HC Deb 06 December 1993 vol 234 cc1-3
1. Mr. Jacques Arnold

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what measures his Department has taken to maintain support for families.

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

We have fulfilled our manifesto commitment to increase child benefit in line with prices. We have also already made extra help worth around £1 billion a year available to low-income families with children. From October 1994, we are introducing a £40 disregard of child care costs for claimants of family credit and housing benefit. This will remove one of the major stumbling blocks in enabling low-income parents to be better off in work and thus to reduce dependency on benefits.

Mr. Arnold

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the £40 disregard in respect of child care costs is very much less than many organisations were pressing for? Does that not show the Government's determination to assist parents to get back into work?

Mr. Lilley

I think that my hon. Friend meant to say "more" than many institutions were pressing for. The booklet, "Becoming a Breadwinner", issued by the Day Care trust, advocated a £35 a week disregard. We are going for slightly more than that—a £40 a week disregard, which will be worth £28 a week for lone parents and working married couples returning to work.

Mr. Kirkwood

Will the Secretary of State acknowledge that future provision for families is part of the long-term series of reviews that his Department is conducting? Putting it neutrally, it is very difficult for people to conduct and engage him in sensible discussions about long-term future provision. In every speech that he makes and every television interview that he gives the Secretary of State is interpreted, rightly or wrongly, in different ways at different times. It is difficult to know whether the Secretary of State is coming or going. Would it not be better for him and for us if he were to make clear the remit of all the internal Government committees and what papers they are working to? We could then all engage in a proper public debate.

Mr. Lilley

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his positive contribution to the debate. I advise him to listen to what I say and to regard what I do, and not to listen to second-hand commentaries. He will then see a consistent theme. We believe in supporting and sustaining the traditional family and, wherever possible, encouraging families to consist of two loving parents. We accept that that is not always the case, and where families break up we want to provide support with the interests of the child in mind. That lies behind the measures announced in the Budget to enable parents to work and improve their well-being while providing proper child care for their children. That is consistent with everything that I have said and the Government have done. We would welcome any positive contributions from the Liberal Democrats, unusual as that might be

Mr. Winnick

In view of the remarks made by the Secretary of State yesterday, is it not clear that child benefit will not be retained as a universal benefit if the Tories were to cling to office? In view of that, is there not every reason for people to be very concerned? The welfare state is being eroded and undermined at every stage. No one has any confidence that the Secretary of State or the Government believe in the welfare state, and there is every expectation that they will use their power to undermine it.

Mr. Lilley

The hon. Gentleman is peculiarly ill informed. There have been two statements about child benefit in the past 24 hours. I have reaffirmed the Government's manifesto pledge to maintain child benefit as part of our provision for families with children. The Commission for Social Justice, established by the Labour party, suggested that it should be abandoned and replaced by national child care.