Social Security

We have had a short but, nevertheless, lively debate. I have been struck by the fact that the hon. Members who have spoken have found it quite a strain to confine themselves to the orders under consideration. I take it from that that, in fact, they have very little to criticise in the upratings that we are making. Before I address any of the specific points made during the debate—I promise to do so—I want to remind hon. Members that this year’s uprating order continues the Government’s commitment to provide help for those who most need it. After all, it adds more than £3.44 billion of extra spending, £2.58 billion of which goes to pensioners and £360 million is above inflation. Some £40 million goes to children; £400 million to disabled people and their carers; and £420 million to people of working age. Most benefits have increased in line with the retail prices index, at 2.7 per cent., while pension credit guarantee has increased in line with earnings, at 4.2 per cent. Those uprating increases contribute to our programme of radical reform which balances rights with responsibilities and offers everyone the chance to build a decent income for their retirement. I turn now to the contributions to the debate. Many of us enjoyed the footwork of the hon. Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Ruffley) as he tried, in the same sentences, to change, but not change, Conservative policy on the new deal. We heard him describe the Conservatives’ approach to the new deal as revamping it, recasting it or improving it. When they have finally sorted that out, we will be interested to hear what emerges. The hon. Gentleman also dwelt at some length on the labour market. It is worth just pointing out what the latest statistics show us. Employment has risen by 183,000 over the last year. The claimant count for January, the latest month for which figures are available, went down by 2,000, a welcome drop after several months in which it increased. We have seen a fall of 58,000 in the number claiming incapacity benefit since August 2005, and a fall of 29,000 in the number claiming lone parent benefit. When one excludes students from the figures—it is important to do that because the number of students going into higher and further education is increasing—one sees that the inactivity numbers have gone down by 61,000 over the last year. The hon. Gentleman also dwelt at some length on means-testing, seeking to criticise us for that being part of the system, while himself declaring that a welfare state requires an element of means-testing. He referred to the projection in Lord Turner’s report that if nothing changed in the current configuration of pensions provision, we could find ourselves with 70-odd per cent. of pensioners encountering means-testing. Lord Turner does say that, but in fairness, the House should acknowledge what he also said about the effectiveness of the means-testing in the system in reducing pensioner poverty. There is an issue about the role and degree of means-testing in the system for the long term, and of course we are reflecting on Lord Turner’s point, as are many others, and we will have things to say about that when we come back to the House in the spring with our response to his report.