(6 days, 12 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It was a very good event. I made some rather poor efforts to address the group in British Sign Language—my first attempt. I know that she will be pleased—I am sure the hon. Member for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton (Alison Griffiths) will be as well—to know that we are committed to supporting the British Sign Language advisory board, which was set up in the wake of Rosie Cooper’s British Sign Language Act 2022. It is the UK Government’s first dual-language board focusing on key issues that affect deaf people. We are committed to promoting and supporting British Sign Language and we will shortly be publishing the 2023-24 British Sign Language annual report.
I am pleased to join my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North in congratulating the Royal School for the Deaf Derby on the accolades that it has received from Ofsted, and I very much agree with the important points made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley) about the importance of what is being provided to ensure that people’s hearing is well looked after and supported.
I need to work closely with ministerial colleagues and with other Departments right across Government to ensure that disabled people get the support they need to overcome the daily barriers that they face. The commitment that I am setting out today on behalf of the Government needs to be a whole of Government endeavour, so I was very pleased about and grateful for what Members said in the debate about my announcement last week of a lead Minister for disability in every Department to represent the interests of disabled people and to champion disability inclusion and accessibility in their Department. I will chair regular meetings with the members of that group and encourage them to engage directly with disabled people and their representative organisations as they work on their departmental priorities. I am looking forward to the group’s first meeting next week, and I can give my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock the assurance that she is looking for about our shared aims and what that group will be working towards.
It is fantastic to hear about all that the Government are doing on disability. My right hon. Friend the Minister will know that many disabled people rely on family and friends to provide care and support to enable them to have a full life—to participate in work, school and other things that they enjoy—so will he reassure me and others that, in taking a cross-departmental approach to disability, he will be considering the important role of family carers?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her point and can certainly give her the assurance that she seeks. As she knows, in the Budget we made an important improvement to the arrangements for carer’s allowance through the commitment that the earnings threshold for carer’s allowance will be increased to 16 hours a week at the national living wage rate. That will be a permanent link with the national living wage and, we hope, will overcome the problem that a lot of carers have run into over the last few years, whereby they get a bit of a pay rise that tips them above the threshold and therefore inadvertently receive an overpayment of carer’s allowance. We hope that the change will help, and we know that the increase itself will bring about 60,000 more family carers into eligibility for carer’s allowance.
As my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer said in the Budget, we will also be looking at the possibility of a new taper arrangement for carer’s allowance, in order to move away from the current cliff edge, which has always been there. That will require quite substantial IT development; it will not be ready overnight, but I think that my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) will agree that it is quite a promising idea to improve support for unpaid carers in the future.
My focus is primarily on domestic disability policy, but I also oversee UK implementation of the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities and represent domestic disability-related policy on international platforms, so in October I attended the first ever G7 disability inclusion summit, which was hosted by the Italian presidency and held just outside Assisi, where I and my G7 counterparts and Ministers from several other countries all signed up to the Solfagnano charter. That sets out a collective agreement to advance work in eight key areas, among which is:
“Inclusion as a priority issue in the political agenda of all countries”.
It is a useful document, focusing specifically on disability inclusion all the way through. We have also worked to extend the UN convention to a number of UK overseas territories. We recently extended the treaty to Bermuda—the first British overseas territory to which it has been extended. I can confirm that we are committed to protecting and promoting the rights of disabled people around the world as well as in the UK.
A great perk of my job was to attend the Paralympic games in Paris in August. The hon. Member for Faversham and Mid Kent (Helen Whately) was right to draw attention to the huge improvement that was the London 2012 Paralympic games, which took the Paralympics movement to a new level. I visited the athletes’ village in August, and it was most interesting to see how it had been laid out to be accessible to everybody. There were ramps everywhere and electrical devices at the bottom of every slope that people could clip on to their wheelchair to help them up it. It is worth making the point that in those games, we came second in the medals table, ahead of the United States and all the other European countries and behind only China. The games attracted unprecedented support and audiences, with the venues full of enthusiastic —and, I must say, highly partisan—French audiences. It was good to hear everybody highlighting the importance of UK leadership in not just starting the games at Stoke Mandeville, but hosting the groundbreaking 2012 games. The unique contribution of Channel 4 in 2012, and ever since, has clearly been deeply appreciated around the world in the Paralympics movement.
My hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich was absolutely right to draw attention to the importance of disabled people being able to be physically active. There is a problem in the benefits system, because too often people fear that being physically active could lead to them losing their benefits. We need to address that challenge of reforming the system in our Green Paper, when it is published in the spring.
Disability History Month reminds us that progress is a shared endeavour. Working together across Government, across the House and with the wider community, we can build a society in which everyone can participate fully and equally. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) rightly raised the question of the extent to which I am working with Ministers in Northern Ireland, in Scotland and in Wales. I met Minister Lyons from Northern Ireland when he came to London, and the Minister for Transformation, my hon. Friend the Member for Stretford and Urmston (Andrew Western), also met him on his recent visit to Northern Ireland. The hon. Member for Strangford is right to underline the importance of us working together across the United Kingdom on these priorities.
Let us honour the courage and contributions of disabled people, past and present, by reaffirming our commitment to not just a month of reflection, but a permanent springboard for lasting change and a more inclusive future.
(2 months ago)
Commons ChamberI thank the Liberal Democrats for choosing this important issue for debate. I congratulate several Members on their maiden speeches, particularly the hon. Member for Torbay (Steve Darling). It is wonderful to hear from him, and I am sure that his family is incredibly proud. I also welcome the House’s honorary canine Member, Jennie.
In my maiden speech, I said that carers would be the group of people for whom I would speak up in this place. For me, it is personal: my mother spent much of her life caring for my grandmother. I hope that, in time, I will be able to take up the fantastic work of the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) as the co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on carers. I served as a chair on the Archbishops’ commission on reimagining care. During that commission on the future of social care in England, we listened to unpaid family carers, who told us that they were stretched to breaking point. They give selflessly but at a huge cost to their own wellbeing, and, as we have heard in the debate, they make financial sacrifices, as caring can affect their ability to work. They must fight every day to get care and support for their loved ones. They do so with support from fantastic organisations, such as Carers’ Resource in my constituency.
In the “Care and Support Reimagined” report, we proposed a new deal for carers to ensure that they are valued and can give out of love and not necessity. However, as we have heard, they are being punished for trying to juggle care and work. Some 2.8 million carers are trying to do that but find that they are inadvertently breaching the earnings threshold, with the result that they face the issue of overpayments. As I have written to the Minister for Social Security and Disability, my right hon. Friend the Member for East Ham (Sir Stephen Timms), it a scandal that the last Government knew about that—there were NAO and Select Committee reports on their desks—but did nothing, so I welcome this Government’s having seized the issue and set up the independent review, and I look forward to seeing its recommendations.
I am glad that that is part of a wider review of support for carers. It is clearly a huge building block for a national care service. As we have heard, we cannot deliver a national care service without valuing the vital role that carers play in giving love to disabled adults and older family members. I am glad that we are righting that wrong.
May I begin by expressing my appreciation of the family carers in the Bishop Auckland constituency? According to helpful researchers in the Commons Library, one in seven of my constituents provides at least an hour of unpaid care each week, and over half of them are eligible for carer’s allowance. Nationwide, as we have heard, our army of family carers is the equivalent of a second NHS.
I agree with the criticism made by the shadow Secretary of State that we must not risk opening the door to fraud, and it is precisely because I believe in the welfare state that I think it must always be watertight and widely perceived as fair. However, I am concerned that in a huge number of cases—I am inclined to believe that it is the majority of cases—overpaid carer’s allowance is the result of inadvertent error.
As others have said, this is a complicated benefit and when so many stressed family carers find themselves having to pay back large sums of money, there must be some onus on the Government to take responsibility. This issue is so widespread that I think every MP in this place will have been contacted by constituents facing hardship. These are decent, honest people who work hard, who serve their families and communities and who ask for little, and they feel as though they are being treated like criminals while the Government have become the nation’s biggest debt collector.
If I may, I will briefly raise a specific issue that two of my constituents have raised with me. They are being required to pay back thousands of pounds because of inadvertently earning just above the earnings threshold. However, as they have pointed out to me, carer’s allowance is counted as income in universal credit claims, so had they not claimed it, they would have received more in universal credit. I gently urge the Minister to consider this point as part of the review, as people are not only being pushed into hardship due to being made to pay back overpayments, but may actually be worse off on aggregate than if they had never claimed.
My hon. Friend rightly points out that this is a huge cause of stress to people. Not only that, but carers are actually leaving work, limiting their hours and not taking on additional responsibilities. Will he join me in calling on the shadow Secretary of State to apologise to the 134,800 carers who have outstanding carer’s allowance overpayments to a total value of £251 million?
