Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Liz Kendall and Melanie Onn

Monday 17th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Liz Kendall]

The Conservative party, which left a broken welfare system that is failing the people who depend on it and taxpayers, had 14 years to put it right. We know what their legacy is. Hon. Members will see the proposals soon, but we will not shy away from the decisions that we believe are right to give opportunities to people who can work, security for those who cannot, and to get the welfare bill on a sustainable footing.

[Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)]

Today’s Telegraph has done a right hatchet job on the most socially deprived ward in my constituency. The people of the East Marsh are sick and tired of journalists taking a day trip to write their poverty porn stories about people who are proud and keen to play their part in society in every way that they can. They have sought to pit older people against younger people, highlighting the NEET record. The young people in that ward are as keen to work as anyone else, but they need the jobs to do it. What discussions is the Secretary of State having about that?

[Liz Kendall]

There will be no greater representative for her constituents than my hon. Friend, who rightly said that they want the right chances, choices and support to work, as anyone else does. That is why we are creating good jobs in every part of the country through our modern industrial strategy. We are improving the quality of work and making work pay through our Employment Rights Bill. Our get Britain working plan will give the work, skills and—

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Liz Kendall and Melanie Onn

Monday 3rd February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)]

24. What steps her Department plans to take with employers to help increase economic growth.

[The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Liz Kendall)]

To get Britain growing again, we have to get Britain working again, and supporting employers is critical to achieving that goal. That is why last week I announced an overhaul of how the DWP helps businesses, including the introduction of a dedicated employers’ team in the DWP, ensuring that there are single account managers for businesses, so they do not have to have multiple conversations with different jobcentres, and the expansion of the number of training programmes tailored to employers’ individual needs. We are working in partnership with businesses: that is how we all go for growth.

--- Later in debate ---

[Liz Kendall]

Yes. I would like to say a massive thanks to Tu Mundo for all the work it is doing. There is a lot of evidence that work placements or work experience are a really important way to encourage more people into work. Last week, I visited B&M, the fastest growing retailer in the country, to look at what it is doing with short work experience placements, which are a form of “try before you buy” for the company and the employee. The placements have a huge success rate and B&M now recruits 85% of its workers through the scheme. We want to continue such success in the future.

[Melanie Onn]

Apprenticeships, training and reskilling in new energy technologies will be essential to deliver growth in the hard-working Humber region. Can the Secretary of State tell us more about the training programmes that she mentioned, which will support businesses in expanding opportunities in Grimsby and Cleethorpes?

[Liz Kendall]

I know that my hon. Friend is passionate about helping more people into work. Youth unemployment in her constituency is almost twice the national average, so it is essential for her constituents that we sort this out. Alongside work experience, we want to expand the number of sector-based work programmes, which have tailored courses for employers. We will also hold summits in three key growth areas—construction, health and social care, and clean energy—to bring employers together with local areas so that we can really go for growth.

Women’s State Pension Age Communication: PHSO Report

Debate between Liz Kendall and Melanie Onn

Tuesday 17th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Liz Kendall]

I hate to disagree with the right hon. Gentleman, but I did not say it was only about there being no money. I said it was because we do not agree that if we had sent those letters earlier, it would have made the difference that he says, and because, when 90% of women aged 45 to 54 knew the state pension age was increasing, we do not believe a flat rate is pertinent. I say this to him: we do take the public finances seriously. We have to make difficult decisions, and we cannot spend more than we have. We will continue with that approach, but based on our values. We do not believe that what has been set out is the right or fair way forward. I have come to the House honestly to make that decision plain, but I would be happy to talk to him in more detail if he would like.

[Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State says the report is about the way this was communicated to those 1950s-born women and that earlier letters would not have made a difference, but they would have made a difference to individuals’ financial planning, their retirement dates, the notice they gave to their jobs, and the wider family arrangements and commitments they had made. There have undoubtedly been losses for those 1950s-born women. My hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) just gave the Government an opportunity to reconsider that at some point in the future. Is she sure that she will not take that offer?

[Liz Kendall]

I know my hon. Friend cares passionately about this issue and many other issues related to pensioners. I repeat what I said in my statement and, indeed, what the ombudsman said, which is there was no direct financial loss for the women. This is not about the increase in the state pension age; it is about how it was communicated. The research shows that only one in four people who get an unsolicited letter remember receiving or reading it, so sending those letters out earlier would not have made the difference. We cannot justify a flat-rate compensation scheme or, indeed, an individualised compensation scheme on that basis.