10 Feb 2004 : Column 1249

House of Commons

Tuesday 10 February 2004

The House met at half-past Eleven o'clock

PRAYERS

[Mr. Speaker in the Chair]

Oral Answers to Questions

SCOTLAND

The Secretary of State was asked—

Whisky Industry

1. Mr. Brian H. Donohoe (Cunninghame, South) (Lab): What progress is being made on introducing strip stamps in the Scotch whisky industry. [152887]

The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Alistair Darling): I met representatives of the Scotch Whisky Association last week to discuss this issue, and general consultation with the spirits industry is, of course, continuing. My hon. Friend the Economic Secretary to the Treasury is due to meet the association on 23 February to discuss the issue further.

Mr. Donohoe : I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer, and I am pleased that he is taking such a close interest in this important subject. The Scotch whisky industry has been looking for some time at alternatives to the stamp duty and strip stamps. If it comes up with a successful solution, will he make representations to the Chancellor, so that we can ditch that proposal once and for all and allow the Scotch whisky industry to get on with its main business, which is, of course, to sell whisky both here at home and abroad?

Mr. Darling: My hon. Friend is right: the industry is of huge importance to Scotland—and, of course, to the whole of the United Kingdom. As my right hon. Friend the Chancellor made clear at the time of the pre-Budget report, his concern is about the growing amount of fraud. Customs and Excise and the Scotch Whisky Association put different monetary values on that fraud, but both agree that there is a problem, and it needs to be sorted out. The Chancellor has said that unless something else is done, he intends to go ahead with the strip stamps. However, he has made it clear that it is up to the industry to talk to Customs and Excise with a view to finding some other way to deal with what is undoubtedly a growing problem. I am sure that the whole House would agree that, faced with a growing amount of fraud, it is necessary to take action, but of course, that action must be consistent with ensuring that

10 Feb 2004 : Column 1250

we do everything we can to help the industry, which is why we have frozen whisky duty for the past six Budgets.

Angus Robertson (Moray) (SNP): Why should the Scotch whisky industry have to foot the bill to crack down on crooks? Surely Customs and Excise should be doing that more effectively. Why is a proposal being made for new systems, new overheads, new costs and new regulations, all to be borne by the Scotch whisky industry, when every bottle of whisky is already clearly marked with a lot number, which would help in the fight, which everyone supports, against fraud?

Mr. Darling: Bottles may be marked, but there is still a problem with fraud, as representatives of the industry admitted when I met them last week. Whisky is going missing when it is shipped out of warehouses. We have made it clear—I have just done so again—that the industry and the Government need to talk together to consider alternatives. As for the hon. Gentleman's first point, it has always been the case in the Scotch whisky industry—and, indeed, in many other industries—that responsibility for security rests jointly with the industry and Customs and Excise. The Scotch whisky industry already has considerable security measures in force to ensure that whisky is kept safe and accounted for, and the vast bulk of it is—but there is a problem with fraud, and the industry and Customs and Excise need to work together to find out how we can sort it out.

Mr. John McFall (Dumbarton) (Lab/Co-op): The Economic Secretary will visit Scotland on 23 February at my invitation, in my capacity as the chairman of the all-party Scotch whisky group, and he will start at Allied Distillers in my constituency. I recognise that fraud is a problem, and I am trying to persuade the industry and the Government to take a consensual approach to achieve a satisfactory outcome, but will the Secretary of State ensure that he makes his colleagues aware that this is a £2 billion manufacturing industry, and any solution that is reached should not damage its competitiveness and productivity?

Mr. Darling: My hon. Friend can rest assured that the Government, and the Chancellor in particular, are well aware of the importance of that industry. Indeed, it is not possible to live in Scotland without being aware of its importance. Of course my hon. Friend is right to suggest that it is in the interests of the industry as well as the general taxpayer—who, after all, will have to foot the loss unless something is done about it—that both the Government and the industry work together to ensure that the problem is dealt with. What is encouraging so far is that the industry is showing a willingness to talk to the Government and discuss with Customs and Excise measures that might help, but as my right hon. Friend the Chancellor has said, the Government cannot ignore a situation in which a very large amount of money is being lost in fraud, and we have to do everything we possibly can to stop that happening.

Mr. Peter Duncan (Galloway and Upper Nithsdale) (Con): The Secretary of State asks the industry to engage with Customs and Excise. Is he aware that one major distiller in Scotland has offered to audit-trail

10 Feb 2004 : Column 1251

random purchases from the high street to trace fraud? Why has it not received a single phone call from Customs and Excise about that? How can he condone such complacency, when one in 50 jobs in Scotland are at risk?

Mr. Darling: When I met the industry and the people from the Scotch Whisky Association last week—the association represents the whole industry in Scotland—they said that they had been working on several measures, including audit measures, which they had been discussing with Customs and Excise. It is not true to say that Customs and Excise has not been engaging with the association—the association readily agrees that that is happening. If the hon. Gentleman thinks that something specific could be done that he would care to let me know about, I shall make sure that Customs and Excise sees it. However, it is important for all of us in the House to recognise that there is a significant revenue loss at the moment—the exact monetary value might be a matter of dispute—that is rising and needs to be dealt with. The question is: what is the best way of dealing with that revenue loss?

Pension Credit

2. John Barrett (Edinburgh, West) (LD): How many pensioner households in Scotland are in receipt of pension credit. [152888]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mrs. Anne McGuire): As at 31 January, there were 229,000 pensioner households in Scotland, comprising approximately 271,000 individuals, receiving pension credit. The latest monthly pension credit progress report, including numbers of recipient households in each parliamentary constituency in Great Britain, was published yesterday.

John Barrett : I thank the Under-Secretary for that answer. Does she agree, however, that the increase in the uptake of pension credit over the past month was only 1.4 per cent., and that at that rate of increase it would take another 30 years before everyone who was entitled to pension credit received it? What are the Government prepared to do to remedy that situation? Does she agree that the answer is to reduce the number of means-tested benefits and raise the basic state pension?

Mrs. McGuire: The answer to all those questions is no. The actual fact about the current situation is that more than 4.1 million pensioner households have been written to about pension credit. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman welcomes the fact that, in his constituency, 2,065 households, comprising 2,424 individuals, now receive an additional £40.43 a week. I ask him to have a conversation with his colleagues the hon. Members for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Sir Robert Smith) and for Gordon (Malcolm Bruce), because in the Mearns Leader, which I am sure is well read in Edinburgh, the hon. Member for Gordon said:


The hon. Member for Edinburgh, West (John Barrett) should have that conversation as soon as possible, before he makes any other misguided comments.

10 Feb 2004 : Column 1252

Anne Picking (East Lothian) (Lab): I am sure that my hon. Friend is aware that, although the good news story of pension credit is just that, another good news story is that only one third of pensioners in the UK actually pay tax. Is that equation reflected in Scotland?

Mrs. McGuire: I think that I missed the last part of my hon. Friend's question, but I assume that she was talking about the numbers in Scotland. The number of pensioners in Scotland not paying tax will be pro rata to the number in the rest of the United Kingdom. What I do not want to lose sight of is the core of my hon. Friend's comments: we have reduced the tax burden on pensioners so that only about one third of pensioners in the United Kingdom now pay tax.

Mr. Peter Duncan (Galloway and Upper Nithsdale) (Con): Is the Under-Secretary aware that less than 0.25 per cent. of pension credit is currently paid into Post Office card accounts? Does she think that that is too much or not enough?

Mrs. McGuire: I thought that the Conservative party had spent its whole history building on the idea that people ought to have choice. We cannot—I am sure that the hon. Gentleman is not suggesting this—force pensioners to collect their pensions in whatever way suits us. We have offered pensioners a plethora of initiatives, including support for the Post Office cards, to give them the choice of how they want to collect their pensions every week, and I would have thought that he would see fit to support that.

Mr. Duncan: The Under-Secretary is right to say that I am very much in favour of choice, but it must be free and fair choice. I am sure that she is aware of constituents of hers who have tried to get their pension credit paid into a Post Office card account, and she will know how difficult that process is. According to the Government's own figures, 140,000 eligible pensioner households in Scotland will not claim the credit. Does she accept my view that they are likely to be the most disadvantaged and the most in need? Is she proud of that statistic?

Mrs. McGuire: I suggest that the hon. Gentleman leave me to look after my constituents, rather than try to tell me what is best for them. We have widened the choice of ways in which pensions can be collected. One reason for moving from the approach of having books stamped weekly at the post office is that it was open to fraud and theft. Up to 100 pension books per week were stolen. The hon. Gentleman has no credibility on pension credit, because his party is against it.

Mr. Michael Connarty (Falkirk, East) (Lab): I applaud the Government's initiative on pension credit, from which 2,700 families in my constituency—more than 3,300 individuals—are gaining. However, I have found out over the past few weeks that some pensioners do not know that they can claim pension credit. They claim other benefits, and in the middle of it all, forget about claiming pension credit. Will my hon. Friend urge all pensioners and their families to telephone 0800 991234, to get immediate access to pension credit?

10 Feb 2004 : Column 1253

Mrs. McGuire: I am sure that the Pension Service will be grateful to my hon. Friend for highlighting the helpline number. We must make sure that all pensioners have the information they require, and we applaud the Pension Service for making a commitment to contact every pensioner. Sometimes that work is not helped by the denigrating and negative comments that are made by Opposition Members for their own political motives, and certainly not to benefit pensioners.


Next Section

IndexHome Page