All 2 Debates between Ben Howlett and Shailesh Vara

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Ben Howlett and Shailesh Vara
Monday 11th July 2016

(8 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Shailesh Vara Portrait Mr Vara
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Lady is well aware that a number of benefits are involved here. The DWP survey in 2012 found that only 6% of the women who were due to retire within 10 years were unaware that the state pension age had increased.

Ben Howlett Portrait Ben Howlett (Bath) (Con)
- Hansard - -

T3. Thanks to the work of this Government, the unemployment rate in Bath is just 1.5%. Does the Minister agree that, as well as providing a steady income, working also provides health benefits, both physical and mental?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Ben Howlett and Shailesh Vara
Monday 1st February 2016

(8 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Shailesh Vara Portrait Mr Vara
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The general trend for longevity is increasing. The new state pension will ensure that 650,000 women will receive £8 extra a week. Women live longer and, in the longer run, they will benefit a lot more.

Ben Howlett Portrait Ben Howlett (Bath) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Although I appreciate that emotions are high on both sides, it is important to ask why, in 13 years of government, the Labour party did nothing to address the issue, especially since they knew that women were living longer. Does the Minister agree that a triple-lock single flat-rate pension would be much fairer to women than the old system?

Shailesh Vara Portrait Mr Vara
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Absolutely. Such a pension will be much fairer. When such passionate comments come up at oral questions and in the various debates we are having on this issue, it is worth remembering that not one party—neither the Scottish National party nor the Labour party—put such a measure in its manifesto. That is because simply to reverse the 2011 measures would cost over £30 billion, and it would cost countless billions more to reverse the change made in 1995. Those parties should be mindful of the fact that the issue was in not in either of their manifestos.