---

Mr. Pond: As I said a few moments ago, we are seeking to help people in that position in a number of ways. People who are on low incomes for a range of reasons will get help from council tax benefit, whether they are over the age of 70 or below that age, if they are on a low income. We are providing additional help for those over 70 because we feel they have additional need for extra help.

Mr. Chope: Will the Minister give way?

Mr. Pond: I will make some progress, if I may. The hon. Gentleman had quite long enough to develop his thoughts. I will give him an opportunity in a few minutes to come in.

A number of Conservative Members tried to turn the debate into one about council tax rises. That is not what the measure is about, but since they have done that, and since they like the band D comparisons on council tax, I can tell them that for 2004–05 Tory authorities have seen an increase of 5.4 per cent., Labour authorities 4.7 per cent. and Liberal Democrat authorities 6 per cent. I am grateful to the Liberals' local election manifesto 2004 for telling us that

"Liberal Democrat-controlled authorities over the last 6 years have seen average council tax rises of 6.9 per cent. compared to rises in Labour councils of 6.8 per cent. and Tory-run councils of 8.9 per cent."

Far be it from me to challenge the Liberal Democrats on any of their arithmetic.

Sir Paul Beresford: The hon. Gentleman is falling into the same fictitious trap as the Minister for Local and Regional Government did on the radio. He picked out one local council and said that its increase last year was 40 or 45 per cent., but as was pointed out to him, it is the bill on the mat that counts, and the bill in that local council was consistently the lowest in the country. So percentages do not count. What counts is the bill on the mat.

Mr. Pond: I thank the hon. Gentleman for that. It is worth him considering what the bill on the mat means for people working in Tory authorities, as against Labour authorities or Liberal Democrat authorities. I can tell him that the bill on the mat in cash terms is a lot
 
12 May 2004 : Column 406
 
smaller in Labour authorities than in Tory or Liberal Democrat authorities. If he wants to play the argument that way, he can do so, but he will not win the argument.

Hywel Williams: Will the Minister give way?

Mr. Pond: I shall make a little more progress, if I may.

A number of hon. Members asked what would happen in future years, under clause 7. It is true that the Bill provides for a one-off payment this year. The Chancellor made that clear. However, if the House approves the measure, we will take additional powers to give us flexibility so that in future years, if the circumstances are appropriate, the Chancellor may decide to give similar help or some other form of help, using the mechanism of the Bill. There is no commitment to do so, but it seems sensible to make sure that we have that flexibility.

Mr. George Osborne: What are those appropriate circumstances?

Mr. Pond: The hon. Gentleman must wait until the Chancellor considers those matters, but the circumstances will be fair, prudent and just, which are the principles that drive the Chancellor of the Exchequer in all his considerations.

I am sure that the hon. Member for Eastbourne did not intend this, but he caused great embarrassment this afternoon by quoting a good friend of mine, Rodney Bickerstaffe of the National Pensioners Convention. He sits on the Benches of the party that cut pensioner incomes by £10 billion, and he quoted Rodney Bickerstaffe in support of his argument for spending the money on the basic state pension, which, like the Bill, would result in a universal increase in pensioner incomes. The difference is, of course, that an increase in the basic state pension would not help the poorest pensioners, but this across-the-board payment is not offset against other benefits and will help the poorest pensioners.

This targeted help for the over-70s, winter fuel payments and free TV licences for over-75s cost around £3 billion a year, and those measures are cost-effective because they help the poorest pensioners as well as the rest. By comparison, the suggested increase in the basic state pension to £105 would cost an extra £10 billion. As with other measures, we concentrate help on those who need it most—older pensioners and those on the lowest incomes. I remind the hon. Member for Eastbourne that the increase in the basic state pension between 1997 and this April was 7 per cent. above inflation, and that it cost about £6 billion a year.

The hon. Member for Tatton asked why we are not making the payment until after Christmas, but he must brief himself more carefully. The payments will start to come on stream from November, and we hope to make all 5 million payments before the end of the year. That is not an absolute commitment, but it is our objective.

The hon. Member for Northavon (Mr. Webb) criticised the £100 payment to ease the burden of council tax because it is across the board. However, the hon. Member for Tatton reminded us that, until recently, Liberal Democrat party policy was to make a payment to everybody, rather than just the over-70s and those
 
12 May 2004 : Column 407
 
who are most in need. That policy was quietly dropped after the Brent, East by-election, although the hon. Member for Brent, East (Sarah Teather) is apparently unaware of that change.

Several Conservative Members suggested that the payment is an election bribe. That prompts the question: why are they going to vote for it? If we were offering an election bribe, we would promise that a Labour Government would continue to make the payments after the next election, but we are not making that promise, because the payment is a one-off. That does not sound like the work of a Government more concerned about the ballot box than the needs of older pensioners.

Mr. Chope: Does the Minister accept that clause 7 contains a power that will enable him to ensure that only people who voted Labour get paid next time?

Mr. Pond: I am not going to bother to respond to that.

The hon. Member for Northavon was rather defeatist as regards ensuring that people who need council tax benefit get that help. I can tell him that we are absolutely determined to ensure that they do get it. I accept that it is means-tested—it always has been. We did not invent council tax benefit any more than we invented council tax. I accept, too, that by increasing the numbers of people who are eligible for that help and get it, we will in the process increase the numbers of people who are on means-tested benefits. However, I do not intend to apologise for the fact that we are ensuring that people get the help that they need and to which they are entitled, especially given that we are today seeking to introduce the £100 universal payment for all pensioners aged over 70.

Opposition Members seem to find difficult the notion that the Government are determined to get help to pensioners, and the most help to those who need it most, but in different ways—by boosting the basic state pension, by introducing universal payments such as the £100 and the winter fuel payment, and by accepting the need for some income-related benefits. Through those measures, we are spending £10 billion a year more on pensioner incomes than when we first came to office. That compares with the £10 billion cut in pensioner incomes under the last Conservative Government.

The hon. Member for Mole Valley (Sir Paul Beresford) suggested that this proposal is the result of the Government's policy on council tax. I remind him that his party's policy on council tax is to cut grant to all local authorities by £2.4 billion, which is equivalent to a 10 per cent. increase in band D bills; to cut the grants to poorer councils; and to refuse to use capping powers even against councils such as Shepway, which, as we heard, is in the constituency of the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition, and which increased band D council tax by 28.9 per cent.

Mr. George Osborne: It is a Liberal Democrat council.

Mr. Pond: Yes, it is—I should read that into the record, too.
 
12 May 2004 : Column 408
 

The hon. Member for Mole Valley suggested that we need to get off the backs of local authorities. I have to tell him, in the presence of my right hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning, that he is a little out of date with the progress of the Government's discussions. We are determined to work in partnership with local authorities, and that is what we are doing. We are giving them the flexibility to make local decisions according to local needs, but in such a way as to ensure that basic minimum national standards apply. That is the context in which we have increased Government grant by 30 per cent. in real terms. Most local authorities have behaved very responsibly this year in proposing council tax increases that are half what they were last year. In the case of those few authorities that decided to go their own way, we had to consider using our capping powers.

The hon. Member for Mole Valley prayed in aid the Audit Commission report, which, it was suggested, blamed the Government for high council tax increases. However, the chair of the Audit Commission, James Strachan, has said that there are a number of factors behind the rises and that trying to find single point of blame is not only counter-productive, but not borne out by the evidence. The Government are trying to do whatever we can to ensure that the implications of that are minimised in terms of the effect on the poorest pensioners and those on low incomes generally.

The hon. Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire) went through the Bill clause by clause. We thought that perhaps he would speak long enough to qualify for the £100 payment. He made some interesting detailed points, which will be considered in Committee, where I look forward to debating them with him. I am sure that he will want to put himself forward to serve on the Committee. However, I must ask my officials to contact his council because he appears to believe that the local authority meets part of the cost of council tax benefit when the central Government subsidy finances all properly made payments of such benefit. I will happily ensure that he and his local authority are clear about that.

---