It is a privilege to follow the speeches by my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Ruffley) and the hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey (Danny Alexander), who put the proposed upratings into context. The Government came to power in 1997 promising radical and ambitious reform, and the Prime Minister vowed that the cost of what he called failure would be reduced in the first five years of the Labour Government. In the event, the cost of failure has risen since the Government came to office.
The backdrop to any uprating of benefit is the general state of the economy. In 1997, the incoming Labour Government had an opportunity to reform the welfare state that was without parallel since its formation. We all support the welfare state if it gives people dignity rather than means-testing, and relieves poverty rather than continues it. The unparalleled opportunity to reform the welfare state was the result of the transformation of the economy that took place under the previous Conservative Government.
In 1979, the British economy was a basket case, but by 1997 it had become the strongest and most powerful in Europe. The Labour Government inherited that economy, but unfortunately they have squandered the legacy, to the detriment of some of the poorest and most vulnerable people in this country.
As the articulate spokesmen for both the main Opposition parties have made clear, the result has been that the people with least have been let down. The British economy had returned to being the powerhouse of Europe in 1997, but the opportunity to reduce the number of people languishing on incapacity benefit has been lost since then. The number of people claiming that benefit was 2.37 million in May 1997, but by February 2005, it had risen to 2.68 million. That is a testament to the Government’s failure to deliver for those with least, and the backdrop of economic strength bequeathed by the previous Conservative Government makes it all the more shameful. I hoped that the Minister would show more humility and display more of the quality of grace that he mentioned when he opened the debate.
The question of benefits uprating touches certain key elements of the approach of Government and all political parties to dealing with the most vulnerable people in our society. Ministers repeat their mantras about providing for the many, not the few. They apply words like ““radical”” and ““ambitious”” to their plans for looking after those with least. That may be electorally effective, but my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr. Cameron) is equal to the challenge of making it clear to people that the Conservative party has always been dedicated to the improvement of those with least in our society. For example, William Wilberforce led the movement to abolish slavery, and the 19th century’s 10-hour working day initiative was led by a Conservative.
Over the past 100 years, the Conservative party has been entrusted with uprating benefits on more occasions than the Labour party. That is because the people of this country recognise that we are committed to social justice and to uplifting the poor. Disraeli and any number of other Conservative leaders have supported the notion of Britain as one nation, with a benefits system—the uprating of some elements of which we are discussing today—implemented to best effect.
Social Security
Proceeding contribution from
Graham Stuart
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 16 February 2006.
It occurred during Legislative debate on Social Security.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
442 c1599-600 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 00:25:06 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_302046
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_302046
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_302046