This sits among the many injustices that the new Government have to deal with, and I think an apology is in order.
In conclusion, I welcome this Government’s review. I think there have been some excellent contributions from all parts of the House, with some really serious issues raised such as students losing their eligibility to claim, my constituents’ point about universal credit and the points about respite care and young carers, and I do not think anyone has even mentioned kinship carers. I hope that this review will take account of all these things so that we can deliver a fairer deal for Britain’s army of unpaid carers.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberThe work of unpaid carers is vital and often heroic, and we are determined to give them the support that they need. We are currently looking at options for tackling the problem of overpayments, including the possible introduction of a text message alert service.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and I agree that we need to support carers properly. We want to get to the bottom of what has gone wrong with these overpayments and why so many people have been caught out. We have been piloting the introduction of a text message service, as I have mentioned, which has involved texting 3,500 claimants to alert them when His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs informs the DWP that they have breached the current earnings limit. We are currently looking at the results, and if they are positive, that will be the first step towards addressing the overpayments problem. We will need to do more, but it will be a good first step.
There are nearly 1,200 recipients of carer’s allowance in Shipley. The current earnings limit leaves people vulnerable to accidentally accruing overpayments if they become ineligible for the allowance, and it also acts as a disincentive, deterring people from working as much as they would like to. Will the Government consider raising the earnings limit?
My hon. Friend has written to me about this matter, and I welcome her commitment to making progress. In an excellent piece of work, the former Work and Pensions Committee made a number of recommendations on the earnings rules, and once the new Committee is in place, we shall respond to the former Committee’s proposals.
(3 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI am pleased to have the opportunity to speak in this debate on changes to the winter fuel allowance. Like many of my colleagues, I have been contacted by constituents who are worried about the impact of these changes. I bring to this debate 25 years of experience of working in public health and with older people, latterly as chief executive of a national ageing charity. During that time I came to understand the impact of cold and damp homes on the health and wellbeing of older people, and the challenges of addressing pensioner poverty.
Let us be clear with those pensioners up and down the country who will be losing their winter fuel payments about where ultimate responsibility for today’s decision lies. It is not with my right hon. Friend the Chancellor, but with the right hon. Member for Godalming and Ash (Jeremy Hunt) and his party. It turns out that the Conservatives were pursuing a scorched earth policy: the NHS running on empty; the cost of housing asylum seekers spiralling; and hollow promises on capital projects across the country, including in my constituency. I know that the Chancellor and her colleagues have not taken the decision to means-test the winter fuel payment lightly; hard choices have to be made to put the country’s finances back in order.
We know that many pensioners will miss out, and I worry that they will be left in the cold. In my constituency 1,160 people are eligible for pension credit but not receiving it. I spoke to a resident in a sheltered housing scheme in Cottingley at the weekend. He did not know whether he was eligible, and was not sufficiently mobile to attend a local community centre. Will the Secretary of State work with colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to urge housing associations and local authorities to support their residents to apply for pension credit and other benefits to which they may be entitled?
The other group who risk being left in the cold this winter are those with disabilities or health conditions, or those who live in cold and damp accommodation. Cold homes can cause and worsen respiratory conditions, cardiovascular disease, poor mental health, dementia and hypothermia. In 2019, the NHS spent at least £2.5 billion per year treating illnesses that were directly linked to cold, damp and dangerous homes.
Pensioners are more likely to be living in poorly insulated homes, leading to a higher risk of fuel poverty. I am worried about pensioners such as Barbara in my constituency—she is a full-time carer and her husband has dementia—having to spend more money because her and her husband are at home and he is ill.
Given the crisis that the NHS faces, as a direct result of the 14 years of funding pressure and cuts from the Conservatives, I urge colleagues to work with colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure that winter planning guidance means that the NHS tackles fuel poverty.
(3 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The hon. Member makes a powerful point, and I will talk about the mitigation that absolutely must be there.
I talked to a director of public health this morning who said we should implement a warm homes on prescription scheme. Evidence from the Energy Systems Catapult and the NHS pilot in Gloucestershire found that such a scheme was value for money and helped people stay well. Government could really help.
Sadly, demand on GPs will rise, queues at A&Es will grow, more beds will be occupied in the NHS and social care will be placed under more demand. Tragically, according to University College London and the Institute of Health Equity, there were 4,950 excess winter deaths due to cold homes under the previous Government. I feel sick to the stomach each time I repeat that reality, because I cannot process how Governments past did not protect those vulnerable people—Labour must be different. We need mitigation, because we must protect those under our care. Otherwise, what is the point of power?
One constituent has had leukaemia. They need to put the heating on to keep warm, but they cannot afford to because it costs £300 a month. A recently widowed constituent, at the depth of their personal sadness, is now scared they will not survive the winter; they cannot afford their heating. Another constituent goes to bed at 5 o’clock to keep warm. One constituent told me he wears jumpers, a coat and a warm hat, but the air is still cold and damp. Then there is Rose, who is registered as severely vision-impaired and living alone, who said:
“I am a council tenant with no extra assets”.
She told me she was scared and “abandoned”—the winter fuel payment was her lifeline. I have many, many more accounts like that.
It is colder in the north, so costs are higher. The UK Health Security Agency recommends indoor temperatures should be at least 18°C. Some people need higher temperatures to keep warm. It is not just the physical impact that matters; people are anxious, tearful and scared each year.
I thank my hon. Friend for securing the debate. Like many in the House, I have been touched by some of the tragic correspondence I have received about those who are being impacted. I am concerned about women such as Barbara, a carer in my constituency who looks after her husband, who has dementia. I echo my hon. Friend’s comments about the need to protect people who have a disability, ill health or chronic conditions, because we know that fuel poverty and cold homes exacerbate those conditions. Does she agree that we must urge the NHS, in its winter planning guidance, to do more to work with others to tackle fuel poverty, and to target vulnerable people so they do not go cold this winter?
I welcome my hon. Friend’s expertise, and she is right: the NHS is where this issue will present itself. It is already under huge pressure, so we have to find a way out of this issue.
We have all had the emails, the handwritten letters and the people queuing up, pleading—I certainly have. These pensioners have worked hard all of their lives. Some have put a little bit aside; others have not. Winter is always a challenge. This Government must have the capacity to find another way. People put their hope in Labour because, like me, we believe that it exists to fight for working people, to protect the poor and to seek justice, equality and fairness. I know that the Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, my hon. Friend the Member for Wycombe (Emma Reynolds), does too.
With the economic imperative shredded and the medical case so powerful, the House of Lords Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee has provided a path out. It is unconvinced that the measures should be pushed through so urgently and wants scrutiny. It highlighted that the DWP needs to assess the risks of those eligible and ineligible for pension credit. While the triple lock fails to provide protection, the triple hit of the energy price cap rising by 10% on 1 October, the Tory freeze to the personal allowance and the removal of the winter fuel payment, without the cost of living payments, leaves people exposed. The Committee says that the measures could be delayed by changing the trigger dates. Delay is still possible.
The Committee also highlights that the Social Security Advisory Committee, which has a legal role in reviewing legislation before debate, will not meet until after the measures have passed. That means that MPs and Lords will not have the opportunity to debate its findings. We need these reports to debate the proposals. Furthermore, no impact assessment has been published.
As has already been said, according to academia fuel poverty is deeply rooted in inequality, disproportionately impacting on women and black and minority ethnic and disabled people, as well as the socio-economically disadvantaged. I have been contacted by many charities highlighting cancer, neurological conditions and others—and, of course, dementia too. Labour must always ensure that those with protected characteristics experience no detriment.
Our constituents are worried sick. They are frail and frightened. I see desperation in their eyes, and I hear it in their voices. As they grip my arm in the street and look at me, they know what I know—and if we are honest, what we all know. They are worried that they will be that statistic. Our duty is to take away that fear.
Mitigation is still possible: from delay to a social tariff or social prescribing, where consultants and GPs can authorise payments. I want to know what work the Government are doing in these areas. What measures are they looking at? What mitigation is possible, and by when? The household support fund will simply not be enough. The pension increase is insufficient. We need more, and we need it urgently.
I want this Government to do much better than the last, and I believe that, over time, we will, but winter is upon us now and we must reassure the fuel-poor pensioners that they will have the support they need. My constituents plead that I do something—my goodness, I am trying, but the Minister must too. Please, let us mitigate. Let us give people confidence and the comfort and care they need—the help and protection to keep them safe, warm and well this winter. If that cannot be done, then delay these measures. I rest my case.