Benefits

HC Deb 14 November 1988 vol 140 cc734-6

7. Mr. Thurnham

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what representations he has received about the level of social security benefits following the Chancellor of the Exchequer's Autumn Statement.

Mr. Scott

After the—[Interruption.]

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Mr. Beaumont-Dark) does not do badly in this place. I have to consider those hon. Members whose questions appear on the Order Paper.

Mr. Scott

After the expressions of opinion in this House, we have received a handful of letters from members of the public.

Mr. Thurnham

In view of the welcome continued falls in unemployment, will my hon. Friend say what effect that is likely to have on the total level of expenditure on benefits?

Mr. Scott

Throughout the public expenditure survey period we expect that there will be substantial reductions in the need to pay unemployment benefit because of the continued growth in the economy. We shall have to decide during the public expenditure survey round how our resources should be deployed.

Mr. Orme

What consultations did the Chancellor of the Exchequer have with his Department before his briefing a week ago last Friday to certain Lobby journalists?

Mr. Scott

It is fairly well known that we discuss all these matters during the course of the public expenditure survey each year. We did so last year, and we shall do so again next year.

Mr. Baldry

Would not a period of silence on pensions by the Opposition be worth while? The Labour party cheated pensioners out of nearly £1 billion—

Mr. Speaker

Order. As with questions to the Prime Minister, the hon. Member must ask questions for which the Secretary of State has responsibility.

Mr. Baldry

When my hon. Friend replies today to questions on this year's uprating in the Autumn Statement, will he take time to point out to the House and the country the contrast between the period 1974 to 1979 and today? The Labour Government failed to pay the Christmas bonus in 1976 and 1977. They cheated pensioners out of £1 billion by changing the basis on which pensions were uprated, and swindled pensioners out of massive amounts of savings by an economic policy that led to high inflation. Would not a period of silence by the Opposition on pensions now be worth while?

Mr. Scott

It would be worth while and much appreciated, but I fear that we are unlikely to get it, despite the fact that the Opposition know as well as we do that when they were in office pensioners' incomes increased by about 3 per cent. over the whole period, whereas under this Government they have increased by some 23 per cent.—twice as fast as those of the population as a whole.

Mr. Dalyell

Further to the unanswered questions by my right hon. Friend the Member for Salford, East (Mr. Orme), was it on the Friday, the Saturday or the Sunday that DSS Ministers were first told and consulted about the Chancellor's briefing?

Mr. Scott

I have nothing to add to the reply that I gave to the right hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Orme).

Mr. Roger King

Is my hon. Friend aware of the widespread support for the Government's policy of targeting resources where they are most urgently needed, and especially of the great increase in family credit that his Department has just announced, so long as those additional sums of money go to those in need? Will my hon. Friend consider new initiatives—through the schools, for instance—to inform those families in need that the money is available?

Mr. Scott

We want to maximise the take-up of family credit in particular, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has already alluded to the steps that we shall be taking to achieve that aim. I know that my hon. Friend recognises—and I hope it is widely recognised—that had we uprated child benefit in this uprating the poorest families would not have been helped. The steps that we were able to take have targeted help on those on low incomes, whether they are on income support or in employment.

Mrs. Fyfe

What advice would the Minister give to one of my constituents, a 43-year-old widow who has been told that she must find either work or a husband? She lives in a constituency where the official unemployment level is 22.6 per cent.

Mr. Scott

If the hon. Lady will provide me with the details of the case, I shall look into it, but I do not recognise the circumstances that she mentions.

Mr. Yeo

Does my hon. Friend agree that the strength of the Government's finances, as reported to the House in the Autumn Statement, underlines the enormous scope for increasing benefits to the very elderly and the worst-off pensioners? We on this side of the House look forward eagerly to the Minister's Department revealing its proposals in due course.

Mr. Scott

I am sure that the House will have read my right hon. Friend's article in yesterday's Sunday Express with great interest.

Mr. Robin Cook

Does the Minister agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that his Back Benchers need to be educated about social security? Why should it be necessary to educate them about social security if all they ever think about is more help for pensioners?

Mr. Scott

I am afraid that I cannot comment on these apocryphal remarks that are attributed to my right hon. Friend.

Mr. David Shaw

Will my hon. Friend confirm that there has been a substantial real terms increase in social security expenditure since 1979? Will he comment on whether that increase is giving full value for money, or whether it would be possible to target benefits better?

Mr. Scott

There has been a substantial increase in real terms under the Government—some 40 per cent.—and an extra £3.4 billion is going in as a result of the uprating announced quite recently. That is the result of the strength of our economy. We shall continue to try to ensure that the most help goes to those most in need.