because of the economic stability that we are now building, has ensured that more people are in work, and we want more older people to be in work. We are increasing the amount that we spend on pensioners--£6.5 billion more than the Tories would ever have spent. The Tories' position on older people and pensioners is one of sheer opportunism, which the electorate have not forgotten.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |