§ 14. Mr. David Amess (Southend, West)What recent representations he has received about the level of the state pension. [115877]
§ The Minister of State, Department of Social Security (Mr. Jeff Rooker)Since January, we have received about 2,000 further letters that mention the level of the state pension, some of which raise other issues as well. We record only the subject of the letter. In addition to letters, we receive representations in this place. Two weeks ago the Government organised a three-hour debate on pensions reform in Westminster Hall, which was attended by one Back Bencher, who happened to be a Labour Member.
§ Mr. AmessIs the Minister aware that he is about to receive thousands of letters from senior citizens who regard the 75p increase as an absolute disgrace? Does he remember sitting on the Labour Opposition Benches and castigating the Conservative Government on their treatment of senior citizens? Will he now admit that the Labour Government have misled senior citizens about the state pension? What does he intend to do about giving them back a decent standard of living?
§ Mr. RookerWe will tell the truth, for a start. We shall reply to all the letters that we receive, but I hope that the hon. Gentleman will tell his constituents, as other hon. Members do, that in the first three years of this Parliament pensioners as a whole will have received £800 million more, through the winter fuel payments and the minimum income guarantee, than they would have received through the earnings up rating of the basic pension. The policy we are operating is the policy that we were elected on, which was to raise the basic state pension at least in line with earnings—the same policy as the one on which the Conservative party and the Liberal Democrats were elected.
§ Mr. Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley)Obviously we welcome what the Government have done for pensioners to ease their plight following 18 years of neglect. I have talked to many pensioners in my constituency, and their need is for an increase in the basic state pension. Through my right hon. Friend's discussions at No. 11, will he ensure that there is a substantial increase in the state pension in the future?
§ Mr. RookerWhen I answered the previous question, my mind was concentrating on the minimum income guarantee, which increases in line with earnings. I referred to the basic state pension rising in line with earnings, but I meant prices, as everyone in the House understood—except me. I was carried away with the success of our minimum income guarantee take-up campaign.
625 People will campaign on the basic state pension, but 20 years ago most people had no second pension. The only fair comparison to make is with total pensioner incomes. Currently, the average for a single person is £132 a week and it is £248 a week for a couple. Net housing costs come out of that. That is double the basic state pension, and is born out of the success of occupational pensions, personal pensions and, above all, the state earnings-related pension scheme introduced by the last Labour Government. We cannot wipe away the pension provision that was legislated for all those years ago, and concentrate, to the exclusion of everything else, on the basic state pension. It is not a fair comparison.