HC Deb 06 July 1992 vol 211 cc5-7
4. Mr. Flynn

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what new proposals he has to improve benefits for 16 and 17-year-olds.

The Secretary of State for Social Security (Mr. Peter Lilley)

The Government believe that 16 and 17-year-olds should be encouraged to continue in education, obtain a job or undertake training rather than enter the benefits culture straight from school, although support is available for those who are unable to work or obtain a training place and those who are at risk of hardship.

Mr. Flynn

Is the Secretary of State also immune to the universal view of all independent bodies which report that the present exclusion of 16 and 17-year-olds from income support is cruel and unnecessary? Has he seen the evidence that was given to his own Social Security Committee which says that the problems of adolescents, the most vulnerable group of young people, are being added to by the system? How much longer will he persist with a system that is cynical, mean and cruel?

Mr. Lilley

The hon. Gentleman spoils his case by gross overstatement. He should know that young people aged 16 or 17 are not excluded. Help is available if they are at risk of severe hardship. More than 85 per cent. of those who apply receive that help, and 90 per cent. receive a decision within 24 hours of making a request.

Mr. Rowe

My right hon. Friend will be aware that too many people are becoming dependent much too young and that that is widely recognised by social workers and others. However, there are also a small number of 16 and 17-year-olds for whom it is proving difficult to deliver the workplace guarantee. Will my right hon. Friend take special measures to ensure that they do not lose out?

Mr. Lilley

I recognise the importance of my hon. Friend's point, as does my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment, who is taking every possible measure to ensure that we fulfil the guarantee of a youth training place for young people of that age. The number of people waiting for such places is declining month by month, I am happy to say.

Mr. Meacher

Is the Secretary of State satisfied that the careers service knows of 50,000 young people who are registered for youth training but without a place who are denied income support, of whom, contrary to what he said, fewer than one third receive special hardship allowance, leaving more than 30,000 destitute, without money at all to survive on? Is it true, as has been reported, that the right hon. Gentleman now proposes that, for young people who go on youth training scheme courses, the £35 a week training allowance should be scrapped and replaced by the equivalent of child benefit of £9.65 a week for their parents?

Is not this vendetta against young people a huge disincentive to go on training courses? Is it not an insult to them, when the country desperately needs much better-trained young adults?

Mr. Lilley

Financial help should be available for everyone who does not have support from his or her family. As I said, 80 per cent. of those who apply for the severe hardship allowance receive it. The hon. Gentleman is talking about people who live at home, who, of course, have the support of their parents. Only if their parents are not able to help is additional support given.

I am not surprised that the hon. Gentleman automatically looks to the benefits system in these circumstances. In 1978, the Labour Government supported only 7,000 training places. There are 300,000 such places under the Conservative Government. As for stories in the press about the public expenditure round, the hon. Gentleman may be sure that I and my Department do not talk to the press about the matter. We shall talk to the Chief Secretary when the moment arrives. The hon. Gentleman may be sure that there will be stories almost every Sunday between now and the autumn. He will believe them, even though the vast majority will turn out to be fallacious.

Mr. Nigel Evans

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the vast majority of 16 and 17-year-olds either go on to training or into work and that there is a severe hardship allowance for people who are unable to go to work or receive training? Such people receive income support and the Government will continue to provide support for people who are unable to obtain training or work.

Mr. Lilley

My hon. Friend is right. One of the Government's successes is the increase in the number of young people either staying on at school for extra education beyond the age at which schooling is compulsory or going on training courses. Only 40 per cent. did so under the Labour Government. The figure is now nearer 70 per cent. That is a vast improvement.

Forward to