| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
The baseline for the target is 1.7 million children. It is now 1.76 million children, so it has gone up. That is not slippage; it is steady movement in the wrong direction. In this charming language that only civil servants and Governments speak, they say that,
- “The increase in the worklessness rate amongst lone parent households means than the achievement of a 5 per cent reduction by Quarter 2 2008 is now challenging”.
It is very challenging. As the graph makes out, it clearly will not happen. There is a similar picture on the graph for the proportion of parents with care on income support/jobseeker’s allowance in receipt of maintenance, and, finally, perhaps even more worryingly, on the graph for the proportion of children reaching a good level of development. That has shown progress in the wrong direction recently—indeed, not progress at all but failure—and a widening of the gap between the most disadvantaged “Super Output Areas”, as they are called, and the rest of England from 16 to 17 per cent. How the Government can claim that they are making progress when they are so clearly failing on all their own targets as regards helping children is beyond me.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I am grateful to both noble Lords who have contributed to this short debate. I note that the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, sought to lull me into a false sense of security by suggesting that these orders are not controversial and then she succeeded in producing quite a challenging speech. She will be relieved to know that I paid the most critical attention to everything she said. If I am not able to answer everything in quite the detail required, I shall of course write to her. I hope I am able to address the main points that she made.
The noble Baroness emphasised a number of important issues. We recognise that whichever index of inflation the Government choose, there will be a challenge. Such is the variation of the impact of rising prices on different families that it is always possible to point to a significant section of the population where particular rises hit adversely and, therefore, the generalisation does not hold as well as it does for others. It has to be accepted that there is bound to be a certain arbitrariness about the index. Households spend different amounts on various goods and services and that shows different price movements, particularly when there are price movements in significant areas. It goes without saying that the increase in fuel prices is significant to many households. It will also be noted that the Government have, for a considerable time, sought to deal with the issues of fuel poverty and the winter fuel allowance provides a cushion for families who face increased prices. The impact on families depends a great deal on the nature of the winter that we undergo and the amount of fuel that is therefore consumed by families in facing the rigours of the—
Baroness Noakes: My Lords, I am a little confused about which families benefit from the winter fuel allowance.
6 Mar 2008 : Column 1290
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, we are mindful as a Government that there are needs as regards the winter fuel allowance and that is why we distribute it to individuals. I hear what the noble Baroness says, but I was seeking to make the general point that, of course, we recognise that in particular areas we have to address ourselves to fuel issues. She will recognise that this year there have been exceptional increases in fuel costs. We know the reasons for those. This has not been a winter of massively heavy fuel usage, which is why the margins for the fuel utilities have been wider than would otherwise be the case. I hope she recognises that the Government would have addressed this issue if it showed itself in a particularly acute form this year. After all, her party is continually challenging our Administration on the costs borne in relation to benefits.
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: My Lords, I was not quite sure what I heard there. Was the Minister saying that the Government would review their policies and arrangements if there was a particularly hard cold snap in the next few weeks? It sounded rather like that.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I cannot be so peremptory as to suggest what will happen in the next few weeks, but the noble Lord will recognise that the Government look carefully at fuel costs for families. Certainly, if poor families were subject to very exceptional burdens we might address that issue. I was merely commenting on the obvious fact that we have not had to approach those issues with quite the insistence suggested by some this winter.
What I am really defending is that the Government have to choose one index and, in so choosing, they are bound to be open to criticism that some families suffer against that index. That does not alter the fact that what is represented by all four statutory instruments is a proper and welcome increase in the allowances. I have not seen an enormous clamour, certainly from the Official Opposition, for increases in specific terms in any of these allowances. When I hear that, I might take some of their criticism a little more seriously.
The noble Baroness asked what the Government will do about the Memorandum of Understanding as far as the SSAC is concerned. The review is under way, under Ann Chant. All the main stakeholders are being interviewed and are being given the opportunity to contribute. The report will be produced in the not too distant future and the substance will be reported to the FST for consideration. I cannot make a commitment now but I appreciate what the noble Baroness was at pains to point out: there are weaknesses in the existing situation that need to be addressed. We are subjecting it to review and we will produce that analysis in the fairly near future. She is pushing at an open door because progress has been made. Considerable work is being done in a difficult area. Nevertheless, I agree with her general proposition that openness and transparency is a virtue to which government should as far as possible adhere on all occasions.
6 Mar 2008 : Column 1291
I also heard what she said about the criticisms of the PAC and tax credits. They have been well documented, but we make no bones about the fact that the tax credit system presents very real challenges in administration. The record over the last few years indicates that. However, that does not alter the fact that it is an excellent strategy for increasing support for families while providing an incentive to work.
We are concerned about error and fraud, which are issues that the noble Baroness raised. This year has seen an improvement over previous years. The PAC recognises that and that there are unacceptable levels of performance in the system. We have a long way to go on that.
The role of the Opposition is to be critical of what the Government do, but also to indicate what alternatives they would introduce to address these challenging issues of support for families in changing circumstances. The particular advantage of the tax credits system is that it takes account retrospectively, with the effect that support is given to families. The final evaluation is bound to be retrospective, which raises real administration issues. On the other hand, it also means that effective support for a large number of families is given when needed. I await a time when the Opposition are in a position not just to criticise what is done by the Government on tax credits, but to make a clear exposition of an alternative scheme of superior support for families than that achieved through tax credits, given that we are improving on both fraud and on misallocation each year. There will always be difficulties, because families’ circumstances change over the course of the year. There is bound to be a retrospective element within it.
I accept the noble Baroness’s chiding when she indicates that the tax credits system must be looked at with the closest scrutiny each year so that we continue to improve how that support is offered to families. The noble Baroness also raised how well we were doing on child well being. The noble Lord, Lord Oakeshott, pointed out with his usual precision areas of underperformance in lifting children out of poverty. Those areas of slippage—he suggested that they were a little more than just slippage—are matters of concern to the Government. We always said that the 2010 target was challenging. It is; there is not much point in having targets if they are not. We are all too well aware of the fact that this past year has not seen the progress towards that target which we would have wished.
Nevertheless, since 1997, the Government have produced a very significant reduction in child poverty through our strategy for support for children. There is a long way to go to achieve elimination by 2020,
6 Mar 2008 : Column 1292
I respect the questions which have been asked. Those which I have not answered, I will write to noble Lords about. They are proper questions and identify both where we wish to see improvements in performance and areas of conspicuous need. On the other hand, Opposition parties are pressing a Government who support families to a level not contemplated by past Administrations. We fall short of our ambitions, but are none the less reducing the level of poverty in this country—particularly child poverty—by significant amounts. These orders help to contribute towards that.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Guardian’s Allowance Up-rating Order 2008
5.09 pm
Lord Davies of Oldham My Lords, I beg to move.
Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 6 February be approved. 10th Report from the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments.—(Lord Davies of Oldham.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Child Benefit Up-rating Order 2008
Lord Davies of Oldham My Lords, I beg to move.
Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 6 February be approved. 10th Report from the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments.—(Lord Davies of Oldham.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Guardian’s Allowance Up-rating (Northern Ireland) Order 2008
Lord Davies of Oldham My Lords, I beg to move.
Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 6 February be approved. 10th Report from the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments.—(Lord Davies of Oldham.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
- House adjourned at 5.10 pm.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |