THE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES
OFFICIAL REPORT
IN THE THIRD SESSION OF THE FIFTY–THIRD PARLIAMENT OF THE
UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND
[WHICH OPENED 13 JUNE 2001]
FIFTY–THIRD YEAR OF THE REIGN OF
HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II
SIXTH SERIES
VOLUME 419
FIFTH VOLUME OF SESSION 2003–2004
House of Commons
Monday 15 March 2004
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Mr. Speaker in the Chair]
The House observed two minutes' silence in memory of those who died as a result of the bombings in Madrid on 11 March.
Oral Answers to Questions
WORK AND PENSIONS
The Secretary of State was asked—
Student Nurses
1. Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire) (Lab): If he will hold discussions with the Treasury and the Department of Health on changing his Department's definition of remunerative employment to include student nurses on clinical placements. [160831]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Chris Pond): The child tax credit introduced in April 2001 extended support to around 100,000 families, including students and student nurses, who were previously excluded from support under the working families tax credit. Time spent by student nurses on clinical placements is a period of study, not
paid employment, and such periods therefore cannot be treated as remunerative work for working tax credit purposes.
Mr. Barnes : Student nurses undertake nursing duties as part of their studies. Why can they not qualify for the child-care element of working families tax credit? One of my constituents may have to pack in her studies after having a baby because she cannot afford child care. Does this not remove a vital future resource from the health service, and waste the bursary moneys that have already been paid in connection with my constituent's studies so far?
Mr. Pond: As my hon. Friend will know, we are doing all that we can to increase the number of nurses and student nurses. He will also know that we have made a public commitment that every health-care student will be entitled to child-care grants for children under five, worth up to 70 per cent. of child-care costs. The Department of Health is currently developing the means to make that commitment a reality by autumn this year. That means that while student nurses are not entitled to the child-care element of working families tax credit because they are not in remunerative employment, they will be entitled to parallel and broadly similar support if they have young children.
Mr. Bob Blizzard (Waveney) (Lab): Will my hon. Friend also discuss with the Treasury the definition of "remunerative employment" in relation to school crossing patrol officers—the lollipop men and women who do such a great job looking after our children, standing outside in all weathers and all conditions? As he knows, they are very low paid and often have to claim benefits and other allowances. At present they are not entitled to the higher-earnings disregard. Would my hon. Friend consider awarding it to them? They deserve it, and we might find it easier to recruit such people as a result.
Mr. Pond: The whole House will want to join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to the work of school crossing
keepers. He has been assiduous in raising the issue with my Department. Whether extending the disregard would be an appropriate way of rewarding those people is in question; we are considering it, but I cannot promise that we will be able to act. Nevertheless, I pay tribute to my hon. Friend and to those whose case he has raised.Benefit Fraud
2. Syd Rapson (Portsmouth, North) (Lab): What measures he is taking to combat fraud in the benefit system. [160834]
5. Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York) (Con): If he will make a statement on the level of benefit fraud in (a) 1997 and (b) 2003. [160838]
The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Andrew Smith): Tackling fraud is a key priority. Ours is the first Government to measure fraud properly, to set targets for its reduction, and to legislate for the tools to do the job. We are penalising more fraudsters, recovering more money and putting out the clear message that benefit fraud is wrong.
The latest figures show that since 1997 we have cut fraud and error in income support and jobseeker's allowance by 29 per cent., which equates to £400 million a year. Beating benefit fraud is good news for legitimate claimants and good news for taxpayers.
Syd Rapson: I thank the Secretary of State for that answer. We all agree that tackling benefit fraud is crucial to maintaining trust in the system, but what advice can he give to the fledgling Liberal Democrat councillors of Portsmouth city council, who are in the difficult situation of having to find £200,000 from their meagre budgets simply to deal with the backlog?
Mr. Smith: My advice to Liberal Democrats in Portsmouth—fledgling or otherwise—is the same as to other local authorities: to work with us in combating fraud. More than 80 per cent. of local authorities are involved with the verification framework, and £160 million has already been provided to help local authorities with anti-fraud work. That sum increased to £233 million for the three years from April 2003. I do not know whether Portsmouth is one of those authorities, but I shall check, as, I dare say, will my hon. Friend.
Miss McIntosh: I thank the Secretary of State for that answer, but can he give the comparable figure for errors and failures to pay out on the part of his Department, and assure the House that he is indeed in control of his Department and its officials? In the past year alone, there have been between seven and 12 cases of people making legitimate claims for all sorts of benefits, particularly the pension credit, and then having to extract an apology from his Department because it failed to pay them. Is he in control, or are the officials getting carried away with their errors?
Mr. Smith: I am glad that the hon. Lady confirms that we apologise when we get things wrong, and I of course apologise for any individual such instance. Given that fraud is down by 39 per cent. since 1997, and that fraud
and error are down by 29 per cent., it is clear that error has not fallen as far and needs to fall further. However, it has been falling.
Mr. David Ruffley (Bury St. Edmunds) (Con): Last year, the National Audit Office published a report on tackling benefit fraud, which said of housing benefit fraud:
- "Although a Government review in 2000 proposed partial simplification as a first step, in practice the scheme has become more complex, with many changes."
Mr. Smith: As the hon. Gentleman knows, we have not only introduced measures to simplify housing benefit administration; we are piloting the flat rate local housing allowance, which takes account of income, family circumstances and area and cuts out reams of red tape in the administration of that benefit. We have to evaluate that pilot properly, but as I reported to the House last week, the early results are very encouraging. I repeat the injunction to all local authorities that I mentioned to my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth, North (Syd Rapson): it is very important that central Government and local government work closely together to simplify benefits such as housing benefit, to make sure that they are efficiently administered and to tackle fraud.
Mr. George Osborne (Tatton) (Con): If the Secretary of State is making such progress in tackling fraud and error in his Department, can he predict when he expects to produce a set of departmental annual reports that are not qualified by the National Audit Office because they are full of fraud and error?
Mr. Smith: We are of course working very closely with the NAO, precisely in order to get our accounts into the shape that everyone wants them to be in. As I said, we have made considerable progress in combating fraud and error, but I will not take lectures from Conservative Front Benchers, given that the Conservatives did not even measure fraud properly when in government.
Pension Credit
3. David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire) (Lab/Co-op): What recent estimate he has made of the number of eligible pensioners in the east midlands who have yet to make an application for pension credit; and if he will make a statement. [160835]
The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Andrew Smith): We cannot estimate eligibility with precision, especially at the regional level, because we would have to take only partial data from the national survey, which would in any case be a couple of years out of date. But today we have published the latest monthly pension credit progress report, which shows that up to 29 February, 2.26 million pensioner households and 2.73 million individuals across the country, and 158,000 households and 192,000 individuals in the east midlands were already receiving pension credit.
David Taylor: Our Government have achieved a great deal in their focus on pensioner poverty, but the take-up
level of pension credit causes considerable concern. Does the Secretary of State agree with last week's Pensions Policy Institute report? It said that a single, flat-rate pension, set at guaranteed credit level, paid to all and indexed to earnings, had much to commend it, being simpler, more robust, fairer and affordable in the long term. Is not that the way to tackle present and future take-up problems?
Mr. Smith: As we have debated on several occasions in the House, there are always attractions of a flat-rate, universal pension and other payments that can be put forward. However, the arithmetic is such that if we spent all the money that goes into pension credit on the basic state pension, although we could increase the pension for a single pensioner from £77 to something like £90, the poorest pensioners in our country would be more than £30 a week worse off as a consequence. I thank my hon. Friend for his comments on our progress in tackling pensioner poverty. He will be interested to know that 2,745 households in his constituency now receive pension credit, which is 36 per cent. more than received the minimum income guarantee.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |