Fourth Standing Committee
|
|
Mr. Austin Mitchell (Great Grimsby) (Lab): Fascinating though this litany is—I was not expecting it from the party of Margaret Thatcher, the milk snatcher—why are the Opposition treating it as a massive quibble to praise with faint damn? Mr. Burns: A massive what? Mr. Mitchell: A massive quibble in which the hon. Gentleman praises the scheme with faint damn. With his constant emphasis on fraud, is he saying that we should establish a police force to make sure that people are not spending their welfare food vouchers on turkey twizzlers, or is he endorsing enthusiastically the principle of the regulations, which is to improve the nutrition of the less well-off and poorest in society? Mr. Burns: That was an interesting intervention. I do not intend to sound patronising, but the hon. Gentleman has been in this House since the by-election in 1977, so he is extremely familiar with our workings. He had the opportunity to be in opposition for 18 years under the Governments of Margaret Thatcher and John Major, so I should not have thought that he needed me, who has been in opposition for a mere eight years, to point out to him that although, as I said
The Government are not infallible. Given his background, I probably have to say that less to the hon. Gentleman than to some of his hon. Friends. Even if the Government come up with a scheme that is welcomed broadly by both sides of the House, there might be parts of it that could be improved or fine tuned. I make no apology. It is our job as Opposition Members to question the Government, to hold them to account and to tease out of Ministers greater explanation of the intentions behind their schemes. Given that we are doing our job, I must say to him in all kindness that it is a little unfair of him to accuse us of being mealy-mouthed. If we were not doing our job and had let the Minister speak for 20 minutes after which the Opposition spokesmen spoke for a half a minute and we all went home, the hon. Gentleman might be one of the first to say that we were useless and that we were not holding the Government to account. On that happy note and, so that there can be no misunderstanding, I wish to repeat that we are not mealy-mouthed— Dr. Rudi Vis (Finchley and Golders Green) (Lab): If, instead of spending half a minute saying that he agreed with the measure, the hon. Gentleman takes longer to say that, it is time wasting nevertheless. Mr. Burns: I do not know about the hon. Gentleman, but 49 of his colleagues did not think the same as him last Wednesday, when they discussed an issue for some hours and held the Government to account. However, I shall not go down that route. It is our duty to hold the Government to account, to question Ministers, to tease out information and to express views that might conceivably help to improve a scheme that we do not want spoilt from the outset through poor planning. 5.9 pmStephen Williams (Bristol, West) (LD): This is my first Standing Committee on delegated legislation, and I am not sure whether to call you Mr. Chairman, Mr. Marshall, or by your name. The Chairman: Call me Mr. Marshall. Stephen Williams: Thank you, Mr. Marshall. It is also intimidating to see a phalanx of Labour MPs opposite me. We broadly welcome the scheme, but I have some questions for the Minister that she did not cover earlier. However, such was the rapid fire of her delivery that it is possible that some of those questions were dealt with, and I simply missed them; if so, I hope that she will forgive me. On the value of the voucher, the
The main point of the scheme is to widen the range of goods that can be purchased to include fruit and vegetables. Clearly, the price of fruit and vegetables is different from that of a pint of milk, and the price of individual items of fruit and vegetables varies enormously, too. We can all think of many examples of the weekly cost of vegetables being more than £2.80. Will the Minister explain how the £2.80 figure was arrived at, and say whether any consideration was given to the price of vegetables compared with milk, which is already covered by the scheme? How is entitlement to the scheme publicised, and given that there is a change of entitlement in the pilot area, how has that changed entitlement been publicised in Devon and Cornwall? Secondly, as has already been mentioned, this is a means-tested scheme, so somebody on contributions-based, rather than income-based, jobseeker’s allowance will not qualify. Will a parent on contributions-based JSA have sufficient income, even if they are not able to feed their children correctly? What if their circumstances change and, after six months, the contributions-based JSA runs out? Are safeguards in place to ensure that when somebody’s benefit entitlement changes, they are notified of their entitlement to this other benefit? We can all think of examples in our casework of a person’s entitlement to housing benefit or council tax benefit not being automatically triggered, or of their not being aware of their entitlement if they go from contributions-based to income-based JSA. That is an anomaly of means-testing. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for West Chelmsford (Mr. Burns) is staring at me, but I have had to deal with that situation and I hope that it does not happen again under this legislation. I am trying to be helpful. Thirdly, regulation 3(3)(b) excludes asylum seekers, and no further reference to asylum seekers is made. However, paragraph 7.5 of the explanatory memorandum says that the needs of asylum seekers
