§ 9. Mr. ViggersTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is his policy in respect of providing support for those who most need assistance. [36964]
§ Mr. BurtOur policy is to focus benefits on those who need them most by improving incentives, bearing down on abuse and encouraging personal responsibility.
§ Mr. ViggersA number of my constituents have complained to me about the generosity of benefits paid to those whom they describe as professional claimants, compared with the meagre benefits available to those who have worked all their lives and have become unemployed for the first time. Does my hon. Friend recognise that contrast, does he think that it is fair, and what further action can the Government take to improve the situation?
§ Mr. BurtUnder present legislation, and under the jobseeker's allowance scheme, the Employment Service works hard to distinguish between those who should be entitled to unemployment and income-related benefits and those who for their own reasons have chosen not to work or to avoid interviews and the like. I assure my hon. Friend that we take this matter seriously. It is important that benefit is paid to those who need it and who have not done anything to put themselves out of the labour market. The new jobseeker's allowance will help in that cause.
§ Mr. Frank FieldThe Government's targeting of benefits means that families who work are penalised, families who save are penalised, and families who tell the truth are penalised. Are the Government proud of the fact that they have doubled the number of families on means-tested assistance, up to one in three of the population?
§ Mr. BurtI do not accept the hon. Gentleman's premises for a moment. The work that we have done to increase earnings-related benefit, work-related benefit, means that a family in work on family credit are £23 a week better off than if they were on income-related benefit. We have tried to improve the benefits system to make sure that it is worth going into work. Many of the changes announced by the Chancellor a couple of years ago which come into effect this year—earnings top-up and the like—will benefit 750,000 people. That is the right way to set about the problem.
§ Mr. ChurchillGiven the massive scale of social security fraud, when will the Government introduce a national system of workfare for all able-bodied unemployed so as to guarantee them an income while at the same time smoking out those who make multiple fraudulent claims or who are already employed but also drawing benefit?
§ Mr. BurtThe issue of workfare is more a matter for the Department for Education and Employment. First, as I said earlier, the new system of jobseeker's allowance should distinguish rather better between those who want to work and those who choose for some reason not to work. Secondly, the measures that we have introduced this year, particularly earnings top-up, still try to find a 138 way to boost the income of those who have just come off benefit so as to make work more attractive. We persist in believing that that is the best way forward.
§ Ms LynneDoes the Minister accept that axing the benefits helpline will cause untold hardship to benefit claimants, especially pensioners, who often do not claim what they are due? Will he reconsider the decision, or does he expect organisations such as the citizens advice bureaux and Age Concern to fill the gap?
§ Mr. BurtNo, it is not a question of that. Local Benefits Agency offices now provide a great deal of support and information for people looking for information about their benefits. All too often, callers to the national helpline had to be redirected to the local Benefits Agency office line, and we prefer that to be the process. The benefits inquiry line, which is specifically designed for queries about disability benefits, remains in place. We have substantially boosted the amount of information that is made available through the Benefits Agency and this good policy will continue.
§ Mr. Bernard JenkinWill my hon. Friend confirm that since 1988 we are spending an extra £1.2 billion on less well-off families and that to claim that more people on means-tested benefits equals increased poverty is a complete distortion of the truth, because in fact it demonstrates that we are helping more and more people in need?
§ Mr. BurtMy hon. Friend is correct. The changes in benefits in 1988 enabled us to redirect £ 1 billion a year to the poorest families. The Opposition should not criticise that. In contrast with all the difficult decisions that we have made and all the decisions to redirect benefits and target them more effectively, there has been nothing constructive from the Opposition—merely a series of reviews and attempts to think the unthinkable. The Opposition have produced nothing workable, only dissent. It is another example of a party not really ready to govern.
§ Mr. Chris SmithCan the Minister tell us how it can possibly have helped those in need for his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to have talks about the disposal of DSS offices, as he is reported to have done on 21 February, with Mr. John Beckwith, chairman of the Premier Club, who is usually employed drumming up money in return for the dubious privilege of meeting the Prime Minister? Will the Minister tell us whether such a meeting took place, and will he now rule out Mr. Beckwith's participation in any such disposal?
§ Mr. BurtIn the past four or five minutes the House has had a sensible discussion about the targeting of benefits. It is a shame that the hon. Gentleman cannot rise to the quality of that discussion.