§ 6. Dr. Brian Iddon (Bolton, South-East)What representations he has received on the impact of the withdrawal of the married persons tax allowance on those who receive DSS benefits. [125829]
§ The Paymaster General (Dawn Primarolo)The Chancellor regularly receives representations on all aspects of the tax system.
§ Dr. IddonOne of my constituents has lost more than £15 per month—even after all the Budget changes and his increase in benefit have been taken into consideration—largely due to the loss of the married couples allowance. He had to retire early because of cardiovascular disease and take incapacity benefit. Although he receives a small occupational pension, I do not consider him to be well off. Will my hon. Friend agree to look again at how the Budget 2000 has affected such incapacity benefit recipients?
§ Dawn PrimaroloI am sure that my hon. Friend fully appreciates that, without all the facts, it is difficult to respond to individual cases. The relationship between tax reliefs and qualifying benefits in the DSS system is complex. Of course, I am prepared to look again, with my hon. Friend, at the particular circumstances of his constituent.
I remind my hon. Friend that the withdrawal of the married couples allowance was to enable the Government to focus on families with children and to start by helping the very poorest first. The children's tax credit, which will start next April and could be worth as much £8.50 a week to families, is being advertised and families are being written to directly to encourage them to apply. I am sure that he would agree that the Government should always start by helping those who are the poorest in our society.
§ Mr. David Ruffley (Bury St. Edmunds)Will the Government now apologise to those couples in which an older partner is of pensionable age after 5 April this year? They will now be up to £500 a year worse off as a direct result of the abolition of the pensioners married couples allowance.
§ Dawn PrimaroloI do not think that the hon. Gentleman understands that those pensioners who receive the married couples allowance will retain that—they have not lost it. With the withdrawal of the married couples 444 allowance, there are a number of other additions in the tax system for those aged under 65: the 10p starting rate for tax; the reduction to 22p; and the introduction of the children's tax credit, which will be worth up to £442 a year—far more than the married couples allowance. There are several other benefits in the system.
The hon. Gentleman sat on the Treasury Select Committee so he knows all that. Instead of saying that pensioners are losing their married couples allowance, he should remind people that those pensioners who receive it are keeping it.
§ Mr. Simon Thomas (Ceredigion)That is all very well, but does the hon. Lady not realise how the withdrawal of the married couples allowance for pensioners discriminates against male pensioners of 64 years of age? How does she justify that?
§ Dawn PrimaroloPensioners will qualify at the age of 65 for the age-related allowance. That will put them in a far better position than non-pensioners. They will have the winter allowance of £150 that they have not previously received. They will have the benefit of the tax changes of 10p and 22p. The hon. Gentleman just wants to cherry-pick; he does not want to look at the whole set of changes to see how people's positions are being improved. He is considering only one of those changes. I encourage him to consider the matter in the round.