Can the Minister confirm what amount NASS pays to asylum seekers? Is it exactly equivalent to the £2.80 available to UK citizens? In what circumstances would local authorities pick up that bill, and how is that to be financed? Fourthly, the scheme now appears to stop payments at the age of four, rather than five. Why? It seems as though that will not happen in Devon and Cornwall. Why not, given that it is meant to be a pilot area? Caroline Flint: I explained that point. Stephen Williams: I am sorry, I missed that explanation. Fifthly, on food outlets, which are covered by regulation 12, what measures has the Minister’s Department undertaken to ensure that a sufficient network of outlets is available to offer fruit and
Regulation 5(2) states that the Secretary of State must be satisfied
of a parent. If so, how is she to be satisfied? Sixthly, why does schedule 3 refer only to cow’s milk—a point that was picked up on in the consultation feedback? My city colleague, the hon. Member for Bristol, East (Kerry McCarthy), is vegan, so perhaps she would have asked this question if she were here. Why is milk such as soya or goat’s milk not also included? Finally, I make a point that is relevant to my personal family history. My father’s mother died when he was very young. All the documents that I have read refer to mothers, but what would happen if a mother died prematurely? Would the father—the widower—also be entitled to claim the benefits for their child up to the age of four? Will the Minister confirm that that is the intention? 5.14 pmCaroline Flint: I shall try to answer those questions, but I shall also take the opportunity to write to hon. Members in more detail on a number of them. I will touch on the application process, because that is important. I have had a number of letters from hon. Members written on behalf of various organisations and individuals who are concerned about whether the system will be bureaucratic and will prevent parents from applying. We are developing a range of communications and considering different ways that information can be disseminated. All families with children who qualify through the child tax credit will receive an invitation to apply, and health professionals will be encouraged to mention the healthy start scheme in routine contacts with pregnant women and families. That is important. Thankfully, NHS antenatal services have a huge take-up, particularly from some of the families that we are talking about today. Again, it is about looking at how the opportunities for antenatal care and health visitors can be developed. I reassure hon. Members that since discussions in Committee during consideration of the Health and Social Care Bill, during which concerns were raised, we have had a further consultation with a wide range of organisations, including industry representatives, other Government Departments and professional bodies such as the Royal College of Midwives and the Community Practitioners and Health Visitors Association. The response to that consultation is available on the Department of Health website. We asked those organisations again about the process and the regulations and how they think they might work, and we have tried to incorporate their views. This group of pregnant women will already apply for the Sure Start maternity grant via their midwives. It is a question of creating an opportunity for this
On the point made by the hon. Member for Bristol, West (Stephen Williams), as far as I am aware, if the mother is not available—for whatever reason—the carer, who could be the father, could access the benefits as well. That point also applies to others who care for a child. As I said, the new application process for pregnant women started through the welfare food scheme on 1 November last year. That process was necessary for operational reasons. Due to changes in how benefits and tax credits are paid, no Government Department now routinely collects information on which women on benefits are pregnant, so there is no other way to identify all those eligible to receive milk tokens. That was one of the reasons why we had to consider some changes, even if we kept to the existing system. I am happy to say that the numbers applying are going up and up, but we need to make sure that, for all the reasons hon. Members have mentioned this afternoon, everyone eligible applies and gets the benefits to which they are entitled. As I said, every qualifying family placed on the child tax credit database will get a personal invitation to apply. We are working with the Royal College of Midwives and others to make sure that there is minimal bureaucracy but maximum health engagement. That is what the scheme is all about, and we shall support midwives with appropriate advice and information, which they can pass on to the families with whom they work. We believe that the application process will provide the most effective means of integrating this scheme directly with the families, but the NHS will also be engaged, particularly at primary level. A number of points were made about fraud, and I have tried to outline how we are seeking to tackle it in every way that we can. We have considered a number of measures to minimise and prevent fraudulent activity, but I am afraid that there is potential for people to take advantage of any scheme, as we know. However, we have been working closely with the NHS Counter Fraud and Security Management Service from the start; it has been closely involved in the healthy start scheme operational systems. We are also carrying forward all existing fraud-proofing measures from the welfare food scheme, and introducing a new common database for contractors to report incidents that may amount to fraud, along with a mechanism for those to be reported to the NHS for further action. The introduction of a fixed-value voucher, and the reimbursement of retailers at that value and no less, removes the 9 per cent. deduction applied for the reimbursement of welfare food scheme milk tokens, which did not help the situation. As I said, the wider range of food vouchers can legitimately be exchanged and increasing flexibility gives greater choice for beneficiaries and, I hope, reduces the temptation to use them inappropriately,
The hon. Member for West Chelmsford asked about the voucher’s fixed value. We want to ensure that the voucher’s value is sufficient for all families. To some extent, this issue is dealt with by providing a wider range of outlets in which people can shop for their food, and by competition within that system. We are therefore looking for more retailers to become part of the process. On retailers, about whom he also asked, any retailer could be part of the scheme. Obviously, they would have to meet the registration requirements, but there is no reason why we cannot seek to expand the number of retailers and the opportunities to offer best value and healthy competition in price choice. Mr. Burns: The Minister is right to say that the wider the range of retail outlets, the more price-competitive the situation, and so the better the deal than an individual can get. However, inflation is inflation, and even this Government have not been able to stop inflation—[Interruption.] Well, inflation is running at 2.5 per cent. at the moment. We have not had a minus inflation figure in the past eight years; indeed, I do not think we have had one since 1958. What safeguards are built into the scheme? In four years’ time—when, presumably, we will still have a Labour Government—will the value of the vouchers be the same as now? Caroline Flint: We intend to review their value regularly. We will increase their value in line with the increase in the retail price of foods available through the healthy start scheme. It is also important that increases in the vouchers’ value be meaningful. Adding a few pence, or fractions of pence, to their value could make matters more difficult for retailers. We must think about those issues. Our intention is to increase the vouchers’ value by a realistic amount—by 10 per cent., for example. That may mean uplifting values at irregular intervals, even though the value will always be reviewed regularly. That is an attempt to reflect change—an issue to which the hon. Members for West Chelmsford and for Bristol, West referred—but in a way that does not completely destabilise the scheme and lead to us having to pay a huge amount in printing costs, and so on, when a ridiculously small amount of money could be involved. Such increases might be in line with any change that occurs, but as a benefit they might not make any real difference or be of any advantage to people. We are trying to attend to those issues. On the foods listed in the schedule, our position is clear. In my opening contribution, I said that we are open to considering other foods, particularly some frozen vegetables, which can have a high nutritional content. We are willing to discuss some of these issues,
The important issue of soya milk was raised, and I am happy to write to the hon. Member for Bristol, West about it. As far as I am aware, one problem with soya and goats’ milk as alternatives to cows’ milk is that their nutritional value is lower. The Committee that reviewed this issue recognised that whatever a parent’s preferences so far as their own diet is concerned, there are issues associated with the foods to which children should have access. Of course, breast milk is the best thing that they could be provided with in those early days. Having said that, the shift to more choice in fruit and vegetables gives a breastfeeding vegan mother the opportunity to increase her intake of fresh fruit and vegetables, to breastfeed at the same time and to give her child the best opportunity in that regard. I am happy to write to hon. Members in more detail about the nutritional content of soya and goats’ milk. I am also happy to write in more detail about how pregnant women asylum seekers are provided for by the National Asylum Support Service. If I recollect this correctly, there is an extra payment of between £3 and £5. It was felt that, as that group of asylum seekers is already supported through the NASS scheme, it would be quite difficult to incorporate it in this scheme as well. That would lead to complications in dealing with different groups of people. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for West Chelmsford is looking at me as if he wishes to intervene. Mr. Burns: I was not, but now that the Minister has tempted me, I will. It is her own fault, but I am grateful. Did she say that, in addition to the NASS scheme, £3 to £5 might be available for asylum seekers? If so, presumably, that is more than somebody in this country would receive. Caroline Flint: Dear, oh dear. I shall write to the hon. Gentleman in more detail on this issue. I do not think that that sum applies to the healthy start food scheme. Several other issues associated with pregnant women and asylum seekers are involved. I hope we have the support of all members of the Committee. By introducing the scheme in phases, we as parliamentarians have an opportunity to see whether it will work. In the next six months, we can identify any problems that arise for the families whom we are trying to support, and any issues of concern to the industry. Although I do not think that all those will be overcome, this is a healthy start food scheme fit for the 21st century. Question put and agreed to. Resolved,
Committee rose at twenty-seven minutes past Five o’clock. |
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2005 | Prepared 17 November 2005 |