Oral Answers to Questions Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateJulie Elliott
Main Page: Julie Elliott (Labour - Sunderland Central)Department Debates - View all Julie Elliott's debates with the Department for Work and Pensions
(10 years, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberYes, they are, because they are set against means-tested benefits. I wish the hon. Gentleman would get his facts right and learn something about the benefits system. We have a system that will enable us to deliver the free school meals to those who are eligible for them, and not to those who are not eligible for them. The reality is that the mess that the Opposition left us is being cleared up and they cannot bear it. They do not even know whether they support universal credit. They flip-flop more on every policy than any other Opposition ever have.
8. What estimate he has made of the number of people below the threshold for auto-enrolment in a workplace pension.
We estimate that around 2.7 million individuals, aged 22 to pension age, who have earnings below the earnings threshold for auto-enrolment are not saving in a qualifying workplace pension in the private sector. About 1.6 million of those individuals are earning between £5,772 and £10,000 and have the right to opt in. Employers must tell workers about this right.
I thank the Minister for that answer, but does he agree that it would be right to extend pension auto-enrolment to all low-paid workers who are missing out at the moment?
I am grateful to the hon. Lady, but let me explain why I disagree with her. She would enrol people at, for example, £6,000 a year—that is the policy of the Labour Front-Bench team. At current contribution levels, someone earning £6,000 a year would be putting 8.8p a week into a pension. If they did that for 35 years, they would end up with a pension of £1.93 a week. That does not seem a sensible policy to me.