| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. David Tredinnick (Bosworth): Despite the Paymaster General's determined defence this afternoon, is it not clear that she has completely underestimated the scale of the task in hand? We have already heard about the chaos of the telephone system. What does she have to say about the fact that the Department ignored its own staff's worries about the failings of the computer system? Is she not aware that the back-payment system does not help those who spend the money that they receive straight away and need immediately to keep their families alive? Is it not a fact that tax credits give entitlements to other benefits such as free prescriptions? To make their claims, people need their tax award notification. What does she have to say to all those people who have not been able to claim their free prescriptions? What has that done to their health?
Dawn Primarolo: I shall try again. On passported benefits, there are interim arrangements for families who had an exemption certificate under the old
arrangements. If they had a tax credit exemption certificate under the previous arrangements, it will have been extended and the claimant can use it until 31 July 2003, even if their circumstances have changed. If the claimant has lost the certificate, they can still sign for one.With regard to the missing applications, the hon. Gentleman has clearly not been listening. Some 4 million people have applied and 3.2 million are receiving payment or are about to do so. On top of those 3.2 million people, 1.3 million are on income support or JSA and are receiving the money to which they are entitled. That is not a system that is failing to deliver. Where families have not received, for whatever reason, the payments to which they are entitled or that they should have received, the Inland Revenue will make them an interim award. I have explained to the House how that can be done.
Mr. David Heath (Somerton and Frome): Does the right hon. Lady accept that when people are living hand to mouth and have not received the payments that they deserve, their difficulties will not stop when the payments are made, whether as an interim or final payment? In the interim, the bills will have continued to come in and there will have been missed payments on gas, electricity and council tax. The banks will be putting in their £20 charges for unintentional overdrafts. First, will she do something about that by approaching the various authorities to ask them to be sensitive to the problems that people face? Secondly, will she ensure that everyone subject to delayed payment has in their hand a letter from her explaining the circumstances that have created the situation in which they find themselves, through no fault of their own?
Dawn Primarolo: No family will lose money. The payment from 6 April will stand. The interim payments are there to ensure that support is available to families who have experienced difficulties. There was a period in which the working families tax credit ran on before the new tax credit started. Each family was asked to state whether they wanted to be paid weekly or four weekly. That money is now available to them. I find it incredible that the hon. Gentleman's party—I hope that he is making this clear to his constituents while pressing his claims about special cases that need to be dealt with accurately—does not support the new tax credits.
Miss Julie Kirkbride (Bromsgrove): The Paymaster General keeps parroting statistics, but does she realise how insulting that is to the many hundreds of thousands of families throughout the country who are at their wits' end because they simply do not know whether they will continue to receive the benefit on which they have come to rely? I have been contacted by many families in my constituency who have cancelled their standing orders because they do not know whether they will have the money to pay for them in the bank by the end of the month, as they have been unable to contact the Inland Revenue to find out about their award.
May I press the Paymaster General on the questions that have been asked about compensation? For example, a lady in my constituency who has been claiming the working families tax credit does not know whether she will receive any money under the children's
tax credit by the end of the month in just a few days' time. Can she be given compensation for the distress that has been caused and for the severe administrative chaos involved in her having to cancel standing orders because she did not know whether she would receive the money to which she is entitled?
Dawn Primarolo: I hope that the hon. Lady is explaining to her constituents why she opposed the introduction of the extra money and why, if she had had her way, people would be talking not about late payments, but about no payments whatever. Of course, it is important that families receive the money to which they are entitled. The payment week of the 2 million families who asked for four-weekly payments—two thirds of those who applied—starts this week, today, and they will receive that money. Where there has been extreme hardship, the circumstances will of course need to be looked at and a decision made about the appropriate and best response to the families who did not receive the service that they were entitled to expect.
Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham): Instead of the Paymaster General seeking to defend the indefensible and scapegoat applicants for ministerial ineptitude, it would have been so much better if her right hon. Friend the Chancellor had come to the House to give a gracious apology for this fiasco. Given that the Government legislated in the previous Parliament to allow the charging of interest in cases of late payment of commercial debt, and as hundreds and thousands, if not millions, of those who have suffered in this fiasco risk plunging into the red through no fault of their own, why cannot she today make good her pledge to the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath) that no one will lose money by guaranteeing that everyone who has not been paid so far will receive a payment with interest on top?
Dawn Primarolo: I have made clear the position with regard to payment, interim payments and the question of ensuring delivery on the appropriate date. I have also explained to the House the response to the families who are in particular need and require urgent support through the interim payment. In all friendship, I say to the hon. Gentleman that I did not see him complain when his party plunged 3 million children into poverty or when millions were unemployed and suffered as a result. This Government have introduced a reform that pays money directly to families and supports them whether they are in work or out of it and supports them in moving from unemployment into employment. We are spending more money than any other Government on supporting families and children. With regard to families who have experienced difficulties, I have said that I apologise for that and I shall ensure, as will the Inland Revenue, that interim payments are made where appropriate.
Point of Order
6.28 pm
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. One of the problems of the House of Commons is that matters that may be the subject of a point of order can refer to issues that were raised two hours, two hours and 20 minutes or two hours and 30 minutes earlier. On grounds of urgency and importance, will you bring to Mr. Speaker's attention the possibility of raising under Standing Order No. 24 the bewildering response of the Foreign Secretary to six questions from all parts of the House about taking custody of the documents found in the Foreign Ministry in Baghdad? Frankly, the impression was given that Ministers perhaps did not want to know too much about those documents.
Mr. George Foulkes (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley): Quite the reverse.
Mr. Dalyell: If it was the reverse, the documents should be taken into custody.
I want to make one point. Politicians may not be too interested, but the courts will certainly ask questions about why the documents were not taken into the custody of the coalition. If Tariq Aziz and others are to be brought to trial, that will have to be taken into account. Certainly, if there is to be a case—I do not know whether there will be—of Galloway v. Telegraph Group newspapers, the lawyers will ask why the documents were left in the Foreign Ministry and not taken into custody.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Sylvia Heal): I certainly accept that, as the hon. Gentleman says, there have been some developments since answers were given in the Chamber, but it would perhaps be appropriate—I know that he is familiar with the procedure—for him to put in an application to the Speaker's Office for discussion tomorrow.
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT (REPRESENTATION) BILL [PROGRAMME] (NO. 2)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Orders [28 June 2001 and 29 October 2002],
- That the following provisions shall apply to the European Parliament (Representation) Bill for the purpose of supplementing the Order of 10th December 2002—
Consideration of Lords Amendments
- (1) Proceedings on consideration of Lords Amendments shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion three hours after their commencement.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |