06/01/2016

:00:07. > :00:16.Ten minute rule motion, Mr Norman Lamb. Thank you very much indeed, Mr

:00:17. > :00:19.Speaker. I beg to move at ldast be given to bring in a bill to

:00:20. > :00:25.establish an independent colmission to examine the future of thd

:00:26. > :00:29.National Health Service and the social care system, to take

:00:30. > :00:34.evidence, to report conclushons to Parliament and for connected

:00:35. > :00:38.purposes. Two former secret`ries of State for health, one Labour and one

:00:39. > :00:40.Conservative, and honourabld members from both the Government and

:00:41. > :00:45.opposition benches, have johned with me to call for the Government to

:00:46. > :00:52.establish such a commission. We re also joined by an organisathon

:00:53. > :00:54.called NHS survival, a group of progressive junior doctors, patients

:00:55. > :01:01.and others, now numbering 8000 members, and by Care England,

:01:02. > :01:05.representing social care survivors. The purpose of the commission is to

:01:06. > :01:09.engage with the public, the staff of the NHS, care services and civic

:01:10. > :01:13.society, on the massive challenge the NHS and care services f`ce, with

:01:14. > :01:22.the objective of establishing a long-term new settlement for the NHS

:01:23. > :01:26.and carer. Why is it needed? The NHS and social care face an existential

:01:27. > :01:31.crisis. In the post-war perhod, demand has gone up by 4% evdry year.

:01:32. > :01:34.We all understand the reasons. We're all living longer. The numbdrs of

:01:35. > :01:39.people surviving cancer has increased dramatically. Half of

:01:40. > :01:49.people diagnosed with cancer and I survived. -- half of people

:01:50. > :01:56.diagnosed with cancer now strvive for ten years or more. The numbers

:01:57. > :02:01.surviving other conditions hs set to rise. New medicine has been invented

:02:02. > :02:06.to tackle the underlying catses of genetic diseases. And we sed

:02:07. > :02:11.remarkable advances in surghcal procedure. All of this is a triumph

:02:12. > :02:16.of modern medicine. And of our NHS. It is something we should cdlebrate.

:02:17. > :02:21.For the last five years, thd Coalition Government ensured

:02:22. > :02:25.spending on the NHS was protected. But real terms increases have been

:02:26. > :02:29.marginal. With demand continuing to rise, this has been the toughest

:02:30. > :02:35.financial settlement in the history of the NHS. Meanwhile, soci`l care

:02:36. > :02:41.has been cut in real terms, despite significant increases in deland As

:02:42. > :02:45.we look to the period up to 202 , the widely accepted assessmdnt is

:02:46. > :02:50.that there would be a gap of ?3 billion in the NHS by that date The

:02:51. > :02:56.Government is committed to finding ?10 million, including the hncrease

:02:57. > :03:00.in this financial year, but few experts believe this will bd enough.

:03:01. > :03:05.The health foundation has estimated a gap of ?2 billion in 2020, on top

:03:06. > :03:09.of the ?10 billion commitment. Many others believe the gap will be

:03:10. > :03:15.larger. A reflection of the rapidly deteriorating financial poshtion is

:03:16. > :03:19.shown in the accounts of NHS and foundation trusts, facing a

:03:20. > :03:23.projected 2.2 billion deficht by the end of this financial year. Pension

:03:24. > :03:28.changes announced by the Ch`ncellor are likely to add another ?0 billion

:03:29. > :03:34.to costs. Pressures across the system are very evident. Thd news

:03:35. > :03:40.today that at least 100 GP surgeries applied to stop accepting p`tients

:03:41. > :03:43.because of shortage of doctors is the latest example. The poshtion of

:03:44. > :03:49.social care is perhaps more serious. We respected health foundathon

:03:50. > :03:53.estimates there will be a ?6 billion funding gap by 2020. Without taking

:03:54. > :03:58.into account the increase in the minimum wage. The LGA estim`tes that

:03:59. > :04:03.alone will add ?1 billion to costs by 2020. It also does not t`ke into

:04:04. > :04:06.account the planned increasd in the introduction of the cap on care

:04:07. > :04:11.costs, which the Government has said it is committed to doing in 202 .

:04:12. > :04:22.The Spending Review provision for councils to increase council tax by

:04:23. > :04:26.2% will narrow the gap. But only if every council takes advantage of the

:04:27. > :04:33.new power. The plan for an hncrease in the better care fund will add

:04:34. > :04:38.?1.5 billion, but only in 1820. So, a substantial shortfall rem`ins

:04:39. > :04:41.This means further cuts to social care are inevitable. Simon Stevens,

:04:42. > :04:45.the head of NHS England, makes clear that if you cut social care, it will

:04:46. > :04:51.have an impact on the NHS and that is in effect creates a largd funding

:04:52. > :04:56.gap in the NHS by 2020. Then the projected ?30 billion. So, the

:04:57. > :04:59.situation, based on planned spending in this Parliament, looks

:05:00. > :05:03.unsustainable. Beyond 2020, it just keeps getting more challenghng. It

:05:04. > :05:08.is worth looking at how we compare with other European countrids. In

:05:09. > :05:14.2000, the Prime Minister, then Tony Blair, said the objective of the UK

:05:15. > :05:18.hitting the average EU spend on health by 2006. We now risk drifting

:05:19. > :05:27.further away from that EU average. An analysis shows that of the 2

:05:28. > :05:32.OECD countries in the EU in 201 , only Slovakia, Hungary, the Czech

:05:33. > :05:38.Republic, Poland and Estoni` spent a lower proportion of GDP on health

:05:39. > :05:41.than the UK. Looking ahead, the picture is just as disturbing.

:05:42. > :05:49.Projected health spending in England, as a proportion of UK GDP,

:05:50. > :05:53.up to 2020-21, shows a declhning share of GDP spent on the NHS.

:05:54. > :05:57.According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, based on thd

:05:58. > :06:02.Government's Spending Review, funding for the Department of Health

:06:03. > :06:10.declines as a percentage of GDP from 6.1%, this year, to just 5 4%

:06:11. > :06:13.in 2021. The position for social care is more dramatic. Given what we

:06:14. > :06:20.know about the electrical rhse in demand, can make any at all to

:06:21. > :06:24.commit a reducing share of GDP to health and care? I fear the

:06:25. > :06:30.consequences of failing to `ddress this funding situation could be very

:06:31. > :06:33.serious. The Government argtes that substantial further efficiency

:06:34. > :06:38.savings could be achieved. Xet, however much we hope that the

:06:39. > :06:40.necessary efficiency changes will be achieved through smart

:06:41. > :06:46.re-engineering of the systel, to deliver better value and better

:06:47. > :06:49.care, the reality around thd country from anecdotal evidence suggests

:06:50. > :06:53.that too often, preventativd services indulge in crisis

:06:54. > :06:59.management. The financial incentives in the system do not help. We have

:07:00. > :07:02.payment for activity in acute hospitals but blocked contr`cts in

:07:03. > :07:06.Community Care and mental hdalth. This ensures rational alloc`tion of

:07:07. > :07:09.resources is distorted. Acute hospitals continue to see increases

:07:10. > :07:13.in income but demand for thdir services also increases, in part

:07:14. > :07:18.because of a failure to invdst in preventive care. Their financial

:07:19. > :07:22.position becomes more perilous, despite the increase in income. It

:07:23. > :07:27.is a vicious circle, that somehow has to be broken. In social care,

:07:28. > :07:33.the anticipated shortfall, with rising demand up to 2020, whll

:07:34. > :07:36.result in more people losing support or support packages becoming more

:07:37. > :07:40.inadequate. We are currentlx witnessing productions and care

:07:41. > :07:45.packages, in my own county of Norfolk, and I suspect it is

:07:46. > :07:49.widespread, there are also serious concerns of significant numbers of

:07:50. > :07:53.providers of social care le`ving the market. There is a sense of the

:07:54. > :07:57.system living on borrowed thme. The unattractive effect of all of this

:07:58. > :08:01.will be that those with mondy will be able to get good care. Those

:08:02. > :08:06.relying on the state will increasingly either get nothing at

:08:07. > :08:10.all or substandard care. And I don't think any of us can toleratd that.

:08:11. > :08:14.None of this also addresses the fact that mental health, desperately

:08:15. > :08:20.needs more investment, desphte the help given in the Spending Review.

:08:21. > :08:23.So, the Government, Mr Speaker, faces a choice. The reality is that

:08:24. > :08:28.the system will either drift into a state of crisis or we can confront

:08:29. > :08:33.the existential challenge now. This transcends narrow party polhtics. We

:08:34. > :08:37.have to decide as a country how much we want to spend on our NHS and care

:08:38. > :08:42.system. What can we do diffdrently to make better use of resources

:08:43. > :08:48.available? Should we considdr, as I propose, two dedicated NHS `nd care

:08:49. > :08:51.tax and give local areas thd ability to vary it? Should we in thd

:08:52. > :08:58.artificial divide between the NHS and social care? We fund He`lth and

:08:59. > :09:01.Social Care through three dhfferent routes, the NHS, local authorities,

:09:02. > :09:07.and the benefits system. Dodsn't make any sense? The NHS, Mr Speaker,

:09:08. > :09:11.commands an extra ordinary level support our country. It is `n

:09:12. > :09:15.amazing demonstration of social solidarity and decency. It hs also

:09:16. > :09:22.the best system in the world, according to the common fund in

:09:23. > :09:24.2014. Yet, we cannot take the survival of the NHS and sochal care

:09:25. > :09:34.services for granted. It's loud claim for a new And

:09:35. > :09:39.beverage commission for the 21st century. The question is thd

:09:40. > :09:44.honourable member have leavd to bring in the bill. As many `s are of

:09:45. > :09:55.the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no the ayes have it. Who

:09:56. > :10:04.will prepare and bring in the rebel? The McLaren, Nick Clegg, Doctor

:10:05. > :10:05.Andrew Murrison, Jim Shannon, Phillip Leigh Ivan Lewis, C`roline

:10:06. > :10:46.Lucas and myself. National Health Service and social

:10:47. > :10:55.care commission Bill. We now come to the main business on opposition day

:10:56. > :11:00.and to the motion in the nale of the Leader of the Opposition on the

:11:01. > :11:11.Universal Credit Work Allow`nce To move the motion I call the shadow

:11:12. > :11:16.secretary of state Mr or Ms Smith. May I start by wishing you ` very

:11:17. > :11:21.happy new year. I wish the same to the ministers and members opposite

:11:22. > :11:29.and all in this house, especially to the secretary of state, who has just

:11:30. > :11:33.joined us. I must say, I am disappointed that it isn't going to

:11:34. > :11:36.be the secretary of state who responds to the opposition hn the

:11:37. > :11:42.debate in the name of my right honourable friend the Leader of the

:11:43. > :11:46.Opposition. I think it is now the second time the secretary of state

:11:47. > :11:50.has failed to address the house went questions have been asked of his

:11:51. > :11:56.department. I am not sure what his excuse is today but I do thhnk it is

:11:57. > :12:00.a shame he is shirking his duty in speaking to the house and pdrhaps we

:12:01. > :12:05.ought to take a listen out of the playbook of his department `nd think

:12:06. > :12:14.about sanctioning the secretary of state if he continues to shhrk work

:12:15. > :12:17.in this fashion. I think it was 600,000 people in the UK sanctioned

:12:18. > :12:21.by Hema last year, some for failing to turn up to a job intervidw, some

:12:22. > :12:26.because they were selling poppies, some for attending the fathdr's

:12:27. > :12:31.funeral, one because they h`d a heart attack. Someone suggested to

:12:32. > :12:34.me and appropriate punishment for the secretary of state may be

:12:35. > :12:38.banning him from the House of Commons campaign for a month or so

:12:39. > :12:44.and force them at last to go and visit a food bank. It is

:12:45. > :12:47.extraordinary though that the secretary of state can't be bothered

:12:48. > :12:51.to defend his pet project of the Universal Credit today. Aha it is

:12:52. > :12:57.beyond the Mac because he thinks he is above asking -- answering

:12:58. > :13:03.questions or perhaps he does agree with me it is now indefensible. The

:13:04. > :13:07.changes we are debating tod`y are amongst the most radical evdr

:13:08. > :13:12.undertaken to Social security. Changes that should have done what

:13:13. > :13:18.the secretary of state orighnally intended and made a work pax for

:13:19. > :13:22.working people on benefits, in work support, and should have made

:13:23. > :13:27.millions of people in this country better off, but I fear they are set,

:13:28. > :13:35.after the recent cuts, to m`ke millions of people worse off. I

:13:36. > :13:40.will. Ashton-under-Lyne, my constituency, was one of thd first

:13:41. > :13:43.place the pilot Universal Credit and an analysis by the House of Commons

:13:44. > :13:53.library says that the singld mother of two working full-time will have

:13:54. > :14:00.in net income loss of 2000 ?981 more on Universal Credit. My constituents

:14:01. > :14:05.will be the first of many pdople to be hit by these cuts becausd they

:14:06. > :14:09.were the first in the country to be put on Universal Credit. With my

:14:10. > :14:14.friend back agree with me this is not fair and another exampld of a

:14:15. > :14:18.broken Tory promise? I agred wholeheartedly. I believed hn my

:14:19. > :14:23.friend back constituency thdre are 12,000 people who buy 2020 will be

:14:24. > :14:28.subject to far lower incomes as a result of the cuts to Universal

:14:29. > :14:39.Credit. Lest the northern powerhouse than in older workers. -- Northern

:14:40. > :14:45.workhouse. Universal Credit is a bit of a black box and many people out

:14:46. > :14:49.there and indeed may be on the Tory benches, don't quite apprechate what

:14:50. > :14:54.is going on and have believdd the smoke and mirrors we have sden from

:14:55. > :14:59.this Government. The changes that were snuck out, mentioned in passing

:15:00. > :15:06.and last summer's budget and leaked out piecemeal statutory instrument

:15:07. > :15:11.that we had to pray against even get it debated, it will half thd value

:15:12. > :15:16.of the work allowance under Universal Credit and that is the

:15:17. > :15:21.piece of Universal Credit that is absolutely essential to makhng work

:15:22. > :15:26.pay. Let me clearly illustr`tes exactly what the nature of those

:15:27. > :15:31.changes to the work allowances are, with the few examples. If you are a

:15:32. > :15:41.single mother with one or more children, the work allowancd will be

:15:42. > :15:51.half from April of this year from ?8,808 to ?4764. Meaning a reduction

:15:52. > :15:58.of ?4044. In cash terms, th`t working mother will lose ?2628 next

:15:59. > :16:02.year. That's the nature of the lost every single mother. I will get if

:16:03. > :16:08.you are more examples beford I give way to my friend back. If you are a

:16:09. > :16:14.joint couple living and working together, one or both of yot with

:16:15. > :16:22.limited capacity to what, i.e., disabled, your work allowance will

:16:23. > :16:27.be cut from 7700 to 4700. A loss of ?3000 in your income. If yot are a

:16:28. > :16:35.single individual in receipt of Universal Credit, you will lose

:16:36. > :16:43.everything. ?1332 reduction, a net loss to income of ?865. I ghve way.

:16:44. > :16:46.I like right honourable fridnd for giving way. I am so glad shd has

:16:47. > :16:51.mentioned that single parents and how they will be hit. The l`st

:16:52. > :16:56.Labour Government that is proud with the new tool for lone parents. Does

:16:57. > :17:00.he agree with me that the f`te that now befalls single parents hn this

:17:01. > :17:08.country is a reversal of wh`t passed Government debt to help thel work.

:17:09. > :17:13.Let me be clear, Mr Speaker. Just as we saw under the Tory governments in

:17:14. > :17:21.the 1980s when the honourable member per working hammer was dragged

:17:22. > :17:24.through the newspapers for damaging the reputation of working mothers

:17:25. > :17:31.almost irreparably after colments he made about the state in Cardiff

:17:32. > :17:37.they are back on the same track In the sites are single mothers. They

:17:38. > :17:43.are the biggest single group of losers, out of all of these changes,

:17:44. > :17:47.tax credits and universal credits, and it is a disgrace that they are

:17:48. > :17:59.undergoing all the good work last Labour Government bids. -- of can he

:18:00. > :18:06.confront it is the case that without these reforms a family with a net

:18:07. > :18:11.household income of ?57,513 would be in receipt of benefits. Does he

:18:12. > :18:20.think that is in anyway sustainable? What we're talking about here is not

:18:21. > :18:25.families in receipt of that is a ?7,000 -- 50 ?7,000. We're talking

:18:26. > :18:30.about families on low and mhddle wages and it is a complete less

:18:31. > :18:34.representation of the facts and of this debate to try into this

:18:35. > :18:42.discussion to high-paying, high earning taxpayers. I will ghve way.

:18:43. > :18:49.And wanted to come back to the process he outlined at the beginning

:18:50. > :18:53.of his remarks in that this was a to any statutory instrument. H`s he

:18:54. > :18:58.read the many questions opposition members asked at this committee on

:18:59. > :19:04.the impact this change would have, for example on carers, parthcularly

:19:05. > :19:07.young carers? Work we have `sked repeatedly for any sort of hmpact

:19:08. > :19:13.assessment in respect of thdse measures and as usual the Government

:19:14. > :19:18.reels to offer one. We do not in his constituency, I believe it hs 1 ,000

:19:19. > :19:23.households that will lose ott by the end of this Parliament as a result

:19:24. > :19:26.of these cuts. In the honourable gentleman constituency I believe it

:19:27. > :19:34.will be 5000 of his constittents who will lose out, on average, ?950 by

:19:35. > :19:39.the end of this Parliament. Perhaps he should reflect on that when he

:19:40. > :19:42.wrote on this motion later today. I am grateful to my friend back and I

:19:43. > :19:47.commend him for bringing thhs motion to the house today because the

:19:48. > :19:59.impact of these changes are going to be devastating on a very grdat

:20:00. > :20:04.number of my constituents who in one part of my constituency, were part

:20:05. > :20:11.of the pilot for Universal Credit. Isn't there enough upon herd, and

:20:12. > :20:15.that the secretary of state has indicated the ?69 million stpport

:20:16. > :20:20.fund will help to bring in transitional arrangements. That fund

:20:21. > :20:25.is used for a myriad of othdr purposes and we already know the

:20:26. > :20:30.impact of the cuts to working families of Universal Credit changes

:20:31. > :20:36.this year will be ?100 millhon alone. We do indeed, Mr Spe`ker My

:20:37. > :20:40.friend that is absolutely rhght I think it will be 10,000 of his

:20:41. > :20:45.constituents eventually affdcted with lower incomes as a restlt of

:20:46. > :20:49.these changes. He is also rhght about the transitional protdctions

:20:50. > :20:51.anti-whaling secretary of state is sought to misrepresent thosd is

:20:52. > :21:05.covering those losses. Why can many colleagues on this

:21:06. > :21:12.side, I was besieged by constituents in the run up to the spending

:21:13. > :21:17.review. People concerned about the tax credit cuts and horrifidd that a

:21:18. > :21:22.Government that said making work pay would be its mantra should do this

:21:23. > :21:27.to working people. Does he think the 600,000 Londoners on tax crddits

:21:28. > :21:33.will be equally horrified to know the sting is still in the t`il and

:21:34. > :21:38.working people are going to lose out dramatically as the Univers`l Credit

:21:39. > :21:42.is rolled out? I think more than that, they will be absolutely

:21:43. > :21:50.cheesed off to the back teeth that this Government has tried to pull

:21:51. > :21:54.the wall over their eyes. The truth is that these are precisely the same

:21:55. > :21:58.cuts proposed tax credits. @lmost the exact amount of money whll be

:21:59. > :22:03.saved through these cuts to the work allowances as was proposed. As a

:22:04. > :22:09.member says from a sedentarx position, excellent, but like I d be

:22:10. > :22:14.delighted to give way. A minor detail. Every penny paid out in

:22:15. > :22:20.benefits has to be raised in packs out of working people's taxds. The

:22:21. > :22:25.money paid out in tax credits is not wages, it is means tested bdnefits.

:22:26. > :22:29.Does he not recognise the great advantage of Universal Credht is it

:22:30. > :22:37.reduces the harsh impact of means tested withdrawal of income? Where

:22:38. > :22:41.do I start, Mr Speaker? I start by telling him he will have 7000 of his

:22:42. > :22:45.constituents hit by this by the time he next stand before them at the

:22:46. > :22:53.election and he ought to reflect on that. It is precisely peopld in

:22:54. > :22:58.work, paying tax, working h`rd, long hours, many men on wage, who are

:22:59. > :23:03.getting hit by his Government. That is what these cuts are. This isn't a

:23:04. > :23:07.different set of people, thdse aren't the scroungers they like to

:23:08. > :23:18.talk about. These are the strvivors who are being hit by his Government.

:23:19. > :23:21.The truth is, as the IFA saxs, there is no difference when these drugs

:23:22. > :23:29.and lose the Government was proposing under tax credits and on

:23:30. > :23:33.which they U-turn. The U-turn makes, and I quote, no difference. It is

:23:34. > :23:38.the same ?5 billion the Govdrnment end up saving at the end of the

:23:39. > :23:43.Parliament as opposed to at the beginning. It is ?10 billion

:23:44. > :23:46.stripped out of the pockets of working families by this Government

:23:47. > :23:52.and they should be ashamed of themselves.

:23:53. > :23:59.I understand what he is sayhng but he has said he was committed to ?12

:24:00. > :24:03.billion in order to tackle the deficit. If not through these

:24:04. > :24:08.changes, how would he make these savings? What I would not do, Mr

:24:09. > :24:14.Speaker, I absolutely would not cut the incomes of 5.5 million working

:24:15. > :24:21.families. An average of ?950 from each of them. Many in her

:24:22. > :24:29.constituency. I would not t`ke 1600 away from 2.6 million working

:24:30. > :24:32.families. Order. The honour`ble gentleman's eloquence must be

:24:33. > :24:40.interrupted for me to make `n obvious point. Whatever dis,

:24:41. > :24:47.similarities the members have, they have one thing in common, they are

:24:48. > :24:53.extremely excitable. They nded to calm down a little bit. Not least,

:24:54. > :25:00.so we can hear the flow of the honourable gentleman's eloqtence. Mr

:25:01. > :25:11.Owen Smith. I am extremely grateful to you, Mr Speaker. Disabled

:25:12. > :25:16.workers, Mr Speaker, will lose 2000 a year and the worst affectdd is my

:25:17. > :25:22.honourable friend -- as my honourable friend remind thd House,

:25:23. > :25:25.is single mothers. They are on the new shiny national living w`ge and

:25:26. > :25:31.will be ?3000 worse off than they would have been. ?3000 worsd off.

:25:32. > :25:36.How does the Government justify this? They have made a serids of

:25:37. > :25:47.attempts at defending it. Fhrstly, to reference the manifesto. That

:25:48. > :25:53.they did not say, as I recall, at the election, was that this would

:25:54. > :25:57.come from working families. I don't recall them talking about ntrsery

:25:58. > :26:03.nurses or security guards or shop workers on the minimum wage, as the

:26:04. > :26:09.sort of wage scroungers thex now seek to vilify. Yet, these `re the

:26:10. > :26:18.very people who will be hit by this change. I will give way. My

:26:19. > :26:23.honourable friend was asked whether he would find alternative w`ys of

:26:24. > :26:27.raising money, rather than taking it from the disabled, single p`rents,

:26:28. > :26:32.carers, working families, would it not be more appropriate perhaps to

:26:33. > :26:37.collect tax from many of thd top companies that are avoiding paying

:26:38. > :26:44.their attacks, rather than stealing from low-paid families, as hs

:26:45. > :26:48.proposed? I did find it quite interesting that in part of that

:26:49. > :26:53.massive data dump before Christmas, we learned that some of our largest

:26:54. > :27:02.banks, JP Morgan, Merrill Lxnch they absolutely no corporathon tax

:27:03. > :27:06.in the UK last year. And others control conclusions. I will stick to

:27:07. > :27:11.the subject at hand, Universal Credit. I want to talk about

:27:12. > :27:17.transitional protection for those affected. As has been said, the

:27:18. > :27:23.Government is telling us thdre is transitional protection. I will

:27:24. > :27:27.concede that is sort of truth. Sort of. For some of the three and 5 ,000

:27:28. > :27:43.people who will be on Universal Credit, by next April. But not. .

:27:44. > :27:47.350 was the latest figure I saw But not for the 5.8 million people who

:27:48. > :27:52.will eventually beyond Univdrsal Credit. There is no transithonal

:27:53. > :28:00.protection for them. Even for the 3.5 thousand, or the three `nd

:28:01. > :28:04.50,000 who will be on it by March, it is not transitional protdction of

:28:05. > :28:08.the undergo anything that constitutes what the Governlent call

:28:09. > :28:11.a serious change of circumstances. Their transitional protection, the

:28:12. > :28:17.maintenance of their benefits, they are in work support, at tax credit

:28:18. > :28:21.levels,.. It will interest the House, I would of thought, given a

:28:22. > :28:25.secure state's interest in larriages in this institution, but getting

:28:26. > :28:27.married would constitute ond of those serious changes in

:28:28. > :28:33.circumstances. Get married hf you're on tax credits and enjoying

:28:34. > :28:35.transitional protection and the Secretary of State for Work and

:28:36. > :28:42.Pensions will take that mondy away from you. For millions of claimants,

:28:43. > :28:47.by 2020 there will be no protection whatsoever. The Secretary of State

:28:48. > :28:57.has implied that there is transitional protection. He

:28:58. > :29:00.intervened in a previous debate and said explicitly that we're

:29:01. > :29:06.transitional protecting those moving on to Universal Credit. But

:29:07. > :29:13.unfortunately, the Minister for welfare had to correct him. He said,

:29:14. > :29:20.it is not the same. Indeed, it might be more work or it might be

:29:21. > :29:30.upscaling. In truth, Mr Spe`ker the ?69 million fund that the Sdcretary

:29:31. > :29:36.of State has mentioned, will in no way make up for the loss ovdr the

:29:37. > :29:43.term of this Parliament. Thd truth came out in the data dump that we

:29:44. > :29:49.saw infamously of documents snuck out in Christmas week. Responding to

:29:50. > :29:52.criticism by the Government's own social security advisory colmittee,

:29:53. > :29:59.ministers had to admit that the only way to recoup the losses, and I

:30:00. > :30:05.quote," was to work an additional 3-4 hours a week". You did hear me

:30:06. > :30:10.correctly. What they are now seen to that single mother losing those

:30:11. > :30:14.?3000, working full-time, on the national minimum wage, lookhng after

:30:15. > :30:21.children in the evening, wh`t they must do is get another job, working

:30:22. > :30:25.an extra 3-4 hours a week or 20 hours a year, approximately. In

:30:26. > :30:32.order to ensure they are no worse off than they are presently. You

:30:33. > :30:35.tell me, Mr Speaker, becausd I can't see how that single mother, working

:30:36. > :30:42.full-time, even on this new national minimum wage, with a child `t home,

:30:43. > :30:46.is going to get an extra 3-4 hours a week, is going to work an extra 200

:30:47. > :30:53.hours a year, adding it to get a job after work in a bar or garage? Or

:30:54. > :30:56.serving coffee? An addition`l job? Additional to the full-time job they

:30:57. > :31:00.do during the day, addition`l to looking after their children,

:31:01. > :31:05.cleaning, for example, in order to earn a few extra quid. What is the

:31:06. > :31:10.incentive for that mother to undertake that work? Becausd the

:31:11. > :31:14.other massively damaging effect of these cards is that it is

:31:15. > :31:20.fundamentally undermines thd very premise of Universal Credit, to make

:31:21. > :31:30.work pay. It fundamentally destroys it. I will give way. Thank xou. I

:31:31. > :31:34.thank my honourable friend for being so generous in giving away `gain. I

:31:35. > :31:38.want to remind him that in the Budget book, when the Chancdllor

:31:39. > :31:42.announced his living wage, he also assumed a rise in personal `llowance

:31:43. > :31:46.in his calculations, that work would pay. Given the broken promises, left

:31:47. > :31:53.right and centre, from this Government, why should any single

:31:54. > :31:58.parent believe what they sax? My advice is clear. Do not belheve a

:31:59. > :32:02.single word they say. Do not believe anything they say to us in response

:32:03. > :32:06.to this debate today. Do not believe what they're telling the cotntry

:32:07. > :32:11.about making work pay and about Universal Credit because each and

:32:12. > :32:18.every promise is being brokdn. The Secretary of State used to say this

:32:19. > :32:24.was a watershed, indeed he tsed to say, it would ensure that work pays

:32:25. > :32:29.and more work pays for everxbody. That cuts to the Universal Credit

:32:30. > :32:34.Work Allowance have hauled that argument below the water line. The

:32:35. > :32:36.House of Commons library brhefing produced yesterday and circtlated to

:32:37. > :32:41.every member in this House lakes clear that that single mothdr, after

:32:42. > :32:50.these changes, would have to work an extra 12 hours each week in order to

:32:51. > :32:56.earn an extra ?40. That is ?3 3 hour, the changes. Before these

:32:57. > :33:03.changes, she would have got ?92 for those extra 12 hours. At ?7 62 p.

:33:04. > :33:10.How on earth is that meant to be increasing her incentive to go out

:33:11. > :33:17.and work harder and longer? It is absolute nonsense, Mr Speakdr. It

:33:18. > :33:23.cannot and it will not... I would be delighted to give way. I just wonder

:33:24. > :33:27.whether there is something hn the integrity of these people you speak

:33:28. > :33:32.about that says they raise their heads high enough to say, OK, it is

:33:33. > :33:37.not great, but I am lifting myself and my children of a life of welfare

:33:38. > :33:44.dependency. And that is a pride and I would like to talk a bit lore in

:33:45. > :33:49.those towns and that language. I have respect for the honour`ble lady

:33:50. > :33:58.in the way she stood up and represented her constituents on the

:33:59. > :34:06.tax credits changes. I would point her to the document commisshoned by

:34:07. > :34:12.the Secretary of State when he first conceived of Universal Credht. In

:34:13. > :34:19.the opening remarks, he demolished the argument she just made. He

:34:20. > :34:23.effectively said that we cannot expect people to simply through

:34:24. > :34:30.responsibility and moral obligation work harder. We need to introduce

:34:31. > :34:34.incentives. That is the unddrpinning rationale of Universal Credht. And

:34:35. > :34:40.unfortunately, these changes, the cuts to the work allowance, to

:34:41. > :34:45.childcare provision, are fundamentally undermining the

:34:46. > :34:51.initial premise. They are ddstroying Universal Credit. As a consdquence,

:34:52. > :34:56.5000 of her constituents in 202 will be suffering lower incomes as

:34:57. > :35:06.a result of these changes to Universal Credit. I just wonder if

:35:07. > :35:11.my honourable friend agrees that, as someone who lived on in work

:35:12. > :35:15.benefits, whilst the delightful feeling of being lifted out of

:35:16. > :35:22.welfare benefits never fed ly children... ? Would he agred? I

:35:23. > :35:28.completely agree and the Secretary of State and members across the

:35:29. > :35:31.House should listen. She should also know there are 17,000 consthtuents

:35:32. > :35:36.in her constituency who will be hit by this in 2020. An extraordinary

:35:37. > :35:41.number of families with lowdr incomes, as a result of these

:35:42. > :35:46.changes. The truth, Mr Speaker, is these changes cannot increase work

:35:47. > :35:52.incentives and they will not increase outcomes. They cannot. I

:35:53. > :35:58.will give way in a moment. That is why successive independent dxperts

:35:59. > :36:03.have now come out and told the Government to think again, `s they

:36:04. > :36:06.did on tax credits. The Sochal Security advisory committee, the

:36:07. > :36:11.Government's own advisory committee, tell them the reverse. The

:36:12. > :36:17.resolution foundation, chaired by former Tory minister, tell them to

:36:18. > :36:21.reverse, the, most important of all, most recently, the Government's

:36:22. > :36:27.social mobility commission, deputy chaired by a Tory peer, Aaron S

:36:28. > :36:33.Shepherd, on December 17, in their state of the nation 2015 on social

:36:34. > :36:38.mobility and child poverty, they said with clarity to be Secretary of

:36:39. > :36:41.State Colin "The immediate priority must be to take action to ensure the

:36:42. > :36:46.introduction of Universal Credit does not make families with

:36:47. > :36:50.children, who do the right thing, in terms of working as much as society

:36:51. > :36:58.expects them to, worse off, then they would be under the current

:36:59. > :37:03.system." That means reversing the cuts enacted through the Amdndment

:37:04. > :37:08.regulations. They are bright, Mr Speaker. We agree with them. Just as

:37:09. > :37:13.we agreed when the honourable member for South temperature and all of her

:37:14. > :37:24.colleagues, urged the Government to reverse last time. I give w`y. I am

:37:25. > :37:29.somewhat selective speech, hs he not somewhat selective speech, hs he not

:37:30. > :37:32.missing the point that Univdrsal Credit, will make it invari`bly

:37:33. > :37:35.clear to people that if thex work more they will earn more, against

:37:36. > :37:40.the current system, where t`pered rates go up to 9%, incredibly

:37:41. > :37:44.confusing and people do not risk taking on extra work cause they

:37:45. > :37:50.would have to reapply for bdnefits and could be worse. Univers`l credit

:37:51. > :38:07.has a beautiful simplicity `nd would encourage people to work. I

:38:08. > :38:15.congratulate his equal deft speech. If we had had a 55% taper r`te. Or

:38:16. > :38:18.even the 65% taper rate we have currently, with worker alli`nces,

:38:19. > :38:21.that would double what is now proposed, and that would have made

:38:22. > :38:25.work pay. It would have been an incentive for people to work extra

:38:26. > :38:34.hours. I made that plane in my speech. But with the success of cuts

:38:35. > :38:39.made since 2012, it will not deliver what was promised. He, and the

:38:40. > :38:43.country, I been sold a pup by the Secretary of State. It is not what

:38:44. > :38:47.was written on the tin when he first brandished it, Mr Speaker. @ll

:38:48. > :38:52.members opposite need to understand that. There will be thousands of

:38:53. > :38:57.families in their respectivd constituencies affected by these

:38:58. > :39:04.cuts, many of them losing as much or more than they would have done under

:39:05. > :39:09.the tax credit cuts. I said to them and to you all here today, join with

:39:10. > :39:15.us, tell me how this is different from the cuts you stood agahnst last

:39:16. > :39:20.time round. Other than, people might not quite have the time to realise

:39:21. > :39:25.the cuts are being made before you next get to stand in the eldction.

:39:26. > :39:30.That, as far as I can see, hs the only plausible reason for f`iling to

:39:31. > :39:31.stand on your conscience thhs time and rail against these cuts. I give

:39:32. > :39:43.way. To the present was war as it was at

:39:44. > :39:52.its conception of this policy and there has been no change. -, the

:39:53. > :40:00.taper rate. I'm not make a listake. I referred to the original document

:40:01. > :40:04.by yourself and share them by yourself, in which it was

:40:05. > :40:11.recommended there be a bettdr day 5% taper rate. I might also re`d their

:40:12. > :40:20.to the commission that argud you need to get back to a 55% t`per

:40:21. > :40:25.rate, so the secretary of state as he wants to make an argument in

:40:26. > :40:29.favour of his pet project bdtter stand up and get to the dispatch

:40:30. > :40:35.box. I would be more than grateful to talk about it any time. @s I have

:40:36. > :40:40.said to effectively absent so recklessly of state who bridfed the

:40:41. > :40:43.press he would resign if his pet project was touched by the

:40:44. > :40:49.Chancellor, now is the time to go. As plans have been shredded by

:40:50. > :40:56.number 11 since 2012. He sahd it would be more benefits than the

:40:57. > :41:01.benefit it replaced, it will be ?5.7 billion less generous and hd

:41:02. > :41:07.promised. 4 billion less th`n the current system. He said it was going

:41:08. > :41:11.to make work pay, but as I have shown today, after these cuts, it is

:41:12. > :41:17.tantamount to asking single mothers to pay to work. I thank my

:41:18. > :41:21.honourable friend for giving way. Might bring back mentioned darlier

:41:22. > :41:26.on the disabled and is it not worth underlining at this point are

:41:27. > :41:32.particularly hard heading this is on disabled people in work and could

:41:33. > :41:42.lose up to ?2000 as a result of this? Mr Speaker, my honour`ble

:41:43. > :41:45.friend is right, as ever. 9000 constituencies in her consthtuency

:41:46. > :41:50.will be worse off. Those amongst them who are disabled or part of the

:41:51. > :41:56.couple where one or more melber is these able will lose ?2000 tnder

:41:57. > :41:59.these cuts and it is a disgrace Under this Government, people are

:42:00. > :42:03.working in a preview of wagd working in a preview of wagd

:42:04. > :42:08.restraint and austerity we have not seen since the 1920s. This story

:42:09. > :42:21.indebted promises to see thd lowest ten year period of wage in ` gated

:42:22. > :42:25.-- for a decade. Half of th`t that under the last Labour Government.

:42:26. > :42:30.That includes all of the fancy promises about a national mhnimum

:42:31. > :42:37.wage. The living wage will lake up just 22% the losses working people

:42:38. > :42:42.will see under these changes and it is misleading to this country and to

:42:43. > :42:45.the house to suggest otherwhse. Under this secretary of state we

:42:46. > :42:51.have a bedroom in packs that leaves people with no money to pay for food

:42:52. > :42:58.or heating, a sanctions reghme that has the song to suicide and now

:42:59. > :43:02.Universal Credit that will reduce security and rewards for people

:43:03. > :43:06.doing the right thing and working hard for their families and society

:43:07. > :43:11.and the secretary of state should have addressed these questions

:43:12. > :43:13.today, have spoken to this house, and consider his position. The

:43:14. > :43:21.question as is on the order paper. I call the minister. I will join the

:43:22. > :43:26.shadow secretary of state in wishing everybody a happy new year. I am

:43:27. > :43:30.sorry I am not the person hd wished to exchange with, but this hs a real

:43:31. > :43:35.area of passion from me. My background is in starting mx own

:43:36. > :43:40.business, I understand opportunity, something that all too often is not

:43:41. > :43:44.given in society and I am ddtermined the changes that helped shape my

:43:45. > :43:50.journey into politics is integral to why we need to reform welfare state.

:43:51. > :43:56.Mr Speaker, the welfare state system. Like a very early. Given the

:43:57. > :44:01.background he set out he will will understand why it would be ` mistake

:44:02. > :44:06.to go ahead with the tax crddit cuts before Christmas. Why then `re they

:44:07. > :44:12.going ahead with the guts for the people whose only mistake is to have

:44:13. > :44:17.the misfortune of receiving Universal Credit -- go ahead with

:44:18. > :44:27.the cuts. And a little bit of time to expand my argument which will

:44:28. > :44:32.address those things. One of the key things over tax credits was people

:44:33. > :44:37.argued all of the changes coming and needed time to be phased in and that

:44:38. > :44:40.is what I will be setting ott. The welfare system we inherited was

:44:41. > :44:47.simply not working. Not supporting people into work, to stay in work

:44:48. > :44:50.and progress and work. People were left unfulfilled potential,

:44:51. > :44:55.languishing on benefit with little or no incentive to work. Progress

:44:56. > :45:00.and opportunities in the work was stifled. Opportunity should be given

:45:01. > :45:05.and not stifled. The truth hs our welfare system had become so

:45:06. > :45:08.distorted and complex and wd know that what our own individual

:45:09. > :45:12.casework when we deal with residents. Two of the residdnts were

:45:13. > :45:16.missing out on benefits thex were entitled to because they cotld not

:45:17. > :45:20.navigate something that was too complex. It off and shut thd door of

:45:21. > :45:29.opportunity because it paid more to be on benefits than work. As we

:45:30. > :45:33.know, as does the electoratd. I say this was not disapproval of those

:45:34. > :45:39.who claim benefits, but it was the system itself to blame and that is

:45:40. > :45:42.why we took to reformat. Thd aim is and continues to be a systel that

:45:43. > :45:48.extends opportunity and instrers were always pays. Moving from the

:45:49. > :45:54.high welfare, high tax socidty to a low tax, low welfare societx. A

:45:55. > :45:58.common-sense approach to crdating a system fairer to taxpayers who face

:45:59. > :46:03.an ever-increasing bill and deliver a system sustainable for our country

:46:04. > :46:06.but crucially, a system that will take the most vulnerable. Ldt me

:46:07. > :46:11.remind the house that will put spending on people in work rose from

:46:12. > :46:23.6,000,000,019 90 82 August 20 8,000,000,020 ten. -- two

:46:24. > :46:29.28,000,000,020 ten. I think my friend back on the front thdn she

:46:30. > :46:32.has made an excellent speech outlining Labour's position. It

:46:33. > :46:39.seems that the something those opposite do not understand. It's

:46:40. > :46:45.just what part of people should not lose out to achieve that he's

:46:46. > :46:49.outlining. Why should certahn families lose out compared to

:46:50. > :46:55.families on tax credit and why won't they protect those people so they do

:46:56. > :47:01.not lose out? I will be covdring the transitional arrangements. H gently

:47:02. > :47:05.remind the honourable lady that when 10p income tax rate was changed

:47:06. > :47:11.where was the transitional arrangements put in place? We will

:47:12. > :47:15.be mindful of the advice we take. Does the Minister have access to any

:47:16. > :47:20.figures that point to the stccesses since 2010 in terms of the number of

:47:21. > :47:25.people in employment and thd number of people receiving benefits? I

:47:26. > :47:29.thank my honourable friend line was worked incredibly hard on hhs own

:47:30. > :47:33.constituency to help people get into work. Over the country over 2

:47:34. > :47:38.million more people are in work record numbers with record low

:47:39. > :47:50.numbers out of work. Welfard spending overall with top costing

:47:51. > :47:54.every household and extra ?3000 a year in 2010. The number of working

:47:55. > :47:58.people in poverty actually went up by about 20% and nearly one in five

:47:59. > :48:04.households have no one workhng and this was just too often the norm. To

:48:05. > :48:10.confirm that welfare spending under his Government has gone up now more

:48:11. > :48:14.than it has under any previous Government, reaching ?1 billion

:48:15. > :48:20.under the last government, ?130 billion more than the last Labour

:48:21. > :48:26.Government. In percentage tdrms it's now back to 2008-2009 levels. These

:48:27. > :48:29.reforms are key to doing thhs. To have a black open cheque-book was

:48:30. > :48:37.simply not an approach we are hard-working taxpayers would take. I

:48:38. > :48:41.think everybody understands the rationale for having a welf`re

:48:42. > :48:46.system that incentivises people to work. What I would like the Minister

:48:47. > :48:50.to explain is how these proposals, which means people have to work

:48:51. > :48:54.longer hours for the same money is actually going to achieve that

:48:55. > :49:00.purpose of incentivising people I will not try to make some progress

:49:01. > :49:04.so I can address this. The old approach of taking money from wages

:49:05. > :49:08.and recycling it back to hil and had those was not transform livds, it

:49:09. > :49:12.was trapping people. It did not provide the right incentives for

:49:13. > :49:15.support for people to get on and realise their ambitions and

:49:16. > :49:18.therefore our central appro`ch is about ensuring people are bdtter off

:49:19. > :49:26.than work and better off working more. I think he's been a lhttle bit

:49:27. > :49:32.too charitable to the party opposite. It may be cynical on my

:49:33. > :49:35.part, what their policies sought to do was create a hinterland of people

:49:36. > :49:38.wedded to welfare and relies upon wedded to welfare and relies upon

:49:39. > :49:43.the Labour Party. That is so through that at the election and thdy are

:49:44. > :49:46.not going back to that again. There is no need to feel you're bding

:49:47. > :49:55.cynical, the statistics makd that very clear. Universal Credit will

:49:56. > :50:00.allow people to have the dignity and respect that comes with havhng a

:50:01. > :50:05.job. Employment is at a record high, up 2 million since 2010.

:50:06. > :50:10.Unemployment down over 750000 by 20 ten. Claimant count at its lowest

:50:11. > :50:14.level since 1975. Number of people claiming made out of work bdnefits

:50:15. > :50:23.is followed by 1 million since 010. Wages are rising, 30 months

:50:24. > :50:28.consecutively higher than inflation. That is when living standards are up

:50:29. > :50:33.and business confidence is underpinning all this progrdss,

:50:34. > :50:37.something the opposition parties of their knowledge. Let me makd a

:50:38. > :50:44.little bit more progress. Universal Credit benefits is removing the

:50:45. > :50:50.barriers to work that existdd in the old system. The major reforls needed

:50:51. > :50:55.to our welfare system of 13 years, after 13 years of a Labour culture

:50:56. > :50:58.of dependency are not that difficult choices but it is designed to

:50:59. > :51:03.provide certainty for claim`nts and the right incentives to find work

:51:04. > :51:08.and crucially progress in work. This has always been at the heart of

:51:09. > :51:12.Universal Credit and contintes to be so. Universal Credit policy is

:51:13. > :51:16.unchanged since the summer budget, despite attempts by the opposition

:51:17. > :51:21.to suggest things to the contrary. It allows us to achieve the goal of

:51:22. > :51:26.achieving a surplus while costing less than the earlier years. This is

:51:27. > :51:30.a point I made at an early intervention. I want to remhnd the

:51:31. > :51:35.house of the incentives that Universal Credit creates and

:51:36. > :51:42.provides. A single paper of 65% means financial support is withdrawn

:51:43. > :51:47.at the predictable rate a loving claimants to understand the benefits

:51:48. > :51:51.of what an extends financial incentives to those working fewer

:51:52. > :51:55.than 16 hours a week and reloves the limit to the amount of covers

:51:56. > :52:00.someone can work each week. No one could understand why we had a

:52:01. > :52:05.welfare system that created an artificial barriers. Whilst we all

:52:06. > :52:09.understand the way Universal Credit is intended to work, does hd not

:52:10. > :52:16.understand there is an in-btilt disadvantage to those areas that

:52:17. > :52:21.were Universal Credit pilots, like part of my constituency. Because

:52:22. > :52:26.Universal Credit is being phased in across the country these cuts will

:52:27. > :52:30.hit those areas that were the early entrance into the Universal Credit

:52:31. > :52:38.programme much harder than other parts of the country. What we are

:52:39. > :52:41.seeing is those on Universal Credit are more likely to progress into

:52:42. > :52:47.work and I will come onto that in more detail a bit later on. One last

:52:48. > :52:53.one for now. He said earlier in response to an intervention it was a

:52:54. > :52:56.transitional arrangement, btt the trouble is people receiving

:52:57. > :53:02.Universal Credit will be full cut in April this year, they will be

:53:03. > :53:07.clobbered. I am coming on to those in detail so a little bit of

:53:08. > :53:10.patience. Crucially and unipuely, Universal Credit stays with you when

:53:11. > :53:14.you went to work until your earnings reach a certain level or yot can

:53:15. > :53:17.support yourself and this ghves claimants the confidence to start

:53:18. > :53:21.the job without going through the bureaucracy of changing the benefit

:53:22. > :53:26.claim. This is not just the idea of streamlining bureaucracy and

:53:27. > :53:30.Universal Credit is often portrayed, it is about having a single point of

:53:31. > :53:33.contact with the work coach to provide personalised support and

:53:34. > :53:36.guidance and this is the Unhversal Credit comes into its own. This is

:53:37. > :53:43.the bit I am very passionatd about because we all confident individuals

:53:44. > :53:50.and when we are faced with challenges we normally will go and

:53:51. > :53:54.take on those challenges but that isn't the case with everybody. To be

:53:55. > :53:57.able to give somebody that named personal contact when they `re

:53:58. > :54:05.navigating complicated benefit systems, dealing with indivhdual

:54:06. > :54:09.segments and this will allow what courts to help you develop xour

:54:10. > :54:14.role. It is not that we will just wish you all the best that xou have

:54:15. > :54:17.now secured a job, it gives you the ability to develop your rold,

:54:18. > :54:21.seeking to secure more hours, develop skills and confidence to

:54:22. > :54:24.progress through the grades. In other words, Universal Credht not

:54:25. > :54:28.only supports bill to move hnto a job or built a career. In breaking

:54:29. > :54:33.the cycle of dependency and creating opportunity.

:54:34. > :54:40.Can the Minister accept that we re talking about people who ard doing

:54:41. > :54:44.the hours but the rate of p`y is so low that it is more about

:54:45. > :54:50.productivity and the fact the Government is not creating the

:54:51. > :54:54.high-level types of jobs. Wd are too dependent on the service sector

:54:55. > :54:57.essentially low paid jobs, not jobs where people are actually gdtting a

:54:58. > :55:05.high rate of pay for the hotrs they are doing? Three quarters of jobs

:55:06. > :55:11.being created are at managerial level and the majority are

:55:12. > :55:15.friend was topping about thd friend was topping about thd

:55:16. > :55:21.benefits of Universal Credit. I have spoken to two Jobcentres and heard

:55:22. > :55:25.exactly that. Such good feedback, both from the job coaches and

:55:26. > :55:28.job-seekers themselves, it gives them more flexibility to work.

:55:29. > :55:33.Please confirm that this will continue because they want to be

:55:34. > :55:38.able to give more job-seekers the opportunity to be on Universal

:55:39. > :55:43.Credit. Thank you. It is thd importance of that personalhsed

:55:44. > :55:55.support. That is vital. We've seen it through experiences in lhfe. This

:55:56. > :56:01.is important. It is an example of the way the honourable friend has

:56:02. > :56:07.taken the time to go and visit a Universal Credit site. I wotld

:56:08. > :56:13.encourage people to do that. I spoke to someone piloting Univers`l Credit

:56:14. > :56:17.two weeks ago. Is the Minister seriously telling me single mother

:56:18. > :56:20.that I mentioned earlier, working full-time on the new nation`l

:56:21. > :56:25.minimum wage, that she should not worry about seeing that ?3000 drop

:56:26. > :56:27.in her income, as a result of these cuts because she has a personal work

:56:28. > :56:31.coach who will encourage her and coach who will encourage her and

:56:32. > :56:35.give for greater confidence and make sure she can get another job, maybe

:56:36. > :56:41.in management or something? Is he seriously saying this to thd

:56:42. > :56:45.country? First of all, I will go further on my invitation. I will

:56:46. > :56:48.join the Bible member if he wants to come and see some of this work in

:56:49. > :56:54.action. The he is worried about going on his own, I will be, in

:56:55. > :56:59.effect, his work coach. We're talking about a working lond parent

:57:00. > :57:01.doing 35 hours on the national minimum wage, who would be better

:57:02. > :57:08.off. We could all continue to trade... We can continue to trade

:57:09. > :57:15.examples that this is presuling that this is a static analysis. @nd I

:57:16. > :57:20.will be coming to address this. The evidence is clear. Universal Credit

:57:21. > :57:23.is working. Independent statistics show that under Universal Credit,

:57:24. > :57:29.people spent 50% more time looking for work. There are more likely to

:57:30. > :57:34.have been in work and when hn work, they are more and seek more hours.

:57:35. > :57:39.Universal Credit is supporthng people, whether they move in or out

:57:40. > :57:43.of work and focuses on getthng people into work and to stax in

:57:44. > :57:50.employment, where earnings hncrease and the number of working hours

:57:51. > :57:55.rises. Thank you. The public and commercial services union h`ve

:57:56. > :57:58.concerns cause it will affect the Government's on staff. What

:57:59. > :58:02.assessment has been made by the cuts to work allowance on the effect of

:58:03. > :58:15.employees in the Department for Work and Pensions? As I will explain

:58:16. > :58:19.this is not a static analyshs. To focus on the point about how we will

:58:20. > :58:24.support people, people will benefit from improved support. For those

:58:25. > :58:29.directly affected by changes to work allowance, we have been cardful to

:58:30. > :58:32.put measures in place. In addition to work coach support, they will

:58:33. > :58:36.have access to funding throtgh flexible support funds. This will

:58:37. > :58:40.help people retain work and increase earnings to things like trahning,

:58:41. > :58:44.travel and care, and we will support people to access this. In the longer

:58:45. > :58:47.term, we ensure protection for claimants when they move from legacy

:58:48. > :58:51.benefits to Universal Credit. We have always been clear that there

:58:52. > :58:54.will be no cash losers as the result of a managed migration of claimants

:58:55. > :59:04.from one system to another, as long as circumstances a missing. My last

:59:05. > :59:10.intervention. The Minister seriously telling me how is that the ?69

:59:11. > :59:17.million flexible support fund he has just mentioned, is in anywax going

:59:18. > :59:28.to make up for the ?3.2 billion lost to working families? You're missing

:59:29. > :59:35.the two parts. People going across to have cash protected. The fund is

:59:36. > :59:38.to help people navigate. I appreciate you giving way. H

:59:39. > :59:42.specifically wanted to come back to the point around the work coaches.

:59:43. > :59:49.In my constituency of Lincolnshire, In my constituency of Lincolnshire,

:59:50. > :59:56.the mapping exercise undert`ken was a out. So, I know the local

:59:57. > :00:02.authorities there cannot medt the needs for work coaches. That has

:00:03. > :00:07.been passed to the Citizens Advice Bureau. They also cannot manage the

:00:08. > :00:16.load. The figures they were given initially were incorrect. This is

:00:17. > :00:22.delivered through Jobcentres and the universal service, so we will have

:00:23. > :00:29.to discuss that a bit furthdr. Figures have been banded about. They

:00:30. > :00:32.were wildly inaccurate and based on a fundamental misunderstandhng of

:00:33. > :00:37.Universal Credit, hence why I am so keen to arrange a visit. Thd vast,

:00:38. > :00:41.vast majority of Universal Credit cases will not lose out as ` result

:00:42. > :00:46.of the changes because the leasure only affects those people who are in

:00:47. > :00:50.work. Most of those would h`ve received nothing under tax credits.

:00:51. > :00:55.That is not something I had seen the opposition campaigning to do

:00:56. > :01:02.anything on before. Univers`l Credit is a dynamic benefit. You h`d your

:01:03. > :01:07.turn. I will give way. We h`ve got to the point of his speech. The

:01:08. > :01:12.50,000 people who are today receiving Universal Credit, who are

:01:13. > :01:20.in work, they will see their benefit sharply cut in April. Thank you for

:01:21. > :01:24.that point. I will come onto those specific people. But in overall

:01:25. > :01:33.numbers, it is the vast majority. And we have to look at the bigger

:01:34. > :01:40.picture. A lot of the analysis has been static. Even that of the IFS. I

:01:41. > :01:44.know many of the speakers h`ve acknowledged this is a stathc

:01:45. > :01:48.analysis. Universal Credit hs not a stand-alone measure. It is part of a

:01:49. > :01:56.wider, dynamic package of rdforms to support families in work and make

:01:57. > :02:03.sure workplace. We will savd taxpayers over ?900 a year. We

:02:04. > :02:06.pledged to raise this by thd end of the parliament. The national living

:02:07. > :02:11.wage will come into effect from April. That will benefit directly

:02:12. > :02:18.2.75 million people. It is forecast to reach over ?9 per hour. That

:02:19. > :02:22.might upset many of the opposition who campaigned for just ?8 per hour,

:02:23. > :02:30.but we felt that did not go far enough. I appreciate the honourable

:02:31. > :02:36.gentleman giving way. For clarification, the House of Commons

:02:37. > :02:39.have quoted me figures. So they are wrong, because according to them, a

:02:40. > :02:45.single parent working full-time on a minimum wage, would be nearly ? 000

:02:46. > :02:52.a year worse off than they would have been on tax credit. I would

:02:53. > :03:00.appreciate clarification. Thank you. I have worked closely on our

:03:01. > :03:08.commitment to have the employment gap... Table Bay cash protected as

:03:09. > :03:16.they transferred over. They will not be worse off. We have rising wages.

:03:17. > :03:18.We have near zero inflation. We have strong economic growth, delhvering

:03:19. > :03:23.record jobs and creating opportunities for people to get into

:03:24. > :03:26.work, to increase their hours. We simplify the benefit system,

:03:27. > :03:30.reducing the potential for claimants to miss out on money they are

:03:31. > :03:34.entitled to. And crucially, allowing them time to focus on actually

:03:35. > :03:41.finding the work, rather th`n navigating the complex chaotic

:03:42. > :03:51.system. It is 50% more time. Work coaches are there to support people

:03:52. > :03:56.in work. And also, childcard. We are increasing the childcare offer.

:03:57. > :04:00.Universal Credit currently covers up to 70% of eligible childcard costs

:04:01. > :04:07.and that will increase to 84% from April. It will make a huge

:04:08. > :04:17.difference to people's lines. We're also doubling free childcard to 30

:04:18. > :04:25.hours for working parents. Tax free childcare from early 2017 whll give

:04:26. > :04:29.those not in receipt of Universal Credit another ?2000 per chhld per

:04:30. > :04:33.year or up to ?4000 for a dhsabled child. All measures are deshgned to

:04:34. > :04:45.help families keep more of the money we earn. We will make it re`l

:04:46. > :04:48.difference to people. I would like to divert your attention to

:04:49. > :04:54.homelessness. Articulate, the rise of homelessness in London. @ group

:04:55. > :04:59.of charities has said the rhse in homelessness in London is dte to the

:05:00. > :05:02.chronic housing shortage, btt also cuts to welfare reform and Social

:05:03. > :05:07.Security, particularly Univdrsal Credit. I don't know if the Minister

:05:08. > :05:14.is aware but last year, homdlessness rose to 7500 people now sledping

:05:15. > :05:19.rough on the streets of London. The minister recognised when Unhversal

:05:20. > :05:30.Credit will exacerbate this problem? Point out... ? And intervention must

:05:31. > :05:34.be short. I think he has thd gist. I thank the honourable lady. We are

:05:35. > :05:37.committed to building more affordable housing, in London in

:05:38. > :05:44.particular. I welcome the mdasures the Chancellor set out to m`ke that

:05:45. > :05:48.happen. She can laugh but wd saw record low house-building under the

:05:49. > :05:55.last Labour Government. One last intervention. I would like to ask if

:05:56. > :05:58.the Minister has done an assessment of how many people on Universal

:05:59. > :06:04.Credit would be able to afford even a starter home in London? That is

:06:05. > :06:09.why we have to create opportunity, so people can get into work,

:06:10. > :06:18.increase their hours... The honourable lady does not like

:06:19. > :06:23.creating opportunity. We have to allow people from all backgrounds to

:06:24. > :06:26.get that opportunity. We, as a party, value the prospect of

:06:27. > :06:37.potential people having homeownership. In conclusion, I ..

:06:38. > :06:41.Does he agree that the welf`re system spiralled out of control

:06:42. > :06:44.under the last Government? Hn the words of Alistair Darling, the

:06:45. > :06:48.former Chancellor, it ended up subsidising low wages in th`t was

:06:49. > :06:58.never intended. Is it not rhght that these reforms will address that It

:06:59. > :07:00.was ?3000 per hard-working family under the last Labour Government.

:07:01. > :07:06.The decision to reverse all these will have to be paid for. Wd cannot

:07:07. > :07:09.just magically print money. It might help any potential future rdshuffle

:07:10. > :07:18.to promise that. But back in the real world, it means life would be

:07:19. > :07:26.more difficult for hard-working people. Universal Credit boots work

:07:27. > :07:31.first and ensures people can improve the quality of their lives. We want

:07:32. > :07:36.to return welfare spending to a sustainable level. It will be

:07:37. > :07:44.delivered through reform, stpport and crucially, creating

:07:45. > :07:49.opportunities. Thank you, M`dam Deputy Speaker. Can I wish xou, and

:07:50. > :07:53.other members of the House, a good New Year? I would like to bdgin by

:07:54. > :07:57.thanking the opposition and the honourable member for Pontypridd for

:07:58. > :08:02.bringing forward a motion for this debate today, which the SNP will be

:08:03. > :08:07.happy to support. Today feels a bit like Groundhog Day. We're d`ting the

:08:08. > :08:12.adverse impact of the Government Social Security changes on people in

:08:13. > :08:16.low-paid work. And once agahn, we, on these benches, ask why low-income

:08:17. > :08:20.families are being asked to pay the heaviest price for austeritx, while

:08:21. > :08:22.low-paid workers, in partictlar once again find themselves on the

:08:23. > :08:34.front line? It was very quickly apparent that

:08:35. > :08:39.this sort was still hanging over many a low paid household sdt to be

:08:40. > :08:43.hammered by tax credits cuts. It has been a short reprieve because in

:08:44. > :08:47.April this year the reductions are the work allowance under Unhversal

:08:48. > :08:52.Credit will hit many of the same low income families when it comds into

:08:53. > :08:55.effect. When Universal Credht was first introduced in the last

:08:56. > :09:00.Parliament, some lofty and extravagant claims were madd for it,

:09:01. > :09:04.some of which we have heard of today. It was going to simplify and

:09:05. > :09:10.streamline the benefit systdm, be much more flexible and make it

:09:11. > :09:13.easier for people to move in and out of work, reflecting the realities of

:09:14. > :09:18.the modern labour market and above all, remove the benefit trap by

:09:19. > :09:23.tackling financial disincentives to enter the workforce. It would create

:09:24. > :09:27.better work incentives and lake work pay but improve the incentives to

:09:28. > :09:32.move into better paid work overtime. It was a grand plan. The re`lity has

:09:33. > :09:39.been very different. I don't need to dwell too long in the technhcal and

:09:40. > :09:44.management problems that has beset Universal Credit since its beginning

:09:45. > :09:48.except that it has been repdated delays and rebooted several times

:09:49. > :09:53.and now is unlikely to be ftlly implemented until 2021 at the

:09:54. > :09:58.earliest. What I think is f`r more telling of how far the whold project

:09:59. > :10:02.of Universal Credit has str`yed from its original objectives. Thd

:10:03. > :10:07.cornerstone of its ailing policy was it would improve work incentives and

:10:08. > :10:10.tackle poverty. That cornerstone has crumbled under the weight of a

:10:11. > :10:17.misconceived, psychologically driven and quite unnecessarily austerity of

:10:18. > :10:21.agenda through this Governmdnt has chosen to appeal lies low income

:10:22. > :10:23.families and make them pay ` disproportionate price for the

:10:24. > :10:29.economic scale the past and present governments. By cutting the work

:10:30. > :10:33.allowance the Government is cutting the very aspect of Universal Credit

:10:34. > :10:37.that creates a work incentives, so all the good progress that has been

:10:38. > :10:44.made will be an done very qtickly after April. I will give wax. With

:10:45. > :10:50.my friends might agree with me that one of the reasons why it mxself and

:10:51. > :10:53.honourable members get so p`ssionate about this issue is that as people

:10:54. > :10:58.who have previously been recipients of benefits have now been able to

:10:59. > :11:04.aspire to do better things `nd we pay our taxes, but that was because

:11:05. > :11:06.of a Labour Government and this Government is appalling that ladder

:11:07. > :11:13.up for people in need and ddserve that helped. I am conscious of the

:11:14. > :11:16.honourable lady represents `n area that has been at the forefront of

:11:17. > :11:19.the pilot scheme for this and I hope I will opportunity later on to

:11:20. > :11:23.address some of the issues. She makes a valid point that thd

:11:24. > :11:29.economic recession hit people very hard indeed and the people hit the

:11:30. > :11:35.hardest were those old with the vulnerable employment, the lost

:11:36. > :11:43.insecure jobs and the recovdry has not given them the job security they

:11:44. > :11:46.hoped for. I will give way. She is making interesting points, but the

:11:47. > :11:52.facts don't quite support some of what she is saying. Is it not a fact

:11:53. > :11:57.that Universal Credit systel is incentivising people into work, the

:11:58. > :12:00.figures speak for themselves. 7 % of Universal Credit claimants hn the

:12:01. > :12:06.first nine months move from welfare to work. It is working. My whole

:12:07. > :12:11.point is any progress that has been made will be undone if you remove

:12:12. > :12:15.the work incentives, which hs the work allowance. It is the aspect of

:12:16. > :12:19.Universal Credit that makes it possible for people to actu`lly

:12:20. > :12:23.learn more when the work. The reality is by cutting the work

:12:24. > :12:27.allowance the Government is going to impose an eye watering level of

:12:28. > :12:30.marginal taxation of people in low paid jobs and make it harder than

:12:31. > :12:34.ever for those from lower income households to be out of the poverty

:12:35. > :12:39.trap. If the Government was serious about making work pay and boosting

:12:40. > :12:44.the UK's productivity and if they actually wanted to help people get

:12:45. > :12:47.on they would be increasing the work allowance, not reducing it. That

:12:48. > :12:54.would be genuinely progresshve measure and actively help those in

:12:55. > :12:58.low paid work. Is her argumdnt is not also supported by the Institute

:12:59. > :13:04.for Fiscal Studies in a report said, the cuts to do what allowance we can

:13:05. > :13:08.incentives for families to have someone in work? I think lots of

:13:09. > :13:17.stink tanks have been queuehng up to point out how this major relove the

:13:18. > :13:21.work incentives. -- think t`nk. To increase the work allowance would be

:13:22. > :13:26.much more progressive measure that raising the personal tax allowance.

:13:27. > :13:34.Higher rate taxpayers benefht of much more than anyone on low paid

:13:35. > :13:37.work. The cuts to the Universal Credit what allowances are

:13:38. > :13:41.introduced via the Amendment regulations that were considered

:13:42. > :13:46.very negative resolution procedure and by a Delegated Legislathon

:13:47. > :13:49.Committee in November. My honourable friend for Glasgow South West are

:13:50. > :13:53.posted at the time because ht was clear to him and to me that reducing

:13:54. > :13:58.the at a hostel can earn before Universal Credit is reduced would

:13:59. > :14:02.hurt low income families, in certain circumstances, very hard indeed and

:14:03. > :14:06.remove work incentives from those households. It gives me gre`t

:14:07. > :14:08.concern they were enacted through delegated legislation inste`d of

:14:09. > :14:12.being more fully debated in this chamber and without that level of

:14:13. > :14:20.scrutiny that I think the consequences merit, as far `s I

:14:21. > :14:25.know, the DWP has yet to implement impact assessment for these changes.

:14:26. > :14:29.Therefore we are dependent on external bodies for impact `nalysis

:14:30. > :14:34.and I would be grateful if linisters could see if they will publhsh any

:14:35. > :14:36.impact assessment, given thd Social security advisory committee has

:14:37. > :14:42.expressed concerns about thd adequacy of the evidence base for

:14:43. > :14:48.evaluating the changes. We can spout as much hot air and this ch`mber as

:14:49. > :14:52.we like, but if we lack the proper evidence or use it selectivdly then

:14:53. > :14:56.we will feel the people who depend on the support of our social

:14:57. > :15:02.security system. In late December the Social security and child

:15:03. > :15:06.poverty commission said the changes to work the week that Universal

:15:07. > :15:10.Credit is largely negative jaw to the reduction in water allowances.

:15:11. > :15:16.Claimants to pay income tax will only keep 24p in every extr` pound

:15:17. > :15:22.that they own. They would bd to earn an extra ?210 a week to makd up the

:15:23. > :15:25.losses from a reduced work allowance. That's a staggerhng rate

:15:26. > :15:30.of marginal taxation and makes a mockery of any motion there will be

:15:31. > :15:34.work incentives left in the Universal Credit. It is also

:15:35. > :15:38.important to get away from the false idea creeping into the day-to-day

:15:39. > :15:43.that there are taxpayers and then there are people on benefits. The

:15:44. > :15:47.reality as most of the people giving work allowances, the clue is in the

:15:48. > :15:50.name, it is a work allowancd for people who are working. It hs for

:15:51. > :15:57.people working in low paid jobs I will give way to the jet lag. I ve

:15:58. > :16:03.been listening carefully to what she has been saying and she does say it

:16:04. > :16:07.is very important the full data and alternatives are exposed. Would you

:16:08. > :16:11.like to set out the implications of the route she would prefer `s the

:16:12. > :16:15.rebellion and how that would be affordable? I will happily do that

:16:16. > :16:20.because prior to the general election the SNP set out in some

:16:21. > :16:27.detail how it had an altern`tive is to austerity that was entirdly

:16:28. > :16:32.costed. What we were keen to point out is austerity is a choicd because

:16:33. > :16:35.you can balance the books whthout austerity and Phillies ?140 billion

:16:36. > :16:40.for investment in public services and that would be much bettdr way

:16:41. > :16:45.and also sensible way of dohng business. I would refer him to our

:16:46. > :16:49.manifesto. The honourable gdntleman needs to know and might be

:16:50. > :16:54.interested to know we actually proposed in that manifesto we would

:16:55. > :16:58.increase the work allowances by 20% to create the exact incentive that

:16:59. > :17:01.the Government says it wants the great, but seems to be pullhng the

:17:02. > :17:07.rug out from underneath. I will not way again but I will make some

:17:08. > :17:13.progress. I am a bit conscious of time. The commission on sochal

:17:14. > :17:16.mobility and Child poverty `lso pointed out the single parent

:17:17. > :17:20.working full-time on the minimum wage and the receiving zero help

:17:21. > :17:26.with housing costs would lose ? 0 a week. In what fantasy world is that,

:17:27. > :17:29.to making work pay? Many parents working hard and struggled to

:17:30. > :17:34.support their families will find themselves substantially worse off.

:17:35. > :17:37.There is enormous complexitx of the impact of these cuts the work

:17:38. > :17:41.allowance depending on a range of factors including number of adults

:17:42. > :17:47.in the hustle and if housing costs are included. As has been s`id

:17:48. > :17:49.already, single parents, but also the self-employed are likelx to be

:17:50. > :17:52.the worst hit but there will be painful and individuals

:17:53. > :17:55.circumstances. The Institutd for Fiscal Studies as part of the doubt

:17:56. > :17:58.there will be more losers than winners under these changes and the

:17:59. > :18:03.resolution foundation estim`tes working families with children or a

:18:04. > :18:10.Universal Credit will be on average ?1300 worse off by 2020. Thd ISS

:18:11. > :18:16.estimate overall 2.6 million families across the UK will be worse

:18:17. > :18:20.off by an average of ?1600 ` year. Let's not pretend any more, to

:18:21. > :18:23.ourselves or to the public, but Universal Credit will creatd work

:18:24. > :18:28.incentives and tackle in work poverty. It is not. For most of the

:18:29. > :18:34.people of big it will make things worse. I will give way. I would be

:18:35. > :18:39.interested to know why it is then that to all people going through the

:18:40. > :18:45.Universal Credit system find employment rather than on the

:18:46. > :18:48.traditional job-seekers method. We're talking about a changd due to

:18:49. > :18:52.commence in April that will undercut the work incentives and the good

:18:53. > :18:55.work incentives out of Univdrsal Credit. What allowance, the thing

:18:56. > :19:00.that helps make Universal Credit make work pay, the cornerstone, and

:19:01. > :19:05.if you take that out then you have just got another benefit tr`p likely

:19:06. > :19:12.what it is trying to replacd. I want to pick up the issue raised earlier

:19:13. > :19:15.by the honourable member on the Government was my response to the

:19:16. > :19:19.Social security advisory colmittee or occasional paper number 49

:19:20. > :19:22.Universal Credit where they said they expect limits to respond to

:19:23. > :19:27.cuts in the wok allowance bx, actively seeking more work. And what

:19:28. > :19:31.we have already heard about the disincentives caused by high rates

:19:32. > :19:35.and marginal taxation that hs simply wishful thinking. I think the

:19:36. > :19:39.secretary of state and thosd on the Government benches are labotring

:19:40. > :19:43.under the misapprehension that people in a low paid jobs. What work

:19:44. > :19:47.as hard as those in highly paid jobs and that is somewhat easy to pick up

:19:48. > :19:52.extra wok. Whether another wee job or longer hours. Low paid jobs are

:19:53. > :19:57.often the most physically ddmanding, most insecure and was exhausting.

:19:58. > :20:00.Earlier yesterday morning when I was Aberdeenshire at past roadblocks

:20:01. > :20:07.were members already working in the pouring rain -- roadworks. They were

:20:08. > :20:11.out of the crack of dawn setting up temporary traffic lights. They want

:20:12. > :20:16.beyond minimum wage but not high earners and some of them undoubtedly

:20:17. > :20:20.will be families receiving tax credits or Universal Credit. I

:20:21. > :20:25.couldn't help like myself how lucky I am to work indoors at this time of

:20:26. > :20:30.year. Both manual workers at the exact sort of folk who will be asked

:20:31. > :20:36.to work extra hours of what a second job. I will give way. She is making

:20:37. > :20:39.an excellent speech. As she agree with me it is fundamentally

:20:40. > :20:44.offensive to those workers `nd all workers on low wages for thd

:20:45. > :20:47.secretary of state and his linisters because that will revert to the

:20:48. > :20:52.dynamic effects that are gohng to be introduced by this new systdm. Are

:20:53. > :20:59.these people on dynamic, working full-time in the pouring rahn? They

:21:00. > :21:01.were definitely showing is there an item they met Dame Millicent

:21:02. > :21:09.yesterday morning and I was glad I did not work with them yestdrday. I

:21:10. > :21:13.partly agree. I think the rdality of the labour market and insectrity of

:21:14. > :21:16.the modern labour market is people moved in and out of pipe work a lot

:21:17. > :21:23.more than in the past and it is important we do manage to h`ve a

:21:24. > :21:26.system that responds to that. My problem, and I hope to come to see a

:21:27. > :21:29.bit about this later on, is the Government is undermining its own

:21:30. > :21:38.process by its transitional arrangements. There are people all

:21:39. > :21:42.over my constituency and I'l sure if everybody's constituencies who work

:21:43. > :21:46.extremely hard in piling on low paid, not exactly pleasant jobs that

:21:47. > :21:50.are neither interesting not glamorous and often where jtggling

:21:51. > :21:55.family responsibilities, looking after children or elderly or infirm

:21:56. > :21:59.relatives. Taking on extra hour was spent not just on that weren't being

:22:00. > :22:03.available but being available at a time when they have access to

:22:04. > :22:08.childcare. Young children c`n get themselves into school in the

:22:09. > :22:13.morning, they merely can walk on their own and can be left unattended

:22:14. > :22:18.at home or get their own te`. Many working parents have to juggle

:22:19. > :22:22.family and work commitments and one of the reason so many women are

:22:23. > :22:26.trapped in low paid, low skhll jobs, even if they have high level

:22:27. > :22:29.qualifications as they are the primary carer and the household and

:22:30. > :22:37.try to fit work around their responsibilities. It is a lot easier

:22:38. > :22:41.to do that any well-paid job. I have a question that it was the puestion

:22:42. > :22:46.posed by my friend from Glasgow or so. Many of those in low pahd jobs

:22:47. > :22:50.in Government departments, hncluding the DWP, receive tax credits at the

:22:51. > :22:54.moment or Universal Credit. Will their employer but then if xou extra

:22:55. > :23:01.hours to compensate them for the loss of their work allowancd? Well

:23:02. > :23:06.the DWP specifically offer dxtra hours to its own staff were set to

:23:07. > :23:09.lose out, will be imposed conditionality on the run stuff

:23:10. > :23:14.instead? If the Government can't award, to support its own staff in

:23:15. > :23:15.my opinion, it has no busindss in putting the onus on other elployers

:23:16. > :23:27.to conjure up extra hours. In terms of the impact of these

:23:28. > :23:33.cuts, it is important we understand, no, I have moved on, it is hmportant

:23:34. > :23:36.to understand that new clailants for Universal Credit will be

:23:37. > :23:40.significantly disadvantaged compared to those still claiming unddr the

:23:41. > :23:44.old tax credit regime. We wdre told there will be transitional

:23:45. > :23:50.protections for those migrating but my understanding is that thdse will

:23:51. > :23:57.evaporate if there is a significant change in someone's circumstances

:23:58. > :24:01.such as a new job, a baby or the breakdown of a relationship. In the

:24:02. > :24:06.coming year a couple with two children will take home nearly 800

:24:07. > :24:11.a year more on the old systdm then they will if they have been moved to

:24:12. > :24:15.Universal Credit. That is a huge disincentive to change your

:24:16. > :24:18.circumstances. People on tight budgets will be reluctant to

:24:19. > :24:24.increase their hours or takd a promotion if it leaves them worse

:24:25. > :24:30.off, undermining work incentives and making people reluctant to love and

:24:31. > :24:36.it will erode the dynamism of the system by which the Governmdnt has

:24:37. > :24:40.set such store today. These disparities will cause ill feeling

:24:41. > :24:45.in our communities. You could have co-workers doing the same job,

:24:46. > :24:50.earning the same salary, living in similar circumstances who rdceive

:24:51. > :24:54.wildly differing support. I don t know how the Government plans to

:24:55. > :25:01.sell but I would not want to justify it to my in situ wants. It hs unfair

:25:02. > :25:05.but what is also problematic is that parts of the UK have been

:25:06. > :25:09.transitioning to Universal Credit before others so there will be

:25:10. > :25:16.regional disparities in are`s where many claimants have migrated. Why

:25:17. > :25:21.should people in Hammersmith, Rugby, Inverness, the areas where ht has

:25:22. > :25:25.been rolled out first, recehve less support than those in towns and

:25:26. > :25:29.cities last in the queue? The Government admits there will be

:25:30. > :25:35.700,000 people still on the old system by the end of next ydar and

:25:36. > :25:40.that is a recipe of discontdnt for those who serve as guinea phgs.

:25:41. > :25:44.Cutting work allowances will not achieve the outcomes the Government

:25:45. > :25:51.claims. The weight to help hs to create jobs and boost activhty,

:25:52. > :25:57.boosting tax receipts. We nded to name these cuts for what thdy are,

:25:58. > :26:01.and assault on people in low paid work as part of a failed austerity

:26:02. > :26:06.programme that has held back economic recovery. The Government

:26:07. > :26:11.have made the wrong choice `nd have a chance to date to rethink these

:26:12. > :26:14.cuts that will reduce work incentives and trapped families in

:26:15. > :26:20.poverty. There is another thought of two austerity. Cutting work

:26:21. > :26:25.allowances will hurt working people and I hope those who expressed

:26:26. > :26:29.reservations about tax credht proposals understand this whll hurt

:26:30. > :26:37.many of the same people in the same way. I hope those people will join

:26:38. > :26:41.us in the lobby this afternoon. It will be obvious to the host that

:26:42. > :26:45.there are many people wishing to speak in the debate and we have

:26:46. > :26:50.limited time because the risk another debate following thhs one. I

:26:51. > :26:55.hope in the spirit of the h`ppiness of the New Year I will not have to

:26:56. > :27:01.impose a formal time-limit but members well, out of respect for

:27:02. > :27:05.other members and other points of view, take six minutes or ldss to

:27:06. > :27:10.complete their contributions this afternoon. We will see how the

:27:11. > :27:15.experiment works, if it doesn't work we will go back to the bad old way

:27:16. > :27:24.of me telling you you have to stop. Craig Williams. In the interests,

:27:25. > :27:30.can I join in wishing everyone a happy New Year and I will do my best

:27:31. > :27:33.to keep under six minutes. H rise to support the Government and welcome

:27:34. > :27:34.Universal Credit as one of the reforms of this

:27:35. > :27:45.I am proud to associate mysdlf with. At its heart is our desire to ensure

:27:46. > :27:48.it always pays to go out and work. Families around the country will be

:27:49. > :27:53.better off at the end of thhs Parliament with more of thehr own

:27:54. > :27:56.income coming from their own earnings rather than the taxpayer.

:27:57. > :28:01.The Government is determined to set our welfare system on an evdn

:28:02. > :28:08.footing, that previous systdm did not work to provide those whlling to

:28:09. > :28:14.work with incentives, it has often paid more to be on benefits than in

:28:15. > :28:19.work and this is not sustainable. As the minister set out, we ard trying

:28:20. > :28:26.to move written from that low-wage high welfare high tax society to a

:28:27. > :28:31.higher wage, low welfare and low tax society and this should be seen

:28:32. > :28:35.within that. We need to enstre our system protects the most vulnerable

:28:36. > :28:40.and it is important to give context given what we have heard th`t under

:28:41. > :28:45.the last Labour government 0.4 million people spent most of that

:28:46. > :28:50.Kate trapped on photo work benefits and a number of households no member

:28:51. > :28:55.had worked nearly doubled. The number of working age peopld in

:28:56. > :29:00.poverty rose by around 20%. Not only did not paid to be in work of those

:29:01. > :29:05.who wanted to bone themselvds trapped or on benefits or worse The

:29:06. > :29:10.reforms have already seen improvement in employment

:29:11. > :29:17.statistics, with employment now over 31 million, an increase of over 2

:29:18. > :29:22.million from 2010. Wages ard rising, living standards are up and we feel

:29:23. > :29:26.it is the right time to makd sure the barriers to work are no longer a

:29:27. > :29:33.factor in employment. Universal Credit is designed to provide that

:29:34. > :29:37.certainty and as a member of the Work and Pensions committee I want

:29:38. > :29:43.to set out by an impressed with that phasing in of the Department to

:29:44. > :29:48.Universal Credit. People have criticised the slowness of ht but

:29:49. > :29:53.that willingness to pause, to reflect, to change and start again

:29:54. > :29:57.is a massive testament to this department and I encourage ht to

:29:58. > :30:04.continue and not be rushed by people. This is a huge change, once

:30:05. > :30:10.I am proud of, and it will help people and create opportunities It

:30:11. > :30:17.is worth reiterating that the taper off 65% means financial support is

:30:18. > :30:21.withdrawn at a predictable rate helping claimants to understand

:30:22. > :30:24.that, there is a bit of smoke and mirrors about that but that is the

:30:25. > :30:30.difference between tax credhts and these changes, the taper is

:30:31. > :30:33.different from what was proposed and the smoke and mirrors we ard hearing

:30:34. > :30:41.from opposite benches will be seen through. I will give way. I am

:30:42. > :30:45.grateful to him for giving way. Does he understand that what we have

:30:46. > :30:51.argued is after the cuts we are urging the Government to reverse

:30:52. > :30:57.today, 6000 people in his constituency will be worse off in

:30:58. > :31:03.2020 than otherwise? I simply do not accept that. What would be lore

:31:04. > :31:07.credible on the Shadow Secrdtary of State is to come here with `

:31:08. > :31:13.practical approach to changd the system rather than up posing

:31:14. > :31:17.everything this Government tried to do, the last Labour governmdnt

:31:18. > :31:23.failed this country and field corridor north, and all we need to

:31:24. > :31:27.see is to look at the Labour Welsh Government to see their track record

:31:28. > :31:36.at creating opportunities and I stand by these changes. Thank you.

:31:37. > :31:41.Not only does Universal Credit encourage people into work, it

:31:42. > :31:48.supports them through the process, and I want to pay tribute working

:31:49. > :31:51.with organisations like Reading Partnership that produced a survey

:31:52. > :31:57.among young people of barridrs to work and one thing they said was

:31:58. > :32:01.about consistent career advhce and these work coaches will change

:32:02. > :32:04.things around for a youth opportunities, having somebody to

:32:05. > :32:09.look after you through the Pearl journey is something I welcome and I

:32:10. > :32:15.do not think the opponent should be as jovial about that. This gives

:32:16. > :32:21.claimants the confidence to start a job without going through the Rocker

:32:22. > :32:27.C of changing a benefit clahm. We need to appreciate the

:32:28. > :32:31.transformational element, 98% of people who sign on did it online, a

:32:32. > :32:37.massive change in how we opdrate and it is welcome. It is being rolled

:32:38. > :32:41.out in a safe and controlled manager, the minister already

:32:42. > :32:49.touched on this but it is worth dwelling on, if we look at findings

:32:50. > :32:54.from September 2015, it does show that 71% of Universal Credit

:32:55. > :32:59.claimants moved into work in the first nine months of the cl`im,

:33:00. > :33:05.compared to 63% of GSA clailants. Universal Credit claimants on

:33:06. > :33:11.average work 12 days more than comparable GSA claimants and we need

:33:12. > :33:16.to recognise that. We need to provide proper support to m`ke sure

:33:17. > :33:22.people can achieve their ambitions and do not remain trapped in an

:33:23. > :33:26.unfair system like the prevhous one. We have it in place measures to

:33:27. > :33:31.affect changes to work allowance, the transitional arrangements are in

:33:32. > :33:37.place which ensure claimants who are migrated onto Universal Credit, it

:33:38. > :33:44.is worth emphasising this, by DWP do not see their benefit entitlements

:33:45. > :33:50.fall in cash terms. I want to dwell on the taper relief because it

:33:51. > :33:54.remains at 65% and I want to see this over because there was smoke

:33:55. > :33:59.and mirrors from the Shadow Secretary for state, unlike the

:34:00. > :34:03.planned tax credit changes which would have seen a rise in the taper,

:34:04. > :34:09.the savings are achieved without increasing the effective marginal

:34:10. > :34:14.loss, a benefit for every ?0 earned as a claimant moves into work or

:34:15. > :34:20.takes more hours, meaning claimants are not affected. I am award you

:34:21. > :34:26.will want to get everyone end so I will conclude, but this is ` huge,

:34:27. > :34:30.massive transition from a sxstem that the last Labour governlent

:34:31. > :34:36.presided over which just is not fit for purpose, isn't sustainable and

:34:37. > :34:42.isn't affordable for this country. I welcome the changes, I welcome the

:34:43. > :34:47.Universal Credit roll out and as a member of the Work and Penshons

:34:48. > :34:56.committee will rule -- welcome the roll out thus far. I think Tniversal

:34:57. > :35:00.Credit is a sensible idea, ht has potential to make this systdm

:35:01. > :35:04.simpler, in particular to m`ke it clearer to people what their

:35:05. > :35:11.financial position will be hf they move into work and we always said

:35:12. > :35:15.that is set, it is not a panacea, ministers often tell us it hs a

:35:16. > :35:22.solution to old problems, btt it is a helpful step, its deliverx has

:35:23. > :35:25.been a shambles. It went very badly wrong at the start, ministers

:35:26. > :35:33.accepted terrible advice about how long this would take, that July 20

:35:34. > :35:38.10th green paper on 21st-century welfare said the IT changes that

:35:39. > :35:46.would be necessary to delivdr Universal Credit would not

:35:47. > :35:50.constitute a major IT project. How anybody persuaded themselves that

:35:51. > :35:55.replacing the entire buffet system would not be a major IT project is

:35:56. > :36:00.beyond me but that was the naivety that underpinned the leadership of

:36:01. > :36:05.the project at the outset, warnings from the side of the House `nd

:36:06. > :36:10.others were cheerily waved `side and it was not until September 2013 when

:36:11. > :36:16.the National Audit Office rdported that shafts of light were trained on

:36:17. > :36:19.what was going on, they said the programme suffered from weak

:36:20. > :36:27.management, and effective control and poor governance, and thdy were

:36:28. > :36:32.right. I will give way. Does he agree that during his distinguished

:36:33. > :36:39.spell in office in government, there was a considerable waste of

:36:40. > :36:43.taxpayers' money on IT projdcts and those lessons have now been applied

:36:44. > :36:50.and there is significant incremental progress being made in the delivery

:36:51. > :36:56.of this reform? We were told in 2010 those lessons had been learned and

:36:57. > :37:02.it would be different. It is true we have not got a major IT project we

:37:03. > :37:06.have two major IT projects hn parallel, the live service `nd

:37:07. > :37:11.digital service. Nobody has yet told us when those systems will be

:37:12. > :37:17.brought together and undoubtedly large amounts of money are being

:37:18. > :37:20.wasted, but I wanted to spend a couple of minutes addressing the

:37:21. > :37:27.question of how far behind schedule is Universal Credit now? Thhs

:37:28. > :37:31.Secretary for state always tells us, and if we spoke at the beginning of

:37:32. > :37:36.this debate, he would have told us it is on track because he always

:37:37. > :37:40.said that. The Office for Btdget Responsibility at the Autumn

:37:41. > :37:45.Statement told us the project has been substantively delayed on at

:37:46. > :37:51.least three occasions, so how far behind is it? When it began we were

:37:52. > :37:58.told the transition would bd complete in 2017, and absurd claim

:37:59. > :38:03.but that was the claim. In 2012 the belief was transition would take

:38:04. > :38:08.five years from that point. Having failed to deliver on that d`te,

:38:09. > :38:17.ministers have refused to announce a risk arrived date, -- revisdd date.

:38:18. > :38:20.The Autumn Statement indicated the Government now indicates and the

:38:21. > :38:26.honourable member for buck, made this point in her speech, the

:38:27. > :38:32.Government appears to expect the roll-out to be complete by 2021 so

:38:33. > :38:37.exactly as in 2012, the Govdrnment in 2016 now expects the roll out of

:38:38. > :38:42.Universal Credit to take another five years from the state. The

:38:43. > :38:52.completion date has gone back for years in the last four years.

:38:53. > :38:59.In the desert to allege that universal credit is running for

:39:00. > :39:04.years later? Let's look at some other milestones, not just the

:39:05. > :39:10.completion date. A press release was published on the first Novelber 2011

:39:11. > :39:15.which said, over 1 million people will be claiming universal credit by

:39:16. > :39:23.April 2014, the Work and Pensions Secretary announced. April 2014 is

:39:24. > :39:30.nearly two years ago and thdy are not 1 million people receivhng, the

:39:31. > :39:33.latest figure is 5000. The Office for Budget Responsibility now

:39:34. > :39:43.expects there will be 1 million by April 20 18. Let's take another one.

:39:44. > :39:55.The Secretary of State annotnced in another press release, on 24th of

:39:56. > :40:01.May 2012, all-new claims to current benefits and credits will bd

:40:02. > :40:05.entirely phased out by April 20 14. They have not been willing to

:40:06. > :40:14.announce when they now expect all-new claims to be phased out but

:40:15. > :40:18.the House of Commons librarx has worked out by reading betwedn the

:40:19. > :40:23.lines of opaque statements from ministers that they now expdct new

:40:24. > :40:29.claims to be closed down by June 2000 18. That is a bit more than

:40:30. > :40:39.four years late compared to what we were originally told. Universal

:40:40. > :40:45.credit is at least four years late. It will undoubtedly slept for that

:40:46. > :40:51.and equally certainly we will continue to be told it is on track.

:40:52. > :40:54.Management has been a shambles and they are still key outstandhng

:40:55. > :41:00.policy issues we have not bden told about. Which recipients are going to

:41:01. > :41:06.be entitled to free school leals for their children. We have been waiting

:41:07. > :41:08.for an answer to that for fhve years and it makes an enormous difference

:41:09. > :41:14.because the way the governmdnt appears to be intending to `nswer

:41:15. > :41:17.that question is going to introduce a huge new cliff edge into the

:41:18. > :41:22.Social Security system far worse than anything in the prior system,

:41:23. > :41:30.even though the whole point was supposed to be to get rid of

:41:31. > :41:33.disincentives of that kind. I want finally to pick up on the points so

:41:34. > :41:41.well made by my honourable friend in his opening speech about thd way

:41:42. > :41:44.that the changes announced to universal credit since first

:41:45. > :41:52.announced are undermining so fatally its objectives. In the earlx

:41:53. > :41:55.debates, they used to make ` lot of the fact that universal credit was

:41:56. > :42:01.going to cost more than ?2 billion a year more than the previous system.

:42:02. > :42:07.That is not true and it will cost ?3.7 billion a year less, and the

:42:08. > :42:10.way that has been done is to erode the work incentives that were

:42:11. > :42:17.supposed to be legal point of doing it in first place. I want to end on

:42:18. > :42:21.the point that the whole hotse has accepted that it would have been

:42:22. > :42:25.wrong to go ahead with the tax credit cuts that would have had such

:42:26. > :42:34.huge impact on reducing the incomes of working families. Two or ?30 0 a

:42:35. > :42:39.year from people with the household income of 20,000, the whole house

:42:40. > :42:42.accepts that would have been wrong, yet the government is going ahead

:42:43. > :42:48.precisely what those cuts for a relatively small number of people

:42:49. > :42:53.who are in work and claiming universal credit. If we havd all

:42:54. > :42:59.accepted that is wrong to h`ve such Draconian cuts imposed on the

:43:00. > :43:05.incomes of those claiming t`x credits, why is it right to go ahead

:43:06. > :43:10.with precisely those cuts on the incomes of working families in

:43:11. > :43:13.receipt of universal credit? I intervenes to ask that question to

:43:14. > :43:18.the Minister three times and each time he told us he will comd to that

:43:19. > :43:24.later in his speech but unfortunately he did not. If he is

:43:25. > :43:28.able to get to that, and explain, my honourable friend is absolutely

:43:29. > :43:34.right that all through this process we were told there would be

:43:35. > :43:37.transitional protection and yet this group, 50,000 people, already

:43:38. > :43:42.receiving universal credit, are going to suffer enormous cuts in

:43:43. > :43:48.their income. Because of ch`nges to the universal credit. It can't be

:43:49. > :43:56.right and the government has to change its mind. Thank you for

:43:57. > :44:00.calling me to speak in this debate on universal credit, we seel to have

:44:01. > :44:08.had endless debates on univdrsal credit over the last 5-6 ye`rs. I am

:44:09. > :44:11.sure we will have many more. It was opened today what they call from the

:44:12. > :44:21.Shadow Secretary of State to reverse the work allowance changes to

:44:22. > :44:26.universal credit. I sensed that the member for Ponty Pred wanted to

:44:27. > :44:29.reverse every welfare cuts lade by this government and its predecessor

:44:30. > :44:34.because after all he and his colleagues that oppose everx penny

:44:35. > :44:38.of savings that are put forward in the last Coalition Government, but

:44:39. > :44:43.he cannot do that, partly bdcause he actually stood on a manifesto that

:44:44. > :44:47.would have only reversed thd smallest welfare savings, on the

:44:48. > :44:52.spear bedroom subsidy, and partly because he signed up to ?12 billion

:44:53. > :44:57.of welfare savings, but he didn t tell us today either that hhs

:44:58. > :45:02.government or party if it w`s elected into government with the

:45:03. > :45:09.reverse all of the changes, or how he would find his 12 million of

:45:10. > :45:17.savings. He had quite a long go early. The reason he didn't say

:45:18. > :45:23.anything... If there are no changes either to tax credits for housing

:45:24. > :45:30.benefits, you will not find ?12 billion of welfare savings, and so I

:45:31. > :45:35.suspect he either has not got a policy at all or he has got

:45:36. > :45:42.something pretty horrific on housing benefit that the House needs to hear

:45:43. > :45:47.about. After his win the eloquence, we then had slightly later the

:45:48. > :45:53.relatives still, small voicd of calm from the right Honourable mdmber for

:45:54. > :46:00.East Ham. He described univdrsal credit as a sensible idea btt whose

:46:01. > :46:04.implementation was a shamblds. I would describe universal crddit as

:46:05. > :46:11.an inspired idea but one th`t his own at that time Chancellor

:46:12. > :46:18.described as too complicated to be taken up by his party. I wotld agree

:46:19. > :46:23.that it has been overoptimistic Lee implemented so far, but that it is

:46:24. > :46:27.happening, and I have seen ht happen and we will come onto that, because

:46:28. > :46:30.I am not sure how many membdrs opposite have gone to their local

:46:31. > :46:34.job centre to find out how ht is happening, and it is alreadx

:46:35. > :46:40.delivering real and positivd change to the lives of my and many other

:46:41. > :46:44.constituents. You can criticise a project that is delayed but

:46:45. > :46:50.happening and successfully so, when you said was impossible to do the

:46:51. > :46:54.project at all, but it risks looking like carping, which is not worthy of

:46:55. > :46:59.the right Honourable member for East Ham. The truth is that the Labour

:47:00. > :47:10.Party cannot make up their linds whether to say universal crddit was

:47:11. > :47:15.a bad idea full stop, whethdr it is a complete or partial shambles, or

:47:16. > :47:20.whether it is a good idea btt we are not sure whether it will be a

:47:21. > :47:25.shambles, and the art half hoping that universal credit will collapse

:47:26. > :47:30.and then they can criticise it more and call again and again for my

:47:31. > :47:35.right honourable friend the Work and Pensions Secretary to resign, or

:47:36. > :47:38.that actually in their heart of hearts that they should support

:47:39. > :47:42.universal credit because it is the right thing to do and will be

:47:43. > :47:45.completely transformative to the working opportunities of so many

:47:46. > :47:52.people in the country. The reason universal credit is right is

:47:53. > :47:58.absolutely clear to all of ts, because when tax credits were

:47:59. > :48:07.introduced, they were a moddst cost to the taxpayer, but they b`llooned

:48:08. > :48:14.in cost from ?6 billion in 0998 to 28 billion by 2010, and as H have

:48:15. > :48:16.already hinted, the former Chancellor has described more

:48:17. > :48:24.eloquently than any others could hear today that project had run

:48:25. > :48:26.miles away from its original intentions, and so something

:48:27. > :48:31.launched with the best posshble intention to help people on low

:48:32. > :48:35.wages had become a massive cost and not just the cost in itself but

:48:36. > :48:41.generating huge interest costs as well, that were simply unsustainable

:48:42. > :48:49.for this country. Particularly so after the great recession of 20 7-9.

:48:50. > :48:55.In their heart of hearts, everyone in this house must recognisd that

:48:56. > :48:57.universal credit is the way forward, and I cannot believe there hs a

:48:58. > :49:03.member here today who has bden a member for more than a few xears who

:49:04. > :49:07.has not got letters from constituents describing how their

:49:08. > :49:11.life on welfare makes it impossible for them to want to go to work,

:49:12. > :49:18.because they would be worse off working. I also cannot belidve that

:49:19. > :49:21.members here have not had mdetings with employers and constitudncies

:49:22. > :49:24.who have described to them the numbers of times they have offered

:49:25. > :49:31.people working for them prolotions or additional salary and actually

:49:32. > :49:34.been told, we do not want that promotion, we will be worse off

:49:35. > :49:40.because we will lose more in benefits than they would gahn from

:49:41. > :49:45.that promotion. Tax credits were ending up as a disincentive to

:49:46. > :49:48.aspiration and achievement, and members opposite from the SNP may be

:49:49. > :49:55.shaking their heads but that is what the truth is, and what is also true

:49:56. > :50:00.is that unfortunately the wdlfare programmes that were introdtced by

:50:01. > :50:05.the previous Labour governmdnt ended up during that period of grdat

:50:06. > :50:09.recession, when 6000 people in my constituency lost their jobs and

:50:10. > :50:15.ended up trapped on welfare, with no incentive to go back to work. Madam

:50:16. > :50:20.Deputy Speaker, that is the background to the debate on

:50:21. > :50:25.universal credit. It is absolutely vital for a country that it works

:50:26. > :50:33.properly. For those of us who have been to job centre plusses. We will

:50:34. > :50:39.know that it is in place and working very well for single people. Where

:50:40. > :50:43.it has not yet been introduced in Gloucester in my constituency is for

:50:44. > :50:49.families where there are two people, perhaps in and out of work or in low

:50:50. > :50:52.paid jobs, with children as well. That is the more complicated element

:50:53. > :50:56.of universal credit and my honourable friend on the front

:50:57. > :51:00.benches today, if they are `ble to add more about how the succdss of

:51:01. > :51:06.the roll-out of universal credit is going, that will be reassurhng to

:51:07. > :51:11.everyone. I have seen it in place in London and it does seem to be

:51:12. > :51:18.working well. I am conscious that they are time limits so I whll bring

:51:19. > :51:23.this hastily to a conclusion. The oh 156,000 people already on universal

:51:24. > :51:30.credit and receiving the benefits effectively. The ones I havd met my

:51:31. > :51:37.constituency are definitely any better placed than they werd before,

:51:38. > :51:41.it is absolutely vital that universal credit continues to move

:51:42. > :51:45.forward as quickly as possible and I suspect that figure will advance

:51:46. > :51:51.rapidly during this Parliamdnt and we should all wish it well. The

:51:52. > :51:59.changes debated today are all part of a move from higher wage `nd lower

:52:00. > :52:04.tax away from what we were left with 102010, which was wages that were

:52:05. > :52:08.too low and taxes too high, unsustainable welfare and the system

:52:09. > :52:13.that was no longer working, so Madam Deputy Speaker, today let md finish

:52:14. > :52:19.just saying that I understand the emotional appeals to the spdech

:52:20. > :52:23.early hour but it is absolutely vital that we do reduce the cost for

:52:24. > :52:26.tax credits and wealthier than provide people with the system that

:52:27. > :52:35.incentivises them to work through universal credit. My happy New Year

:52:36. > :52:38.and experiment has not workdd, so I will now impose a formal tile limit

:52:39. > :52:43.of six minutes on backbench speeches.

:52:44. > :52:51.I would like to start off I reassuring the honourable mdmber for

:52:52. > :52:55.Gloucester that I think Universal Credit is an utter total sh`mbles

:52:56. > :53:00.and I would like to invite him to my in situ unsafe to speak to

:53:01. > :53:05.constituents who are claiming enough at speakers all of them are in work

:53:06. > :53:09.already and tax credits did not stop them from going to work, its

:53:10. > :53:16.incentive I is then to go to work, and he needs to visit places in

:53:17. > :53:21.London to dispel the truth that people claiming benefits ard

:53:22. > :53:29.scroungers because they are working hard but work does not pay. I never

:53:30. > :53:37.said, would never say and I do not leave anyone in this House would say

:53:38. > :53:45.people looking for work are scroungers. You implied it hn my

:53:46. > :53:52.opinion. I will go back to ly speech. In January 2012, a

:53:53. > :53:58.considerable period of time before I entered the House, I listendd to the

:53:59. > :54:02.Secretary of State tell the House that Universal Credit roll-out was

:54:03. > :54:08.on track and on budget. Sevdral years later and aliens of pounds of

:54:09. > :54:15.expense to the taxpayer latdr, his claim that I am not complacdnt about

:54:16. > :54:21.delivery has not stood the test of time. Millions of family is across

:54:22. > :54:28.the country, have faced perhods of relentless anxiety over the future

:54:29. > :54:35.of their welfare support and 20 5 did not bring fresh hope. The DWP

:54:36. > :54:40.select committee's report in September revealed the roll,out of

:54:41. > :54:43.Universal Credit from oral `scent to resolving the final outstanding

:54:44. > :54:48.legacy payments could stretch beyond a decade. The Government promised

:54:49. > :54:56.that Universal Credit would reach 4.5 million people by the 2015

:54:57. > :55:02.general election. This has not happened. The Secretary of State may

:55:03. > :55:08.be content for his department to cruise through endless trial and

:55:09. > :55:12.ever but delays to the roll,out have been at a significant cost to the

:55:13. > :55:17.taxpayer, with the major projects at the revealing an increase of ?3

:55:18. > :55:25.billion in the past two years. The bill now stands at a staggering 15.8

:55:26. > :55:28.William. If the Secretary of State truly understands the presstres

:55:29. > :55:35.faced by claimants, he will apologise for the years of `nxiety

:55:36. > :55:42.is delays have subjected thdm to. The Autumn Statement contradicts the

:55:43. > :55:47.ridiculous claim that nobodx loses a penny through these changes. They

:55:48. > :55:53.also marked the end of the Chancellor's claim at a Conservative

:55:54. > :55:59.Party conference that the Tories are the new workers party. Nothhng could

:56:00. > :56:03.be further from the truth. Cuts to the work allowance are so sdvere it

:56:04. > :56:08.will mean single people and couples with no depth and children would

:56:09. > :56:15.lose out the moment they st`rt work. Listen to the facts. The poorest 20%

:56:16. > :56:23.in our country are set to lose between 6% and 8% of their hncome on

:56:24. > :56:27.average. Listen to Paul Johnson director of the Institute for Fiscal

:56:28. > :56:36.Studies, stating that 2.6 mhllion families would be an averagd 16 0

:56:37. > :56:42.pounds a year worse off. Further to this, a point made by my honourable

:56:43. > :56:46.friend for East Ham, we know transitional protections for

:56:47. > :56:52.payments moving from the old system to Universal Credit will only

:56:53. > :56:58.provide 200 million against a background of ?3 billion of cuts. We

:56:59. > :57:02.know transitional protections are dropped when a claimant was my

:57:03. > :57:10.circumstances change and new claimant will not be protected

:57:11. > :57:14.whatsoever. Is she aware thd IFS has said anyone transferred into

:57:15. > :57:21.Universal Credit will be protected, will not be worse off in cash terms?

:57:22. > :57:26.I have not seen that, what H have seen is what I have reiterated,

:57:27. > :57:33.which shows 2.6 million working families will be on average ?16 0

:57:34. > :57:38.worse off and he needs to look at the stats in inner London to see

:57:39. > :57:42.this will be true. Given thd tendency for new claimant, the

:57:43. > :57:46.prevalence of low paid jobs crewed by this Government and the

:57:47. > :57:52.impossibility of the so-called national living wage to mithgate

:57:53. > :57:55.cuts to the work allowance, the Secretary of State must upd`te the

:57:56. > :58:01.House as to whether he still stands by his claims that no one loses a

:58:02. > :58:06.penny through these changes. We need a government that is working towards

:58:07. > :58:12.an economy where employers, city leaders and central governmdnt work

:58:13. > :58:15.together to ensure economic growth creates new opportunities and

:58:16. > :58:20.high-quality jobs. Instead the Government is embracing cuts that

:58:21. > :58:25.will worsen the bleak picture of deprivation across the country,

:58:26. > :58:30.especially in inner London. Earlier in the debate I made the pohnt about

:58:31. > :58:34.the rise of homelessness and did not get an answer from the minister but

:58:35. > :58:39.I would like to know if he acknowledges the changes to welfare

:58:40. > :58:44.will increase the number of people sleeping rough on the streets of

:58:45. > :58:50.London? As a London MP I have fears that the growth in homelessness and

:58:51. > :58:55.destitution seen in the caphtal will only be made worse by these changes

:58:56. > :59:01.to welfare. An independent `nalysis by the IFS, the resolution `nd

:59:02. > :59:07.evidence of the select commhttee 's report, all acknowledge the

:59:08. > :59:09.consequences of that cuts to the lowest paid when they are eventually

:59:10. > :59:15.signed up to receive Universal Credit. I fear the decisions being

:59:16. > :59:20.pushed through will ensure lany in Hamstead and Todd Byrne will reach

:59:21. > :59:26.breaking point. Many people are already making the choice bdtween

:59:27. > :59:30.eating and heating. Eight thousand of my constituents are expected to

:59:31. > :59:35.be an Universal Credit by the time it is ruled out properly. It is not

:59:36. > :59:39.too late for the Government to rethink cuts to the work allowance

:59:40. > :59:47.if they have any ambition to increase earnings. Higher, lore

:59:48. > :59:52.stable levels of pay is the only way to improve financial security and

:59:53. > :59:56.move people out of poverty. The Secretary of State celebratdd in

:59:57. > :00:00.this House when his so-calldd national living wage was announced

:00:01. > :00:06.but he must reflect upon cheerleading in the base of the

:00:07. > :00:10.stark reality that Britain's low and middle income families down to lose

:00:11. > :00:16.thousands of pounds under this flagship all say, so I would ask him

:00:17. > :00:20.to carefully reconsider where he thinks his legacy lies and whether

:00:21. > :00:24.he wants to put low and middle income families through this trial

:00:25. > :00:34.they will face when Univers`l Credit is rolled out. Thank you. The motion

:00:35. > :00:40.that members opposite are asking us to consider today is a simple one.

:00:41. > :00:48.Again they are asking us to dock a difficult decision. I would like to

:00:49. > :00:54.speak briefly, hopefully make up sometime, about why such an approach

:00:55. > :01:01.is as sustainable. We have two major problems. The first is that we

:01:02. > :01:06.continue to live beyond our means. When we on this side came into

:01:07. > :01:11.government we were spending ?4 for every ?3 we were burning, which

:01:12. > :01:17.meant we had them biggest btdget deficit in peacetime historx. We

:01:18. > :01:24.have made progress with this, we have more than halved it, this

:01:25. > :01:29.budget has been more than h`ve in the deficit, but we have a distance

:01:30. > :01:36.to go with this problem of ` high tax low-wage and high welfare

:01:37. > :01:40.economy and at the root of ht lies the situation we inherited hn 2 10

:01:41. > :01:46.when people on the minimum `ge were working hard but still having to pay

:01:47. > :01:51.tax and have their wages subsidised through the welfare system. As a

:01:52. > :01:57.result nine out of ten workhng families were having some sort of

:01:58. > :02:04.benefit payment, and this fhght all the additional spending, it wasn't

:02:05. > :02:10.working, as we heard in work poverty rose by 20%. This level of borrowing

:02:11. > :02:16.and welfare spending is not sustainable. Under the last

:02:17. > :02:22.government there was an extra ? 000 spending for every household in this

:02:23. > :02:28.country and that spending is burdening our children and

:02:29. > :02:33.grandchildren with addition`l borrowing simply to pay for current

:02:34. > :02:37.welfare spending at a time when countries around the world `re

:02:38. > :02:42.taking difficult decisions, facing rising competition from the East,

:02:43. > :02:49.living with this burden of welfare spending paid for by borrowhng, paid

:02:50. > :02:56.for by our children, is not sustainable. When this partx came

:02:57. > :03:01.into power we came forward with a plan to deal with this. First on the

:03:02. > :03:08.deficit we said part of the reductions had to be funded by 12

:03:09. > :03:12.billion of welfare savings. Members opposite could say we shouldn't

:03:13. > :03:17.achieve ?12 billion of welf`re savings but I have yet to hdar a

:03:18. > :03:25.suggestion for the alternathve. There are only three altern`tives,

:03:26. > :03:33.either put up taxes... Which like to make an intervention? As adlirable

:03:34. > :03:37.as his party may feel his efforts are in saying we have to cut

:03:38. > :03:43.welfare, the problem is unddr government spending welfare has

:03:44. > :03:50.persistent leak gone up, thd amount of money we are spending on welfare

:03:51. > :03:55.is more than it was before, so your tactics do not work in the real

:03:56. > :04:03.world. I think she means thd honourable gentleman's tacthcs. I

:04:04. > :04:09.would ask her to look at thd facts. I believe the OBR is projecting a

:04:10. > :04:14.decline in the proportion of national income spent on welfare

:04:15. > :04:21.during this argument, so thd plan is working, but if you don't w`nt to

:04:22. > :04:26.reduce welfare spending, thdre are only three alternatives. Either

:04:27. > :04:31.members can choose to cut spending on public services. Nobody has

:04:32. > :04:35.suggested instead of making this reform we cut spending on the

:04:36. > :04:42.National Health Service or on education. War members could

:04:43. > :04:47.advocate an increase in personal taxation or other taxation. I happen

:04:48. > :04:51.to think we already have unsustainably high levels of

:04:52. > :04:59.taxation. The third choice hs that members opposite... Am gratdful to

:05:00. > :05:06.him for giving way. What will he say to some 7000 people who will be

:05:07. > :05:10.worse off on Universal Credht by 2020 about the nearly ?1 billion to

:05:11. > :05:19.his party is spending and cttting inheritance tax on houses worth the

:05:20. > :05:27.twain 300 and ?6 million. I do not recognise those figures but I know

:05:28. > :05:30.in my Kindle constituency 5000 people have been lifted out of

:05:31. > :05:39.paying tax altogether. Unemployment is down by 11% and a result of tax

:05:40. > :05:43.cuts introduced by this Govdrnment, 47,000 people have seen a rdduction

:05:44. > :05:51.in the amount of tax they p`id. This is the Government's plan in action,

:05:52. > :05:57.moving from a low-wage, high welfare, high tax economy to way

:05:58. > :06:01.higher wage, low welfare, low tax economy and the result is that

:06:02. > :06:06.unemployment continues to f`ll at a record pace, two point 2 million

:06:07. > :06:14.more people since the party on this side came into fat have sectrity, a

:06:15. > :06:18.regular pay packet, and a job to provide for themselves and their

:06:19. > :06:24.families and that is a record we can all be proud of. If the party

:06:25. > :06:30.opposite does not have an alternative plan on spending, do

:06:31. > :06:36.they have a plan on welfare reform? On this side there is a cle`r plan

:06:37. > :06:39.for welfare reform. We are saying we will introduce Universal Crddit to

:06:40. > :06:45.remove the perverse incentives we have seen which have been dhscussed

:06:46. > :06:50.extensively, whereby employdes are refusing to take a pay rise because

:06:51. > :06:53.they fear the reduction in their benefits will be greater th`n the

:06:54. > :07:00.benefits they receive from the additional pay. Secondly, wd're

:07:01. > :07:05.increasing the personal allowance, under this Government by thd end of

:07:06. > :07:11.Parliament the personal allowance will be 12 point ?5,000, lifting

:07:12. > :07:17.those working 35 hours a wedk on minimum wage out of tax, reloving

:07:18. > :07:23.the absurd situation where people on the minimum wage per paying tax and

:07:24. > :07:29.having it recycled to the sxstem, and we are introducing a national

:07:30. > :07:33.living wage made possible bdcause we have been so successful in reducing

:07:34. > :07:39.unemployment, employers can bear the burden of that higher national

:07:40. > :07:45.living wage and the effect hs that we will cease to subsidise low paid

:07:46. > :07:50.jobs whether they are in supermarkets, the cleaning hndustry,

:07:51. > :07:54.with welfare payments. I thhnk this is a sensible plan which whdn

:07:55. > :07:59.combined with help on childcare and other measures introduced bx this

:08:00. > :08:05.Government offer as a route towards the higher pay lower welfard, lower

:08:06. > :08:13.tax economy we desire, so this is the choice faced by this Hotse, do

:08:14. > :08:16.we stick with a plan that h`s seen 2.2 million more people havhng

:08:17. > :08:20.security and stability of a job with a plan which will see the

:08:21. > :08:26.deficit even limited during the Parliament so we've I run a surplus

:08:27. > :08:31.and start spending less than we earn so when the next crisis hits we have

:08:32. > :08:35.some sort of cushion to deal with that, and do we start reforling the

:08:36. > :08:40.nature of our welfare systel with the reforms introduced eithdr

:08:41. > :08:46.Secretary of State for welf`re and his ministers? Would do we take the

:08:47. > :08:49.approach advocated by the p`rty opposite which is to bury otr heads

:08:50. > :08:56.in the sound, pretend the problem does not exist, carry on borrowing

:08:57. > :09:00.for ever and burden are children and grandchildren with what the party

:09:01. > :09:07.opposite, when they were led by the likes of Mr Blair and Mr Brown, used

:09:08. > :09:11.to describe as the bells of social failure, we are tackling thousand I

:09:12. > :09:16.am proud of the approach taken by my party.

:09:17. > :09:22.of the I have two reduce thd time but once again to five minutes and

:09:23. > :09:28.perhaps I should remind the House, because perhaps newer members have

:09:29. > :09:32.forgotten, that if one makes a speech in this chamber, then it is

:09:33. > :09:37.courteous and required by the rules of the House that one stays in the

:09:38. > :09:42.chamber, certainly for the speech following your own speech, `nd

:09:43. > :09:51.usually for at least two spdeches thereafter. The people who have not

:09:52. > :09:57.done so today know who they are But thank you for calling me and it is

:09:58. > :10:02.an absolute delight, I am grateful for this debate taking placd. My

:10:03. > :10:05.constituency of Rochdale was included in the pilot roll-out of

:10:06. > :10:08.the universal scheme and thdy will be feeling the full force of the

:10:09. > :10:14.dreadful cuts that have comd along with this scheme is implemented Let

:10:15. > :10:17.me start by saying IV men ftlly committed to getting as manx people

:10:18. > :10:22.out of the benefits system `s is absolutely possible. We need to

:10:23. > :10:29.reduce the burden on the welfare bill. We must do all we can to get

:10:30. > :10:32.people into regular well-pahd work, but to do so at such a high price

:10:33. > :10:38.for those least fortunate is not the way to do it. We must be cldar that

:10:39. > :10:44.these cuts will affect hard,working people. These are not peopld who are

:10:45. > :10:48.work-shy. These are the verx people that we should and must be

:10:49. > :10:54.supporting. The Chancellor was right to do a U-turn on the proposed cuts

:10:55. > :10:57.to tax credits. They were not warrant attack on the financial

:10:58. > :11:03.well-being of millions of hard-working people in Brit`in, and

:11:04. > :11:07.more than 7000 people in my constituency of Rochdale. Btt here

:11:08. > :11:12.we are faced with the same work penalty albeit in a different name.

:11:13. > :11:17.The cuts are the same. Once again it will be the hard-working falilies

:11:18. > :11:21.that suffer. The only difference being the name. This time it is cuts

:11:22. > :11:26.to universal credit and not tax credits. At first it will bd those

:11:27. > :11:32.on the pilot scheme who will fall victim to these cuts. Currently

:11:33. > :11:37.140,000 people. As we have seen too often under this government and the

:11:38. > :11:42.last, it will be the north who suffers first, with 75,000 hn the

:11:43. > :11:49.north-east being part of thd current roll-out in my own constitudncy of

:11:50. > :11:53.Rochdale, currently there are just over 1400 people claiming universal

:11:54. > :11:56.credit who will see their household budget cuts. They will face

:11:57. > :12:01.increasing pressure when thdy need to pay their rent and incre`singly

:12:02. > :12:06.struggle to put food on thehr table. It will become harder for them to

:12:07. > :12:09.support their children. Howdver this is not just about those currently on

:12:10. > :12:18.the pilot scheme of univers`l credit. The cuts will in tile affect

:12:19. > :12:22.many more. After the initial cuts in 2016 to the 140,000, there will then

:12:23. > :12:27.be a postcode lottery of whom the roll-out affects, and in thd longer

:12:28. > :12:36.term up to 1.6 million workhng families could be worse off by 020,

:12:37. > :12:41.to a sum of something like ?160 . A single mother of two working

:12:42. > :12:48.full-time on universal credht in 2016-17 will be worse off to the

:12:49. > :12:52.tune of ?2981, compared to someone on tax credits. These cuts will also

:12:53. > :12:58.show a sharp decline in the award for people taking on more work. The

:12:59. > :13:01.House of Commons library has shown that a single parent of one early

:13:02. > :13:08.new minimum wage will only hncrease their wage packet by ?40 by working

:13:09. > :13:14.an extra 12 hours, when prior to the cuts this would amount to an

:13:15. > :13:17.increase of ?92. The Conservatives continue to perpetuate the rhetoric

:13:18. > :13:24.that the reward those who w`nt to get on. This is simply not true

:13:25. > :13:30.Only proven by the proposed cuts to tax credits and proposed cuts to the

:13:31. > :13:34.work element of universal credit. Let me finish, Madam Deputy Speaker,

:13:35. > :13:40.by saying only this week th`t wage growth in the Conservatives will be

:13:41. > :13:48.the worst for 100 years, as from 2010-2020 wage growth is expected to

:13:49. > :13:50.be only 6.2%. First with cuts to the work element of the univers`l

:13:51. > :13:57.credit, the lowest paid in society will suffer massively at thd hands

:13:58. > :14:02.of this government. I urge the party opposite to reverse these ctts to

:14:03. > :14:09.universal credit for current and future claimants to protect these

:14:10. > :14:14.hard-working people. Thank xou. It is a great privilege to contribute

:14:15. > :14:25.to this debate. I think it goes to the heart of this government's

:14:26. > :14:28.approach to the form in our society. -- reform. The universal crddit will

:14:29. > :14:33.be the critical measure of success for this government and I think in

:14:34. > :14:38.the wake of the tax credit debate, it is very easy to be distr`cted by

:14:39. > :14:47.how significant the univers`l credit is. Time and time again, well worn

:14:48. > :14:53.problems with our current wdlfare system have been shown to not be

:14:54. > :15:01.able to be solved by thinking about -- tinkering around the edgds of the

:15:02. > :15:05.previous welfare system. As we listen to representations on benefit

:15:06. > :15:11.delivery and welfare to work and on tax credits, it makes absoltte sense

:15:12. > :15:19.to have radical reform across the benefits system. The universal

:15:20. > :15:25.credit achieves three games. Making benefits more like being in work,

:15:26. > :15:30.monthly payments, getting rhd of the distinction between benefits like

:15:31. > :15:35.working tax credits and jobseeker's allowance, removing the need for

:15:36. > :15:38.reapplication. Piggybacking onto peers you are via real-time

:15:39. > :15:43.information, and this would deal with the vast number of bendfit

:15:44. > :15:46.delivery issues that the success of work and pensions committees have

:15:47. > :15:54.addressed. Finally, benefit simplification. Claimants who quite

:15:55. > :16:01.reasonably find it difficult to work out what they are entitled to. This

:16:02. > :16:04.effort by this government and by the Secretary of State for Work and

:16:05. > :16:09.Pensions, who has been in this post that eminently for five and a half

:16:10. > :16:15.years, battling those who h`ve been cynical about the necessary

:16:16. > :16:17.adjustments that he has had to make, and I remember in my previots

:16:18. > :16:23.employment before coming to this house working in an IT constlting

:16:24. > :16:29.firm, when they won a contr`ct under the previous government to deliver a

:16:30. > :16:34.significant project for the NHS only to see that a few years later,

:16:35. > :16:41.several billion pounds were written off because that project was not run

:16:42. > :16:45.properly. I don't particularly want to make a party political point

:16:46. > :16:52.because I think complex IT systems, to be delivered by any government,

:16:53. > :16:54.is incredibly difficult. I think the Secretary of State has shown

:16:55. > :17:00.admirable determination in the face of great cynicism, and a lack of

:17:01. > :17:06.clarity from the opposition benches on exactly what should be ddlivered.

:17:07. > :17:12.Are they in favour of universal credit? Are in favour of it if it

:17:13. > :17:16.works at a time scale they think is politically expedient? Or do they

:17:17. > :17:22.have a credible and well thought through alternative that will

:17:23. > :17:25.deliver the quantity to say things that they deliver to in thehr

:17:26. > :17:32.manifesto? Because I listendd very carefully to the speech by the

:17:33. > :17:38.member for Banff and Buchan, who quite reasonably say is that we must

:17:39. > :17:43.in this house look at the ddtail and we mustn't make grand statelents. We

:17:44. > :17:50.must also recognise, as my honourable friend pointed ott, that

:17:51. > :17:56.they are real consequences of not making the changes that we have set

:17:57. > :18:03.out, and not delivering the savings that this government has based its

:18:04. > :18:11.projections for our public finances. We do not need to be distracted by

:18:12. > :18:17.the speed of universal credht delivery. We can be very positive

:18:18. > :18:21.about the progress that has now been made, and the DWP recently `nnounced

:18:22. > :18:25.before Christmas that the universal credit is now in the three puarters

:18:26. > :18:29.of job centres, and it is mx expectation from the evidence that I

:18:30. > :18:34.have seen, that everything hs moving in the right direction to sde the

:18:35. > :18:40.film delivery of universal credit in the timescale that is set ott. This

:18:41. > :18:45.government's legacy will be enhanced by the fact that universal credit is

:18:46. > :18:48.not a stand-alone measure. The reforms to the personal allowance,

:18:49. > :18:54.the national living wage, rhsing wages, economic growth delivering

:18:55. > :19:00.record jobs, and the simplified benefits system, and the detail of

:19:01. > :19:04.work coaches helping those who need assistance will be a compelling

:19:05. > :19:08.legacy, and I regret the fact that the opposition have brought this

:19:09. > :19:19.motion to the House today. H think it is misguided and I will be voting

:19:20. > :19:23.against it. Thank you. I wotld like to echo the sentiments of all my

:19:24. > :19:25.honourable friends about how this will affect working families in the

:19:26. > :19:31.country and I am especially concerned about the effects on

:19:32. > :19:34.single parents. The changes to the universal credit are complex and

:19:35. > :19:41.difficult to judge from people already receiving benefits. Make no

:19:42. > :19:48.mistake, the same uproar will come in the tax credit debate in this

:19:49. > :19:51.house, we arrested and spokd for the 24,000 children in Birmingh`m

:19:52. > :19:56.Yardley who would be worse off by those changes. In contrast, on that

:19:57. > :20:00.date I could only find four properties in my constituency that

:20:01. > :20:04.would benefit from the inheritance tax changes, and thanks to the fact

:20:05. > :20:08.universal credit has been record-breaking lace lo, on April

:20:09. > :20:14.2016 the changes will only potentially affect 760 housdholds in

:20:15. > :20:19.my constituency, but that is still 756 more families hit hard lan will

:20:20. > :20:24.benefit from the inheritancd tax changes. I think it is safe to say,

:20:25. > :20:31.that other than perhaps we four families who lets not forget have to

:20:32. > :20:34.be dead first, the residents in my constituency see the same old Tory

:20:35. > :20:41.government protecting and rdwarding the richest. In order a smack in

:20:42. > :20:45.honour of these Tories sticking to their type, I shall stick to take

:20:46. > :20:52.and speak about domestic and sexual violence victims. One of thd

:20:53. > :20:57.problems is that it all gets paid to one person in a household. H have

:20:58. > :21:00.met countless women who havd kept small and some money to savd up to

:21:01. > :21:06.help set themselves and thehr children free. I have also let too

:21:07. > :21:12.many women whose financial control is the worst and most limithng part

:21:13. > :21:16.of the abuse. Walking away from violence and threat is never easy.

:21:17. > :21:22.It is nearly impossible if xou have nothing. I recognise that the DWP

:21:23. > :21:26.have bowed to pressure and dxpected that split payments should be

:21:27. > :21:29.available in cases of domestic violence, when reported to the

:21:30. > :21:38.benefits advisor or guesswork person. -- the work person. There is

:21:39. > :21:42.a deal problem with this scheme and that is the same as with thd two

:21:43. > :21:46.child policy coming down thd line when considering children born of

:21:47. > :21:52.rate. The government expects women who are terrified to rock up to the

:21:53. > :21:59.local job centre and tell staff they have been raped or that thex are

:22:00. > :22:04.husband beats and controls them What do we think violent partners

:22:05. > :22:07.will do when they find half the finds stunning? I have tabldd some

:22:08. > :22:12.parliamentary questions abott how many people have asked for split

:22:13. > :22:15.payments and perhaps all my years of experience are wrong and people are

:22:16. > :22:22.just skipping into neighbourhood officers happy to disclose their

:22:23. > :22:26.worst fears. I understand the power of the points she is making but one

:22:27. > :22:31.of the subtle changes is th`t for the first time they will have named

:22:32. > :22:33.contact who will get to know and understand them, and if thex can

:22:34. > :22:39.spot signs that have been highlighted, bacon Spotlight support

:22:40. > :22:42.and it may encourage people. I know it is difficult but it is another

:22:43. > :22:47.opportunity for people to then get the support they absolutely need.

:22:48. > :22:54.I suppose in answering the point I will continue to what I was going to

:22:55. > :23:01.say and I hope is the roll-out continues these issues will be

:23:02. > :23:05.addressed, but when domestic violence victims have to prove to

:23:06. > :23:11.legal aid processes they were victims, they needed proof from

:23:12. > :23:16.either the police or a doctor, and in some cases were charged for a

:23:17. > :23:21.letter proving they were victims. The managing victims of domdstic

:23:22. > :23:26.violence tell anyone who will listen they are a big before the Government

:23:27. > :23:31.recognises them is inhumane. I thank her for raising this issue, it is

:23:32. > :23:37.important, but the cheese share my concern there have been no details

:23:38. > :23:43.on what this burden of proof will be or how women are expected to go

:23:44. > :23:47.about that? I share that concern and commend her for all the work she is

:23:48. > :23:53.doing on this issue. We havd seen in the past as we have limited services

:23:54. > :24:00.and what we can provide in this case in terms of legal aid, to domestic

:24:01. > :24:06.and sexual violence victims, how a woman's word should be enough. It

:24:07. > :24:10.has always been enough for le. I never made anybody prove thdy were a

:24:11. > :24:15.victim when they wanted to come into refuge but for the Government what

:24:16. > :24:20.proof will be needed? I leave that for the minister to take aw`y. I

:24:21. > :24:23.understand the Government h`s aged five to bring down welfare dven

:24:24. > :24:30.though they have repeatedly failed on this task. There is a desire for

:24:31. > :24:33.the people opposite, and I wish we could today draw a line and stop

:24:34. > :24:39.this, to pitch people who t`ke against people who give, but did

:24:40. > :24:44.truth that the Government f`ils to realise again and again is that we

:24:45. > :24:50.are all taxpayers. There is not a distinct group of people who pay

:24:51. > :24:57.nothing, and I will wager everyone in this room has been for whll be on

:24:58. > :25:02.some sort of state benefit because I bet all our mums and dads h`d their

:25:03. > :25:08.family allowances as we called it. Even the Chancellor, a man H believe

:25:09. > :25:15.has got a bob or two, admitted for his children he claimed child

:25:16. > :25:21.benefit. What a scrounger! Dverybody contributes and everybody t`kes The

:25:22. > :25:27.single parents on low wages who will be hit by these changes are no

:25:28. > :25:31.better or worse than any of us here and in my opinion they deserve to be

:25:32. > :25:41.treated better than a dead person with a posh house. Thank yot, Madam

:25:42. > :25:45.Deputy Speaker. I am delighted we are debating Universal Credht as

:25:46. > :25:48.already those on the side of the House have eloquently quashdd the

:25:49. > :25:59.myths and rumours about Universal Credit but I buy those opposite

:26:00. > :26:03.Probably the most frequent reason constituents come to my advhce

:26:04. > :26:09.services arm when tax payments are in a mess and they owe thousands of

:26:10. > :26:14.pounds. This is a system we inherited in 2010 that is not fit

:26:15. > :26:17.for purpose. This Government is again sorting out the mess left

:26:18. > :26:23.behind by the party oppositd, created by a tax credit system that

:26:24. > :26:29.did not encourage financially able who wanted to work to actually go to

:26:30. > :26:35.work. Universal Credit is at the heart of this Government's welfare

:26:36. > :26:41.reforms and is ensuring everyone who can work is encouraged to do so The

:26:42. > :26:45.way it combined six benefits into one is the right way to go.

:26:46. > :26:51.Universal Credit is being rolled out in my constituency and on Friday I

:26:52. > :26:57.have a meeting planned at Btxton job centre to get an up date on his

:26:58. > :27:02.progress. Earlier this year I met a member of staff from the job centre

:27:03. > :27:07.at a business meeting and hd told me how good Universal Credit w`s and he

:27:08. > :27:10.wanted it to be rolled out puicker, but I think we have the right

:27:11. > :27:17.approach in measured roll otts that will benefit long-term. The latest

:27:18. > :27:25.data as of November 2015 shows the total number of unemployed claimants

:27:26. > :27:34.in air wash was 1058, representing just two point 3% of the active

:27:35. > :27:41.population. This includes 943 people claiming job-seeker's allow`nce The

:27:42. > :27:49.good news that these figures are 245 lower than November 2014 and

:27:50. > :27:53.represents a fall of 59% since 010, and I am sure all those people

:27:54. > :27:57.already own Universal Credit appreciate its benefits and many

:27:58. > :28:04.will now be in work since the figures came out. People cl`iming

:28:05. > :28:08.Universal Credit by 13% mord likely to be in work than people claiming

:28:09. > :28:14.jobseeker's allowance and are earning more money than it would to

:28:15. > :28:18.take a job. Nobody wants to be on benefits and I believe Univdrsal

:28:19. > :28:23.Credit goes a long way to hdlping people be independent of and

:28:24. > :28:27.efforts, and self esteem and dignity is so much higher when incole comes

:28:28. > :28:32.from earnings rather than the taxpayer. This debate has evolved

:28:33. > :28:37.around and efforts but I want to expand this to job opportunhties and

:28:38. > :28:44.how to help people get that into work and those in work to aspire to

:28:45. > :28:50.different jobs. The Prime Mhnister prior to 2010 encouraged both MPs

:28:51. > :28:56.and candidates to set up voluntary job clubs and since 2010 many MPs

:28:57. > :29:03.have organised successful jobs fairs. I am combining this tradition

:29:04. > :29:08.established I my predecessor by having a jobs and communitids fair

:29:09. > :29:12.in March, which will promotd not just job vacancies but the power of

:29:13. > :29:17.volunteering, as it has been proven if people volunteer they ard more

:29:18. > :29:22.likely to get into jobs and stay there long term. Like the rdcent

:29:23. > :29:27.debate on tax credit Universal Credit cannot be in isolation and

:29:28. > :29:32.should not be debated in thhs way. This Government is committed to

:29:33. > :29:36.welfare reform as a whole. Changes to welfare must be seen as `n

:29:37. > :29:44.overall package of measures. The National Living Wage will mdan a pay

:29:45. > :29:49.rise by 2020 for those over 25 and working full-time. Changes hn the

:29:50. > :29:55.Arsenal are low and will make more difference, in this coming xear

:29:56. > :30:01.Nepal have ?80 more because of that. Increasing childcare support will

:30:02. > :30:06.help people go from part tile to full-time work and also measures we

:30:07. > :30:10.need to look at in total. I am disappointed that the party opposite

:30:11. > :30:15.does not back the Government's measures which move us towards a

:30:16. > :30:27.nation of low welfare, low tax and higher wages. A secure economy, a

:30:28. > :30:32.secure future for our country. May I wish you a very happy New Ydar and

:30:33. > :30:38.everyone in the House. Unfortunately it will not be a happy New Xear for

:30:39. > :30:45.many people own Universal Credit. I am proud of where I come from, a

:30:46. > :30:51.North West constituency. We were at the very centre of the powerhouse of

:30:52. > :30:56.this country in the industrhal revolution, unfortunately wd have

:30:57. > :31:02.lived through the industrialisation and struggled to provide jobs for

:31:03. > :31:06.people who had good pay and manufacture but most of the jobs are

:31:07. > :31:12.now service. They are insectre zero hour contracts, agency work,

:31:13. > :31:17.part-time, and those that are secure are low paid. People in my

:31:18. > :31:22.constituency want to work, they are hard workers, they want to be

:31:23. > :31:26.respect did and they want the dignity of dividing a home for their

:31:27. > :31:33.family and putting food on the table and clothing them and they struggle.

:31:34. > :31:46.Many of them go to the food bank and that is not right. That is tnfair.

:31:47. > :31:50.The Department for Work and Pensions would wish its feet would not touch

:31:51. > :31:57.the ground to do with an assessment in taking away money from the first

:31:58. > :32:02.of people, which is unacceptable. You would not get away with it in

:32:03. > :32:08.local government and here wd are in central government, no impact

:32:09. > :32:10.assessment, but did the Secretary of State for the Department for Work

:32:11. > :32:15.and Pensions not want that assessment? He insisted people own

:32:16. > :32:21.Universal Credit would not be worse off because of changes of in work

:32:22. > :32:28.benefits both of the summer budget, but now they add met that is not the

:32:29. > :32:33.case. At the beginning of Universal Credit it was sold as encouraging

:32:34. > :32:38.people into work and people went along but were warned by all the

:32:39. > :32:42.experts that it was not critical to expect it in the time frame and

:32:43. > :32:51.repeatedly it has gone back and back, the roll-out. Unfortunately my

:32:52. > :32:58.constituency has had its roll-out. We are now own Universal Crddit not

:32:59. > :33:05.all of us but 1500 from the last assessment, families own Unhversal

:33:06. > :33:16.Credit. This is November but I would rather take the House of Colmons

:33:17. > :33:22.word then the Government's. Of these, 510 were in work. 510

:33:23. > :33:28.families will be affected and that backs are from the House of Commons

:33:29. > :33:37.library that has not been proven no -- wrong to me, people who `re not

:33:38. > :33:45.disabled will lose 2400 pounds in their income in April next xear A

:33:46. > :33:55.single work couple, one or both of them disabled, will lose ?2000 in

:33:56. > :34:02.April this year. People who have a single mother of two working

:34:03. > :34:08.full-time will lose ?2400. The jobs in my constituency are low paid and

:34:09. > :34:12.insecure, too many of them. We have many agency workers and the

:34:13. > :34:20.Government has done nothing about agency workers. They turn up work

:34:21. > :34:24.and are sent home, you can have a weak's work now, a week in `

:34:25. > :34:31.fortnight. We even have one agency offering two weeks' free work

:34:32. > :34:37.comfortably employed and th`t they would guarantee you an interview for

:34:38. > :34:44.a permanent job, but not many of them got the permanent job. We have

:34:45. > :34:49.people working at Tata steel, jaguar, where they would be working

:34:50. > :34:56.for 12 months but did not -, would then get full-time jobs, but it did

:34:57. > :35:00.not happen. Then in seven wdeks they called some of them back fotrth

:35:01. > :35:06.three weeks, and this is how it goes on in the real world. Madam Deputy

:35:07. > :35:13.Speaker, what has gone wrong and the reason and efforts have gond up is

:35:14. > :35:17.because the Government of today your economic strategy faildd

:35:18. > :35:22.miserably, and don't talk to me about debt in this country because

:35:23. > :35:29.it has a lot to do with that. We paid off more debt than any

:35:30. > :35:35.government on record, and wd have up to 1% GDP and paid 38 billion of the

:35:36. > :35:43.debt we had to borrow money to save the banks, to save working-class

:35:44. > :35:48.people's savings. We are only up to not .4% now and then efforts have

:35:49. > :35:56.soared because you have not produced the jobs you would said. Whdn the

:35:57. > :35:58.Honourable lady says you, if she wishes to attack the ministdr she

:35:59. > :36:07.has to say the minister for the Government. They apologise, the

:36:08. > :36:10.minister for Secretary of State who is often not present on subjects

:36:11. > :36:22.like this, but it is an excdpt the ball... The honourable lady has had

:36:23. > :36:29.her five minutes. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I apologise for not

:36:30. > :36:36.saying before, I now have to reduce the time limit to four minutes. I

:36:37. > :36:42.will be brief. I just wanted to pick up on a couple of points, fhrst to

:36:43. > :36:47.address the economic aspect of the issue, because I have pressdd the

:36:48. > :36:51.Shadow Minister this afternoon but we have had debates around tax

:36:52. > :36:55.credits and file members opposite has said the your committed to

:36:56. > :37:00.reducing the deficit in this country and the Shadow Minister has said he

:37:01. > :37:04.is committed to reducing welfare spending by ?12 million, ag`in today

:37:05. > :37:11.we have not had answers how that would happen. To give credit to the

:37:12. > :37:18.SNP, the effective opposition, while I disagree with their alternatives

:37:19. > :37:20.at least they have a son, so perhaps the Shadow Minister can acknowledge

:37:21. > :37:26.how he would tackle the welfare saving that needs to be madd and if

:37:27. > :37:30.not through savings in Univdrsal Credit, how he would proposd that. I

:37:31. > :37:35.also agree with the member for Cardiff North and Gloucester because

:37:36. > :37:40.they have produced figures that show that for those moving to Unhversal

:37:41. > :37:46.Credit, with the tapering and transitional arrangements, people

:37:47. > :37:53.will not be worse off in cash terms and they produced those figtres and

:37:54. > :37:58.shone a light on the smoke `nd mirrors from members opposite. With

:37:59. > :38:02.all the changes happening dtring this Parliament, with the

:38:03. > :38:08.introduction of the National Living Wage, it will mean someone working

:38:09. > :38:15.full-time on the current minimum wage would be ?5,000 a year but off,

:38:16. > :38:19.with free childcare introduced for three and 5 euros, families would

:38:20. > :38:27.also benefit from five thosd in pounds a year, the rays in tax

:38:28. > :38:30.thresholds we have heard about, a proposed 12 point ?5,000 by the end

:38:31. > :38:37.of this Parliament would benefit low wage families, and that is not to

:38:38. > :38:38.mention increase in unemploxment, a significant percentage of which is

:38:39. > :38:49.in full-time work. The I have been very disappointed by

:38:50. > :38:52.the patronising laughter from the shadow minister when we suggested

:38:53. > :38:56.single parents could get back into work and life cultures would be

:38:57. > :39:04.helpful and he loved that off as if it was something we could only dream

:39:05. > :39:09.about. -- life cultures. It is from my personal experience of growing up

:39:10. > :39:15.in a working-class family. H went to school in a socialist state where

:39:16. > :39:20.there was little or no hope or aspiration of working-class kids

:39:21. > :39:27.like myself. We got no caredrs advice, my careers advice w`s how to

:39:28. > :39:31.claim my first benefits. Thdre was no sex for advice or advice on how

:39:32. > :39:35.to go to university so I never got there, just benefits advice, because

:39:36. > :39:41.that is the socialist weight with no hope or aspiration. This unhversal

:39:42. > :39:47.credit debate is about more than just pounds and pence and pdople's

:39:48. > :39:53.pockets. It is a fundamental shift on how people work and are paid for

:39:54. > :39:55.doing so. I will be supporthng the government in their move to

:39:56. > :40:03.universal credit and I would encourage members opposite to do the

:40:04. > :40:06.same. Can I make it clear that I welcome the principles behind

:40:07. > :40:09.universal credit and I think any scheme that simplifies the welfare

:40:10. > :40:15.system provides additional support to those who need to use it and

:40:16. > :40:21.incentivises people into work, which ultimately is the best routd out of

:40:22. > :40:26.poverty, has to be encouragdd. However the problem is that because

:40:27. > :40:32.of the Chancellor's failure to reach his deficit reduction target, the

:40:33. > :40:35.original and totally laudable objectives have been subsumdd to the

:40:36. > :40:46.government need to cut the cost of it. Can I say I applaud those

:40:47. > :40:52.members opposite who lobbied hard for the removal of his proposals to

:40:53. > :40:59.cut working tax credit? Thex recognised the false logic of what

:41:00. > :41:04.he was doing. Indeed, when we had the Autumn Statement, he sahd and I

:41:05. > :41:09.quote, I have had represent`tion that the changes to tax credits

:41:10. > :41:14.should be phased in. I hear and understand them, and he went on The

:41:15. > :41:17.important thing to do is not to say is their men but to avoid them

:41:18. > :41:23.altogether. Tax credits are being phased out anyway as we introduce

:41:24. > :41:30.universal credit. The overwhelming impression at that point is that

:41:31. > :41:35.this policy had been abandoned. What he didn't mention, is that ht was

:41:36. > :41:42.effectively being rebranded and recycled through the universal

:41:43. > :41:46.credit system. I cannot unddrstand why those people who lobbied the

:41:47. > :41:51.Chancellor beforehand on working tax credits appear to be accepthng these

:41:52. > :41:58.same proposals being recycldd through universal credit. The

:41:59. > :42:05.Chancellor was the one involved in smoke and mirrors, and actu`lly he

:42:06. > :42:12.compound that with another threat. He suddenly found for the ftnding of

:42:13. > :42:20.it, ?27 billion that seems to be in the accounts in autumn that had not

:42:21. > :42:27.been in the accounts in Julx. It does credit to that well-known

:42:28. > :42:33.former comedian, Tommy Coopdr, illusionist and comedian, you found

:42:34. > :42:41.it just like that! All I can hope is that for the state of the n`tion's

:42:42. > :42:45.finances, this 27 billion is not as illusory as the benefits whhch the

:42:46. > :42:52.Chancellor claimed would accrue to those who moved on to universal

:42:53. > :42:55.credit. I would like to devdlop this further, because not only do I

:42:56. > :43:01.object to the way in which ht was introduced into the House, the

:43:02. > :43:04.proposals, but the underlying philosophy of it is a compldte

:43:05. > :43:11.contradiction to everything that the government has said about m`king

:43:12. > :43:18.work pay and taking people off benefits, incentivising people into

:43:19. > :43:21.work. This is a theme I think has been well developed by a nulber of

:43:22. > :43:30.other contributors to this debate, so I will not take it any ftrther.

:43:31. > :43:35.But can I just say, Madam Ddputy Speaker, that if you put thhs in the

:43:36. > :43:40.context of the cuts to inheritance tax, what we have now is a tniversal

:43:41. > :43:45.credit system that effectivdly penalises those who are working hard

:43:46. > :43:50.to produce the goods and services and pay the taxes that will reduce

:43:51. > :43:55.the deficit and gives benefht to those who inherit capital that will

:43:56. > :43:58.actually be better off. It hs a policy that is incoherent,

:43:59. > :44:07.contradictory and sends the wrong message and ultimately will be

:44:08. > :44:11.self-defeating. Thank you. Ht must surely be a fact that all shdes of

:44:12. > :44:17.this house want to see more people in good jobs, and this must be a

:44:18. > :44:19.central focus of any governlent There is a pragmatic economhc

:44:20. > :44:27.argument for this but also the social and moral argument. Labour's

:44:28. > :44:31.policies in this area were no doubt well-intentioned but proved to be

:44:32. > :44:35.expensive, bureaucratic and in some cases, too many cases,

:44:36. > :44:39.counter-productive. The growth in jobs vacancies in the UK economy

:44:40. > :44:42.today is a reflection of thd success of this government's policids and

:44:43. > :44:48.provides opportunities to pdople currently out of work and pdople who

:44:49. > :44:54.want a better job. 2 million more people are now in work meanhng we

:44:55. > :45:00.are creating 1000 jobs in. Dstimates vary but they are now betwedn

:45:01. > :45:08.750,001.2 million more vacancies in the economy at any one time than

:45:09. > :45:12.before the recession. On a parochial note, I welcome the latest figures

:45:13. > :45:18.showing that the number of people in my local constituency of br`in to be

:45:19. > :45:27.claiming job-seekers has fallen by 110 this year, 2015 alone, `nd it is

:45:28. > :45:34.a staggering 59% drop since the economic and welfare reforms that

:45:35. > :45:39.the government introduced in 20 0. However, looking foreword, we have

:45:40. > :45:43.to ask why we have so many vacancies and yet so many people

:45:44. > :45:49.underemployed. Surely, the past welfare system must be a

:45:50. > :45:56.contributory factor. We can recognise the impact of perverse

:45:57. > :45:59.incentives without vilifying the unemployed or the underemployed and

:46:00. > :46:04.they would make the point that at no point in this debate have hdard the

:46:05. > :46:09.words scroungers uttered from this side of the House, but unfortunately

:46:10. > :46:13.many times from the other, `nd I think that is unfortunate. We have

:46:14. > :46:20.all had people in our surgeries say something along the lines of I am

:46:21. > :46:29.working my 16 hours. How on earth have we come to this? If taking more

:46:30. > :46:33.work brings extra paperwork, extra uncertainty, but little extra money,

:46:34. > :46:39.is it any wonder that so many people decide not to do it? This is

:46:40. > :46:42.fundamentally wrong and must be rectified if we are going to deal

:46:43. > :46:48.with long-term underemploymdnt seriously. Universal credit extends

:46:49. > :46:52.financial incentives to people working less than 16 hours ` week

:46:53. > :46:58.and removes the limit on thd number of hours some people can work, and

:46:59. > :47:04.the taper helps people clearly understand the advantages of working

:47:05. > :47:08.and planning for the long-tdrm. As a conservative I want to get people

:47:09. > :47:12.real choices in work and a life trapped in welfare is a lifd without

:47:13. > :47:18.choices, and it is our duty to change this. Give people a well

:47:19. > :47:22.deserved chance to make the very best for themselves and thehr

:47:23. > :47:25.families. The financial impdrative is important but just as important

:47:26. > :47:30.is universal credit as a me`ns of getting more people into work and

:47:31. > :47:33.more people onto good work. I have listened to the members opposite and

:47:34. > :47:37.the arguments are all based on people not changing their

:47:38. > :47:40.circumstances and this fund`mentally misses the point of univers`l

:47:41. > :47:45.credit. I want people to ch`nge their circumstances. If people are

:47:46. > :47:49.trapped in low paid and part-time jobs I want them to change their

:47:50. > :47:53.circumstances. If their employers would invest in their trainhng

:47:54. > :47:58.because they are only on 16 hours a week, I want them to change their

:47:59. > :48:01.circumstances. If they are stuck on minimum wage I want to see them able

:48:02. > :48:05.and confident to get better jobs and therefore change their

:48:06. > :48:14.circumstances. Universal crddit will be a game changer and I will commit

:48:15. > :48:20.and commend it to the House. Happy New Year. The apparent tax credits

:48:21. > :48:24.U-turn performed by the Chancellor appeared that the time to bd a

:48:25. > :48:27.victory for common sense and for the vigorous campaign fought by my

:48:28. > :48:35.colleagues on these benches and in Hollywood and indeed by Labour and

:48:36. > :48:40.the Greens. As the dust has settled on the much hyped Utah and ht would

:48:41. > :48:45.appear role the government has done is delay this and transfigured into

:48:46. > :48:48.universal credit, specifically the work allowance. The House of Commons

:48:49. > :48:52.library debriefing on this list you state that the work allowance

:48:53. > :48:57.reductions will ultimately have similar impact to the changds in tax

:48:58. > :49:08.credits now going ahead. Low income working households in places across

:49:09. > :49:14.this country will still be `sked to pay the price for economic failure

:49:15. > :49:17.is not of their making. The cuts have just been deferred and

:49:18. > :49:23.deflected and dished out by other means. So yet again we must ask how

:49:24. > :49:28.these cuts can possibly chine with the government claim that they want

:49:29. > :49:32.to make work pay, or with the aim of universal credit that work pays and

:49:33. > :49:36.more work pays for everyone. Work will not pay for those on universal

:49:37. > :49:41.credit due to see the incomds reduced by up to ?3000 a ye`r. 3000

:49:42. > :49:47.less for a single parent or a family before closing costs are considered

:49:48. > :49:52.that we are one or both adults are disabled. These people are working

:49:53. > :49:56.and working hard. They are paying their taxes and are now to be hard

:49:57. > :50:01.once again. The minister has said in his remarks that he wants a change

:50:02. > :50:03.to the cycle of taking monex from lower-income workers and giving it

:50:04. > :50:07.back to Social Security. He is achieving that changed but now the

:50:08. > :50:12.Treasury will just take and not give back. The government may well

:50:13. > :50:15.suggest this can be made up by working extra hours and indded the

:50:16. > :50:19.Work and Pensions Secretary has already made this suggestion but for

:50:20. > :50:24.those with a disability which makes it possible to work but impossible

:50:25. > :50:27.to work full-time, or with someone with caring responsibilities who can

:50:28. > :50:32.only work full-time or thosd whose employer cannot afford to ghve them

:50:33. > :50:36.extra hours, this cut will be an unfair punishment for this

:50:37. > :50:40.government's flawed and reckless austerity at any cost of session.

:50:41. > :50:43.This despicable suggestion that all those about to have their incomes

:50:44. > :50:48.cut can just pick up some overtime here and they are just goes to show

:50:49. > :50:53.how desperately out of touch to the ministers are, and on the evidence

:50:54. > :50:58.of this debate, a great manx government backbenchers really are.

:50:59. > :51:01.They have not got a clue how people on low incomes get by and nor how

:51:02. > :51:07.devastating an impact these cuts will have. If the government is

:51:08. > :51:11.serious about reducing welf`re spending, it would be creathng more

:51:12. > :51:15.job opportunities and truly dealing with barriers to employment

:51:16. > :51:19.particularly for the disabldd and mentally unwell but instead we see

:51:20. > :51:28.savage cuts to Social Securhty support directed at those bhnding it

:51:29. > :51:32.most difficult to get into work These groups help those in need of

:51:33. > :51:36.extra support either get back into work or stay and work for ddaling

:51:37. > :51:40.reasons and are being slashdd to reverence by this government, so I

:51:41. > :51:44.hope the government will hedd the call from my right honourable

:51:45. > :51:49.friend, the member for Banff and Buchan, and publish an impact

:51:50. > :51:54.assessment. We must remember that these cuts are being made ott of

:51:55. > :51:58.choice, not necessity. The Tory government should be focusing its

:51:59. > :52:04.priorities for spending cuts elsewhere but not on low income

:52:05. > :52:08.families, so in conclusion, I hope we can see a similar reargu`rd

:52:09. > :52:13.action from the Tory backbenchers who spoke out against the t`x credit

:52:14. > :52:17.cuts and to oppose these cuts to universal credit work allow`nce The

:52:18. > :52:29.House of Commons library has said it will have... Chris Stephens. Madam

:52:30. > :52:39.Deputy Speaker, can I thank the Labour front bench, it is OK, I will

:52:40. > :52:42.send that up to Hansard! Thd honourable gentleman is using

:52:43. > :52:50.perfectly good language and most of us understand perfectly. Can I thank

:52:51. > :52:56.the Labour Party and the melber for bringing this motion to the House,

:52:57. > :52:58.and I want to start is he dhd, by discussing the parliamentarx

:52:59. > :53:04.procedures and concerns I h`d about how this change was made. Mx view

:53:05. > :53:09.was that the statutory instrument committee should be used to address

:53:10. > :53:14.technical changes to legisl`tion and technical amendments. This was not a

:53:15. > :53:17.technical amendment. This w`s a policy change and it was a

:53:18. > :53:22.procedural vehicle to sneak in the most damaging legislation and

:53:23. > :53:28.avoiding public scrutiny. What we were subjected to from government

:53:29. > :53:36.members was the usual sunshhne and cheerful rhetoric. So much so, that

:53:37. > :53:40.if you were playing Tory buzz phrase Bingle, you would have won `fter a

:53:41. > :53:44.couple of minutes. The realhty of this change is that a singld parent

:53:45. > :53:48.currently earning minimum w`ge can work up to 22 hours but with this

:53:49. > :53:56.change the cut to working allowance would lose that support aftdr 1

:53:57. > :53:59.hours. There were many questions I asked at the Statutory Instrument

:54:00. > :54:03.Committee which I am still `waiting an answer to, and I hope thd

:54:04. > :54:08.Government front bench will answer these. What assessment has been made

:54:09. > :54:16.on the effect of the changes on working families and their `bility

:54:17. > :54:20.to take part-time work? Doesn't this incentivise work and lead to workers

:54:21. > :54:25.reducing their hours, because it seems to be human nature if there is

:54:26. > :54:29.a chance of somebody losing enough it a month and they can onlx say

:54:30. > :54:35.that bike cutting working otrs, they will do that. Will there be any

:54:36. > :54:41.mitigation on the effects of benefits? How will carers bd

:54:42. > :54:47.affected, and talking about young workers, what about those aged under

:54:48. > :54:55.25 who will not get access to the National Living Wage? What hmpact

:54:56. > :54:58.assessment has been done on staff in the Department for Work and Pensions

:54:59. > :55:04.who we know are at the lowest paid civil servants in the country, so

:55:05. > :55:11.much so that when staff frol Her Majesty's Revenue and Custols were

:55:12. > :55:18.merged into DWP, staff workhng in HMRC earned ?2000 more than those

:55:19. > :55:25.who work in DWP. Staff who `re subjected to a 1% pay cut who were

:55:26. > :55:30.increasing and had to pay increased National Insurance contributions,

:55:31. > :55:37.40% of DWP staff currently on tax credits. We have heard much today

:55:38. > :55:44.about aspiration. What does a cup to working allowance mean, what message

:55:45. > :55:50.does it send to those who aspire? I believe the reality is that people

:55:51. > :55:53.are aware that ladder of social mobility is being systematically

:55:54. > :55:59.pulled up ahead of them and no matter how hard they work or home at

:56:00. > :56:03.the aspire to wave at life for their children and themselves, thdy will

:56:04. > :56:14.be punished for not being bored into the right sort of family. -, born.

:56:15. > :56:21.That is the reality of this cut Thank you, Madam Deputy Spe`ker It

:56:22. > :56:25.is a pleasure to follow the member for Glasgow South West in actually

:56:26. > :56:31.debating the motion before ts about the Government's cut to the

:56:32. > :56:37.Universal Credit work allow`nce It has been like a silent disco

:56:38. > :56:41.experience where the other side seem to be tuned to a debate abott their

:56:42. > :56:46.patients of Universal Credit whereas this side of the House seems to be

:56:47. > :56:52.tuned into the right debate about the cut to the work allowance. We

:56:53. > :56:57.have had is spurious arguments, the honourable member for Braintree said

:56:58. > :57:02.he wants to see his habitual and is able to improve their choicds but

:57:03. > :57:07.hasn't told us how the cut to the work loans will improve anybody s

:57:08. > :57:16.choices. It will not improvd choices for a table in my judgment see when

:57:17. > :57:21.this change reaches them. Wd have also heard nonsense arguments like

:57:22. > :57:26.the memorable for Gloucester saying the IFS have told us nobody will

:57:27. > :57:32.lose out. That is not what the IFS have said in relation to spdcific

:57:33. > :57:41.changes to Universal Credit and not just the work allowance. Thd IFS

:57:42. > :57:46.taking into account all the changes estimates a reduction of 3.7

:57:47. > :57:53.billion, and estimate there will be an aggregate loss of 1.5 billion to

:57:54. > :57:58.working families, and as thd member for Banff and Buchan pointed out,

:57:59. > :58:06.there are some who are meant to be built as losers and some as winners,

:58:07. > :58:11.but 2.6 million according to the IFS will lose an average of 1600 pounds

:58:12. > :58:20.a year and 1.9 million are scheduled to gain an average of 1400 homes a

:58:21. > :58:24.year, but we got no that those who are projected as winners will stay

:58:25. > :58:29.as winners because we have `lready seen the comment bend and change all

:58:30. > :58:35.its promises around Univers`l Credit, work would play and more

:58:36. > :58:42.work would pay for everyone, we have seen that promise eroded by the

:58:43. > :58:46.Government this year. We saw them produce a budget in the sprhng where

:58:47. > :58:52.they announced one figure for the welfare cap and then came b`ck and

:58:53. > :58:58.reduced the welfare cap by 46.5 billion in the next four ye`rs, so

:58:59. > :59:03.that shows us we cannot depdnd on any of these projections for

:59:04. > :59:08.assurances, and when the Ch`ncellor announced his U-turn in rel`tion to

:59:09. > :59:13.tax credits, it was clear hhs intent was still there in relation to

:59:14. > :59:19.Universal Credit, both the near term change and the longer term changes,

:59:20. > :59:24.those would be there, but hd also said the savings he was givhng up in

:59:25. > :59:30.his U-turn, he would achievd by other means, so we'll got the bike

:59:31. > :59:34.other changes in terms of Universal Credit, including the work

:59:35. > :59:42.allowance? Will those currently cold as potential winners have their

:59:43. > :59:50.terms and conditions change in years to come? There is no argument given

:59:51. > :59:53.by honourable members opposhte in terms of the Universal Credht work

:59:54. > :59:59.allowance that they could not equally give in response to any

:00:00. > :00:05.future cut affecting other claimants, and apart from the

:00:06. > :00:10.question of the roll-out, the fact is individuals know they cannot rely

:00:11. > :00:16.on any of the promises given about what Universal Credit will lean to

:00:17. > :00:21.them. It is all very well for Tory MPs to say what it means to them but

:00:22. > :00:28.it will be a different storx on the kitchen tables of hard-workhng

:00:29. > :00:33.families. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, I promise to try to be

:00:34. > :00:39.brief. In his Autumn Statemdnt, the Chancellor trumpeted that hd was

:00:40. > :00:42.reversing proposed cuts to tax credits, saying he abandoned plans

:00:43. > :00:48.to impose the cat from April this year. It now appears he is doing a

:00:49. > :00:54.U-turn on his U-turn becausd since the Autumn Statement it transpired

:00:55. > :00:59.he has lined up similar cuts to the same working families, this time

:01:00. > :01:04.with cuts to Universal Credht. It seems the Secretary of Statd is

:01:05. > :01:07.ushering in a new postcode lottery by pushing ahead with cuts to

:01:08. > :01:12.Universal Credit, which will see some families ?3000 a year worse off

:01:13. > :01:18.than others in the same circumstances. We heard the example

:01:19. > :01:25.of a single mother working full time who will have a net income lower

:01:26. > :01:33.next year than somebody in the same circumstance on tax credits. A

:01:34. > :01:40.single parent on to -- of two will see their income fall by eight

:01:41. > :01:46.thousand pounds next. Analysis shows that cuts to the work allow`nce will

:01:47. > :01:53.also mean an annual work allowance cut for disabled people in work and

:01:54. > :02:00.this is a concern. My consthtuency will be hit hard by these proposals,

:02:01. > :02:07.with 2000 families affect it in 2017, and more each successhve year.

:02:08. > :02:11.Across our country we see the need for food banks increase and I raise

:02:12. > :02:17.this because in many cases would bang support is provided more to

:02:18. > :02:22.people in work that out of work and perhaps if the minister and

:02:23. > :02:25.Secretary of State would visit food banks and talk to volunteers they

:02:26. > :02:32.would get a better appreciation of the hardship endured. These

:02:33. > :02:36.proposals to cut tax credits but make things worse for working

:02:37. > :02:42.families, people the Governlent say they are committed to helping. I say

:02:43. > :02:46.to the members opposite, thdse measures will cause great h`rdship

:02:47. > :02:52.to vulnerable families across our country. This Government has

:02:53. > :02:57.choices. We have seen announcements to allocate billions to help the

:02:58. > :03:03.most well-off by cutting inheritance tax, to support big businesses by

:03:04. > :03:10.cutting corporation tax... His repeated assertion in relatdd to the

:03:11. > :03:18.inheritance tax cut, even bx 20 1 this will still only cost ldss than

:03:19. > :03:22.?1 billion. It is not comparable to the savings achieved through these

:03:23. > :03:29.welfare reforms. You cannot magic up savings through not preceding with

:03:30. > :03:36.the inheritance tax cut alone. That is one example, there are others. It

:03:37. > :03:45.is an example of the wrong choices being made by this Government. They

:03:46. > :03:50.have also taken to give support to read businesses and have chosen to

:03:51. > :03:58.continue cuts in the top rate of income tax from 50 two 45%, allowing

:03:59. > :04:06.someone earning ?2 million ` year to continue to pay 250,000 pounds a

:04:07. > :04:11.year less in income tax. Thdse are clearly wrong choices made on the

:04:12. > :04:17.back of ordinary working falilies, and it is with this acronym but the

:04:18. > :04:22.decision to penalise working families is wrong in so manx ways.

:04:23. > :04:27.These changes will cause undue stress to millions of familhes and I

:04:28. > :04:32.urge members opposite to support the Labour Party's motion today are not

:04:33. > :04:40.turn their backs on working families. I welcomed and pr`ised the

:04:41. > :04:47.Chancellor for the U-turn on tax credits. It was the right thing to

:04:48. > :04:51.do, the courageous thing to do, and I've paid tribute to colleagues from

:04:52. > :04:57.all sides of the House who worked to achieve that and in the othdr place,

:04:58. > :05:00.and colleagues on the other benches who had the courage to tell their

:05:01. > :05:05.front bench they were wrong and this would head working families, so

:05:06. > :05:13.imagine my dismay when thosd same people, many of them who thought

:05:14. > :05:18.they had escaped a 1400 cut in their low income from next April, they now

:05:19. > :05:25.find that through a different mechanism they will suffer hn

:05:26. > :05:30.exactly the same way. This decision was merely a delay, a temporary

:05:31. > :05:41.reprieve, and those people will feel. They will feel betraydd. Let

:05:42. > :05:44.me serve notice on the Government today that the Liberal Democrats

:05:45. > :05:48.will table an amendment in the House of Lords and will seek coopdration

:05:49. > :05:53.from other parties to bring this down, to show the Government they

:05:54. > :06:00.cannot win the tax credit changed by the act thought, which is

:06:01. > :06:05.disgracefully what this is `bout. The reality of the figures `re

:06:06. > :06:11.worrying. The reality of thd people affected is disgraceful. Lone

:06:12. > :06:16.parents will be affected, the net effect on their income will be a

:06:17. > :06:24.reduction of ?2600 according to Liverpool economics. Disabldd people

:06:25. > :06:30.will see a reduction of ?2000. Couples with children will see a net

:06:31. > :06:34.effect of a reduction of ?1000. 2.6 million working families will lose

:06:35. > :06:42.out if this cup to Universal Credit goes through. A couple on ?20,0 0 a

:06:43. > :06:48.year with two children, thex were looking forward to being ?160 better

:06:49. > :06:54.off due to changes in personal allowance next April after that

:06:55. > :06:59.scrapping of the tax credit and would have welcomed that, btt now

:07:00. > :07:08.that same couple will be facing a cut in just if you weeks of ?10 0.

:07:09. > :07:14.This Social Mobility and Chhld Poverty Commission, the Govdrnment's

:07:15. > :07:20.own advisory body, said the incentives to progress in work could

:07:21. > :07:24.be worse than they were and they say the immediate priority should be

:07:25. > :07:27.reversing planned cuts to work allowances before they are `nd

:07:28. > :07:35.wanted and despite the reversal on income tax credits, these proposals

:07:36. > :07:38.merely delayed the reversal for those, so why not one word from

:07:39. > :07:43.those who had the courage to oppose tax credit cuts went exactlx the

:07:44. > :07:49.same cuts in a different guxs are here today. Asking people to work

:07:50. > :07:56.200 more hours a year simplx shows a front edge and a Conservative

:07:57. > :08:02.government that are out of touch. The questions I have for thd

:08:03. > :08:07.Chancellor in the short terl and the Secretary of State for Work and

:08:08. > :08:10.Pensions, why has there not in a proper impact assessment of this

:08:11. > :08:17.change? What have they got to hide and will they know do one, `nd will

:08:18. > :08:22.they also respond to the Chhld Poverty Commission's view, which

:08:23. > :08:26.they have not done so? The Liberal Democrats will seek to overturn this

:08:27. > :08:32.in the House of Lords. They are right to do so and let us hope that

:08:33. > :08:36.once again we see a U-turn from this Government because this is not

:08:37. > :08:43.acceptable and heads the people they purport to be seeking to help.

:08:44. > :08:51.Thank you, can I congratulate everybody and thank them for their

:08:52. > :08:55.contributions to the today's debate. Too many to mention in detahl but if

:08:56. > :09:02.I could just mention the right Honourable member for East Ham, who

:09:03. > :09:08.in his typical way has forensically analysed the implications of the

:09:09. > :09:14.cuts to work allowance for tniversal credit, and also the implic`tions in

:09:15. > :09:19.this house for undermining the objective of universal credht, which

:09:20. > :09:24.is to incentivise work. The government may have been forced to

:09:25. > :09:29.roll back on their proposal around cuts to tax credits, but as has been

:09:30. > :09:34.emphasised, this is not the end of the attack on hard-working people on

:09:35. > :09:38.low paid. In his Autumn Statement last November, the Chancellor failed

:09:39. > :09:46.to exclude people currently on universal credit from any ctts in

:09:47. > :09:48.work allowances. As has been said, as everybody will eventuallx move on

:09:49. > :09:55.to universal credit the long-term effect will be zero. Accordhng to

:09:56. > :10:03.the IFS, by 2020, two .6 million families will be ?1600 a ye`r worse

:10:04. > :10:10.off. Starting in April next year there will be 9.6 billion worth of

:10:11. > :10:15.reduction in support with ?000 million coming from 2016-17. Those

:10:16. > :10:22.people including my constittents will be hit first. They are

:10:23. > :10:25.currently 155,000 people on UC and that is increasing every wedk and

:10:26. > :10:33.expected to be half a million by April. The House of Commons library

:10:34. > :10:39.show these cuts mean a single parent of two will lose ?2400 next year.

:10:40. > :10:46.Liverpool economics have estimated that disabled people will h`ve their

:10:47. > :10:49.support reduced by ?2000 a xear A couple with two children earning

:10:50. > :10:59.?20,000 a year and will be ?6,0 0 a year worse off. The North Wdst will

:11:00. > :11:03.be hit first saw from powerhouse to workouts. The government first of

:11:04. > :11:06.all denied anyone on UC would be worse off with the Secretarx of

:11:07. > :11:12.State saying on the BBC, nobody will lose any money on arrival on

:11:13. > :11:16.universal credit from tax credits because they are cash protected

:11:17. > :11:21.which means transitional protection. That couldn't be further from the

:11:22. > :11:26.truth, as the government finally conceded during the Christm`s

:11:27. > :11:28.recess. The flexible support find that the Secretary of State claimed

:11:29. > :11:35.would provide additional protection is used for other purposes. Last

:11:36. > :11:45.year it was only ?69 million short of the ?100 million short -, cuts.

:11:46. > :11:48.So will the Secretary of St`te now apologise because this is the first

:11:49. > :11:51.time I believe he has had an opportunity to come to the House and

:11:52. > :11:58.apologise for the inaccuraches that he made and that were misle`ding to

:11:59. > :12:05.the public in this way. I t`ke that as a no. The blunders and

:12:06. > :12:08.callousness does not stop there the government suggested the wax to

:12:09. > :12:16.avoid these cuts was to work an extra 200 hours a year, thrde or

:12:17. > :12:23.four hours a week. As the mdmber for Banff and Buchan Canon... Sorry

:12:24. > :12:27.Banff and Buchan, said, is that really what the department hs going

:12:28. > :12:35.to do, because if it is not they need to be getting their own house

:12:36. > :12:39.in order. The minister is trying to say this is about dynamism `nd

:12:40. > :12:43.strengthening work incentivds but cutting universal credit work

:12:44. > :12:49.allowances will weaken and not strengthen incentives, a far cry

:12:50. > :12:52.from the supposedly pension. As a result of these cuts, a single

:12:53. > :12:56.parent of only earning the new minimum wage will only incrdase

:12:57. > :13:02.their income by ?40 for working an additional 12 hours. That compares

:13:03. > :13:04.with an increase of ?92 for the additional 12 hours before the cuts

:13:05. > :13:11.to the work allowances were introduced. The government `re once

:13:12. > :13:15.more making the poorest including the working poor bear the brunt of

:13:16. > :13:20.further cuts and again as a result of the IFS analysis of the @utumn

:13:21. > :13:26.Statement shows. After six xears late have done nothing to ctrb

:13:27. > :13:30.boardroom pay, the average worker is paid ?27,000, an increase of less

:13:31. > :13:35.than 2% on last year, compared with pay for top executives of an average

:13:36. > :13:40.of ?5 million, and this trend is getting worse and not better. In the

:13:41. > :13:46.first five days of January, they had already amply qualified and --

:13:47. > :13:49.equivalent of the average worker's salary. Unsurprisingly this

:13:50. > :13:54.government has failed yet again to publish an impact assessment of the

:13:55. > :13:59.effect of these cuts. The Social Security advisory committee said

:14:00. > :14:03.these impacts need to be an`lysed carefully and the policy should be

:14:04. > :14:08.derived from strong evidencd. The committee was concerned that there

:14:09. > :14:12.may be impacts on individuals and expressed disappointment with the

:14:13. > :14:15.lack of statistical analysis to support the view that the abolition

:14:16. > :14:23.of the work allowance will not deter people from seeking work. In the

:14:24. > :14:28.House of Lords, the secondary legislation is written -- scrutiny

:14:29. > :14:30.committee said its members were disappointed that no impact

:14:31. > :14:33.assessment similar statement has been provided is showing how many

:14:34. > :14:39.people are likely to be affdcted by these changes, and to what degree.

:14:40. > :14:42.In addition there has been no cumulative assessment of thd

:14:43. > :14:46.department's impact on poverty as regards to affecting disabldd people

:14:47. > :14:50.or children, something I have repeatedly encouraged ministers to

:14:51. > :14:55.publish. Again the Social Sdcurity advisory committee stated in the

:14:56. > :15:00.report that they believe more can and should be done to identhfy and

:15:01. > :15:04.evaluate the interaction between elements in the welfare reform

:15:05. > :15:10.agenda, particularly as thex affect vulnerable groups. Others h`ve done

:15:11. > :15:16.it and we know in terms of the cumulative assessment on thd 20 2

:15:17. > :15:22.welfare reform act that ?23.8 billion will have been taken from

:15:23. > :15:33.3.7 million disabled people. That is not even taking into account the

:15:34. > :15:39.welfare reform and work act. The majority of which are found in

:15:40. > :15:45.children, will amount to ?9.7 billion. A recent article

:15:46. > :15:50.highlighted the disproportionate effect the cuts are having on

:15:51. > :15:52.children and on people with disabilities, and another

:15:53. > :15:59.highlighted the estate -- the impact on child health of the government

:16:00. > :16:04.welfare cuts. This is at a time when we in this affluent country, the

:16:05. > :16:07.sixth wealthiest in the world, have under five mortality rates the

:16:08. > :16:16.highest in northern Europe. These policies will that worse. Wd are

:16:17. > :16:20.calling for a field reversal of the proposed cuts. As we have hdard all

:16:21. > :16:25.the evidence shows there is no reason why it is right to protect

:16:26. > :16:30.people on lower incomes frol cuts to tax credits and not extend the same

:16:31. > :16:33.protection to working familhes on universal credit, especiallx so as

:16:34. > :16:36.we know the Secretary of St`te has said that he expects no new

:16:37. > :16:40.claimants to be eligible for tax credits from 2018 as the well have

:16:41. > :16:45.been replaced by universal credit is. The cuts to the univers`l credit

:16:46. > :16:49.work allowance are just as tnjust and that is why on this sidd of the

:16:50. > :16:53.House we are calling for thd field reversal and asking Conserv`tive

:16:54. > :16:57.members who were brave enough to make a stand against the tax credit

:16:58. > :17:10.cuts to have the courage and do the same today. Thank you. May H thank

:17:11. > :17:14.all the speakers who have t`ken part in today's debate. I have to say and

:17:15. > :17:19.starting that it is rather regrettable that when you h`ve

:17:20. > :17:23.Labour opposition day, you find there are more SNP members of

:17:24. > :17:27.parliament here for most of the debate, and for an opposition day,

:17:28. > :17:34.it is a poor showing they h`ve demonstrated. Let me make one thing

:17:35. > :17:39.clear, universal credit is transforming people's lives. After

:17:40. > :17:42.years of Labour's dependencx culture this government is continuing to

:17:43. > :17:48.reform the welfare system and the labour market. It is worth reminding

:17:49. > :17:52.the House of the broken welfare system and labour market th`t was

:17:53. > :17:55.left to us, a legacy honour`ble members have recognised durhng

:17:56. > :18:01.today's debate. Nearly one hn five households had no one working. The

:18:02. > :18:07.number of households where no one had ever worked had nearly doubled.

:18:08. > :18:12.1.4 million people had been on benefits for most of the prdvious

:18:13. > :18:16.decade, and close to half of all households in the social rented

:18:17. > :18:20.sector had no one in work. H will not give way, I have limited time

:18:21. > :18:27.and am keen to address as m`ny of the points that have been m`de. We

:18:28. > :18:30.have turned that around. Our reforms, the centrepiece of which is

:18:31. > :18:39.universal credit, are working and getting people back into work. I

:18:40. > :18:42.will make one exception. Thd government isn't now going `head

:18:43. > :18:46.with the tax credit cuts so why is it right to go ahead with precisely

:18:47. > :18:51.the same cuts for that minority of people who have the misforttne to be

:18:52. > :18:54.claiming not tax credits but universal credit? It is important

:18:55. > :18:58.that the right Honourable gdntleman and others take into account that

:18:59. > :19:05.they need to consider the broader perspective. Raising person`l

:19:06. > :19:11.allowances, the introduction of the living wage, the doubling of the

:19:12. > :19:14.childcare to 30 hours, tax free childcare from 2017, and don't

:19:15. > :19:19.forget that every time you fill up your tank with petrol, therd is a

:19:20. > :19:24.saving of ?10 because of thd freezing of the fuel duty, so it is

:19:25. > :19:27.important to consider everything any broader perspective, not thd narrow

:19:28. > :19:32.perspective we have seen from so many of the people opposite. They

:19:33. > :19:36.have been a number of peopld and I am afraid time simply doesn't allow

:19:37. > :19:41.me to address them all, but I will simply say that the honourable

:19:42. > :19:44.gentleman for East Ham, madd a very passionate contribution and I have

:19:45. > :19:48.to say I have huge respect for him and I am personally sorry hd is no

:19:49. > :19:52.longer on the front bench of his party. May I also paid tribtte to my

:19:53. > :19:58.honourable friend who made ` very learned that contribution, clearly

:19:59. > :20:02.setting out the reasons as to why the Labour proposals are silply not

:20:03. > :20:07.sustainable. A very powerful contribution from my honour`ble

:20:08. > :20:11.friend, the member for Lewis, who gave her experiences as she grew up.

:20:12. > :20:17.I thought that had the whold house in agreement with our. Madal Deputy

:20:18. > :20:19.Speaker, this is an important subject and we need to recognise

:20:20. > :20:25.that the Institute for Fisc`l Studies has pointed out that no one

:20:26. > :20:28.on existing benefits or tax credits whose circumstances remain the same

:20:29. > :20:33.will lose out on cash terms as a direct result of being moved onto

:20:34. > :20:38.universal credit. These clahmants will get transitional protection to

:20:39. > :20:42.allow cash loss at the point of change. It is important to note that

:20:43. > :20:46.the only people who will be directly affected by the change to work

:20:47. > :20:50.allowances in April will be those already in work and the majority of

:20:51. > :20:58.these will be single claimants without dependents. The honourable

:20:59. > :21:03.gentleman, Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, Cox away. We just checked

:21:04. > :21:08.the Hansard records. He was wrong and we were right, this sidd of the

:21:09. > :21:13.House with -- awaits a wet role of his comments. We have checkdd

:21:14. > :21:17.Hansard and he should do likewise. For those people affected, we have

:21:18. > :21:21.been careful to put measures in place to ensure they are fully

:21:22. > :21:24.supported. As well as the additional coaching support these clailants

:21:25. > :21:28.will receive, we have incre`sed the amounts available through the

:21:29. > :21:33.flexible support funds to hdlp people progress in work and increase

:21:34. > :21:38.earnings. Madam Deputy Speaker, universal credit is a major reform

:21:39. > :21:43.of welfare designed to make sure that work always pays. By rdmoving

:21:44. > :21:48.the requirement to work 16 hours per week that exists in the tax credit

:21:49. > :21:53.system, people will see a fhnancial benefit from the extra hour that

:21:54. > :21:56.they worked. The universal credit paper means that financial support

:21:57. > :22:03.is with product at a consistent and predictable rate. It helps claimants

:22:04. > :22:06.to clearly understand the advantages of work. The Institute for Fiscal

:22:07. > :22:12.Studies has said anyone being moved onto universal credit from tax

:22:13. > :22:16.credits will be protected. They will not be cached losers. Members

:22:17. > :22:21.opposite need to take that on board, and that is from the Instittte for

:22:22. > :22:26.Fiscal Studies. Madam Deputx Speaker, it is also worth noting...

:22:27. > :22:29.I will not give way. It is worth saying also universal credit is

:22:30. > :22:34.working. But every 100 jobsdeker's allowance claimants to find work,

:22:35. > :22:40.113 universal credit claimants also find jobs. It is important to look

:22:41. > :22:44.at the bigger picture. This government is moving Britain to

:22:45. > :22:49.higher wage, lower tax, lowdr welfare of society. Univers`l credit

:22:50. > :22:55.is fundamentally different to the legacy systems it and it has to be

:22:56. > :23:00.recognised leader nor meaningful of comparing an unreformed tax credits

:23:01. > :23:03.system with universal credit. As my honourable friend the Minister for

:23:04. > :23:09.disabled highlighted at the start of the debate, Labour spending on

:23:10. > :23:13.benefits went up by ?22 billion but the number of working peopld in

:23:14. > :23:24.poverty actually logos. The system we inherited from Labour was one

:23:25. > :23:27.where millions of people, bding on welfare was a more attractive option

:23:28. > :23:41.than working or doing more work than they were already doing.

:23:42. > :23:49.Labour's shambolic welfare policies led to a colossal welfare btdget

:23:50. > :23:54.that was simply out of control. And, Madam Deputy Speaker, they haven't

:23:55. > :24:00.changed. The Labour Party m`nifesto said, and I quote, on page 47, and

:24:01. > :24:03.this was the manifesto of the last election, to guarantee a decent

:24:04. > :24:10.Social Security system for the next generation we need to keep costs

:24:11. > :24:13.under control. Yet when the Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary was on

:24:14. > :24:19.the daily politics programmd in December, he said, and I quote, "We

:24:20. > :24:25.are campaigning for a full reversal of Universal Credit, we will put

:24:26. > :24:31.that money back in if we were in power, I am crystal clear about

:24:32. > :24:36.that". When the presenter challenged him, and she had to challenge him

:24:37. > :24:42.three times, she said, "Where would you get the money? The Bill would go

:24:43. > :24:50.up under your proposal". Thd reply was "Had I been Chancellor H would

:24:51. > :24:55.have taken the extra 27 billion tax receipts". So there you havd it the

:24:56. > :25:00.party that wants to continud taxing, that is why they are the party of

:25:01. > :25:07.welfare, they are the welfare party and not the Labour Party. M`dam

:25:08. > :25:13.Deputy Speaker, welfare is luch more than simply giving money to people

:25:14. > :25:17.and writing blank cheques. Ht is about removing the barriers that

:25:18. > :25:20.prevent people finding work and progressing in work. It is `bout

:25:21. > :25:25.giving people the support they need to stand on their own two fded and

:25:26. > :25:30.live independently from the state. It is about creating the right

:25:31. > :25:35.incentives people so they c`n make the right choices for themsdlves and

:25:36. > :25:39.their families. That is what Universal Credit does, and ht is

:25:40. > :25:44.working. It is incentivising work, renewing personal responsibhlity and

:25:45. > :25:50.rewarding positive choices. And under this Government, this one

:25:51. > :26:03.nation Government, we will continue to deliver for all our citizens The

:26:04. > :26:04.questions is -- is on the order paper, say I... Say no. Cle`r the

:26:05. > :27:09.lobby. The order paper, say aye, s`y no.

:27:10. > :34:12.Tellers for the aye... Telldrs for the no s.

:34:13. > :39:19.. . Ayes The right to a 73, noes the two the left 278.

:39:20. > :39:43.Ayes 273 The, noes 308 the. We now come to the motion on floodhng.

:39:44. > :39:47.--The noes, 308. I will try to limit the number of interventions. I think

:39:48. > :39:52.it is important we hear frol people whose own constituents have been

:39:53. > :39:56.affected by flooding over this Christmas period. This is the second

:39:57. > :40:00.opposition day in less than a month when we have had to call a debate on

:40:01. > :40:04.flooding. We are grateful for the response Environment Secret`ry

:40:05. > :40:07.yesterday with a statement but there were too many unanswered qudstions

:40:08. > :40:12.for communities devastated by the floods and I hope today we will hear

:40:13. > :40:16.more answers. I want to put on record as banks for the outstanding

:40:17. > :40:21.work of the emergency services and Armed Forces and many volunteers who

:40:22. > :40:29.responded to the floods will stop --. . It is quite difficult to hear

:40:30. > :40:34.the Minister and a lot of otr constituents have been affected by

:40:35. > :40:43.it. Thank you very much. I appreciate that the Secretary of

:40:44. > :40:48.State chaired Cobra in order to get a swift response of the Chrhstmas

:40:49. > :40:51.period but we cannot keep rdlying on emergency responses. That is a

:40:52. > :40:55.worrying air of complacency from this government and ministers have

:40:56. > :40:59.prioritised by prevention ddspite the national security risk

:41:00. > :41:04.assessment fighting for risk of Tier one priority. We would not hgnore

:41:05. > :41:12.expert warnings on terrorisl or cyber attacks so why do thex ignore

:41:13. > :41:17.warnings on flooding? Flood adaptation was given a double red

:41:18. > :41:20.warning and the comment was urged to protect an increasing number of

:41:21. > :41:24.homes at risk from flooding, sound advice which this government

:41:25. > :41:31.inextricably rejected. Able to have been forced their homes need to know

:41:32. > :41:34.why. My area floods repeatedly and people are frankly sick of ht. It

:41:35. > :41:38.has been happening for a very long time. Is it not the case th`t all

:41:39. > :41:44.governments have disregarded advice and after the lights in 2000 which

:41:45. > :41:47.also devastated my constitudnts the previous government was warned it

:41:48. > :41:52.needed to spend ?709 per ye`r to keep up but never dead. The record

:41:53. > :41:55.is of increased blood spent after the event followed by reductions

:41:56. > :42:05.afterwards and all governments have to be seen as guilty of that and we

:42:06. > :42:07.have to break that cycle. The review initiated in 2007 but the l`st

:42:08. > :42:12.Labour government recommenddd increasing spending and that is what

:42:13. > :42:15.the ligament was doing. It was only when the Coalition Government got in

:42:16. > :42:21.in 2010 that they reversed that spending. I was talking abott the

:42:22. > :42:27.warnings that the government had ignored including the warning from

:42:28. > :42:34.the climate Jim it to victory. - climate change committee. Pdople

:42:35. > :42:41.want to know by then by mid-secretary did not act on what

:42:42. > :42:44.was recommended by Professor Colin Mellors who said that ever tighter

:42:45. > :42:49.budgets would mean they would have to consider sites when thesd things

:42:50. > :42:53.might be formally discontinted. Ministers were told that thdir

:42:54. > :42:57.neglect of flood defences would double the number of households at

:42:58. > :43:01.significant risk of flooding in 20 years with too many assets

:43:02. > :43:05.maintained only to minimum level. The government was warned rdpeatedly

:43:06. > :43:07.about the damage caused by spending cuts and Environment Agency

:43:08. > :43:13.redundancies. It is one that too many households and businesses could

:43:14. > :43:15.not afford household insurance and that neglect of the natural

:43:16. > :43:21.environment was exacerbating the FUD rest and that heavy rain threats

:43:22. > :43:28.would only become more freqtent -- flood risk. If only this government

:43:29. > :43:36.put as much effort into defdnding the homes of people and bushnesses

:43:37. > :43:44.as it does its own record. The Secretary of State is talking about

:43:45. > :43:49.capital expenditure only. It did increase after the Somerset floods

:43:50. > :43:54.by 0.8% in real terms. In today pass my prices that is ?50 million over

:43:55. > :44:00.five years. They all advisers of the government have told them that flood

:44:01. > :44:06.spending would have to incrdase by ?20 million plus inflation dach

:44:07. > :44:14.year. Do they really think this is something to be proud of? -, the

:44:15. > :44:17.government's own advisers. . The National Audit Office has s`id were

:44:18. > :44:20.not for the panic reaction to the Somerset floods total funding would

:44:21. > :44:28.have followed by 10% in real terms during the last Parliament. In 012

:44:29. > :44:32.alone capital funding fell hn real terms by 180 million. The following

:44:33. > :44:34.year the Environment Agency published a list of three and a

:44:35. > :44:39.dataset and flood projects that would be delayed and cancelled due

:44:40. > :44:46.to lack of funding and this included schemes in Leeds and Lancashire and

:44:47. > :44:52.Cumbria. It does not matter who is in comment, the pressure for flood

:44:53. > :44:55.defence goes away when therd has not been flooding for a while goes away

:44:56. > :45:03.and we're competing with schools and hospitals. Is it not time for

:45:04. > :45:07.radical change so that instdad of fighting within the Treasurx to the

:45:08. > :45:12.funding we put it on water bills and do some other form of levies such as

:45:13. > :45:22.was recently suggested in a paper produced this week? I agree that

:45:23. > :45:25.upstream management makes are really important contribution and think

:45:26. > :45:27.perhaps the constituents of the honourable gentleman with the

:45:28. > :45:31.consent of the thought that would be paying more on what bills to meet

:45:32. > :45:36.the situation. Our emotion today is asking the government whethdr they

:45:37. > :45:39.would be prepared to meet the spending of ?800 million per year

:45:40. > :45:48.the Environment Agency is recommended. Dash-macro what bills.

:45:49. > :45:51.-- water bills. Is this somdthing we are people who are already having to

:45:52. > :45:56.struggle to pay high insurance premiums and cover losses not

:45:57. > :46:00.covered by insurance are having excesses of up to ?10,000 that they

:46:01. > :46:03.are having to beat themselvds to then be hit by rising water bills on

:46:04. > :46:16.top of that, I think they would really struggle with that concept.

:46:17. > :46:20.Many people have been angerdd by the claims of the Prime Minister. A

:46:21. > :46:26.six-year programme of investment is welcome. We need to know it will

:46:27. > :46:29.address the lasting legacy of the Coalition cuts and that this money

:46:30. > :46:31.will be available given the reliance on external contributions. With the

:46:32. > :46:33.slow progress made in infrastructure projects we need to know whdn

:46:34. > :46:36.schemes will largely be built and communities cannot wait six years

:46:37. > :46:39.for what even start and we know how slow the progress has been some of

:46:40. > :46:42.these schemes that are alre`dy supposedly in the pipeline. We need

:46:43. > :46:47.Environment Secretary to re`lise any benefit from schemes be dimhnished

:46:48. > :46:51.if the government allows to existing schemes to deteriorate. It was

:46:52. > :46:55.estimated that almost three quarters of flood defence asset systdms would

:46:56. > :47:00.not be maintained sufficiently. Maintenance spending fell bx 6% in

:47:01. > :47:04.real terms in the Coalition. I am very grateful to my honourable

:47:05. > :47:08.friend and as well as the point she makes we also need an Environment

:47:09. > :47:13.Secretary that understands particularly in urban areas the

:47:14. > :47:19.value of flood planes such `s those around Denton and a reddish Vale.

:47:20. > :47:23.They were completely submerged during the Christmas period did

:47:24. > :47:26.precisely what they were supposed to do, to take the excess away from

:47:27. > :47:30.further up the valley where the flooding could have been much worse.

:47:31. > :47:35.Those aliens are set to be reviewed as part of the Greater Manchester

:47:36. > :47:44.green belt review and are vdry much under risk had been taken off the

:47:45. > :47:51.green for development. -- of being. That is very much an issue of flood

:47:52. > :47:59.planes with House building. People are looking after the indivhdual

:48:00. > :48:02.patch only to exacerbate thd problem further downstream and that is why

:48:03. > :48:07.we need a coherent overall `pproach to the areas to make sure that

:48:08. > :48:17.upstream, that the overall picture and the needs of everyone bding

:48:18. > :48:22.protected. What she is saying is absolutely right on this issue. Does

:48:23. > :48:27.she advocate pressing the government for a complete review on thd

:48:28. > :48:30.guidance which is given to local authorities? At the moment local

:48:31. > :48:37.authorities can say it has not been designated a flood plain th`t

:48:38. > :48:42.clearly their thinking is ott of date given the changes we h`ve had

:48:43. > :48:47.in climatic conditions over recent years. The Secretary of State will

:48:48. > :48:51.see it is ultimately a decision for local people but we need to look at

:48:52. > :48:54.the broader picture and for one local authority to say it is OK to

:48:55. > :48:58.build on a flood plain is pdrhaps ignoring the impact that buhlding a

:48:59. > :49:05.flood plain will haven't amdnities in surrounding areas so we need a

:49:06. > :49:08.much more overarching view. I know the honourable ladies from Bristol

:49:09. > :49:11.and we have set up the Somerset rivers authority as she is well

:49:12. > :49:15.aware and this is working wdll. The money we need for the flood

:49:16. > :49:19.defences, we have everything we require. This is a countywide

:49:20. > :49:22.development which we are giving money directly from governmdnt to be

:49:23. > :49:27.able to do the work we need and I want to make sure she understands. I

:49:28. > :49:31.am pretty sure she does. I `m very aware of the work is being done on

:49:32. > :49:34.the Somerset Levels that I think it is a slightly different picture

:49:35. > :49:40.there because of the basin geography of it it is perhaps more isolated

:49:41. > :49:42.than areas in the North of Dngland where one Trinity after another

:49:43. > :49:51.after another that is being consecutively. -- one alia `fter

:49:52. > :49:58.another. -- one community after another. Flood spending in Scotland

:49:59. > :50:02.is going up. Does she not fdel it would been have better to unite the

:50:03. > :50:10.House on this issue and get the Scottish National party to support

:50:11. > :50:13.Labour? The spending to the Scottish environmental agency has bedn cut as

:50:14. > :50:18.I understand it and I think that is important, we have seen dev`stating

:50:19. > :50:28.pictures of flooding in Scotland. We have seen Arsenal together ,-

:50:29. > :50:37.devastating pictures of flooding in Scotland. It is important to

:50:38. > :50:40.recognise how flooding is bding dealt with and the seriousndss with

:50:41. > :50:46.which it is being taken in Scotland and that needs to be addressed and

:50:47. > :50:50.why we have put in motion. ,- bluetit in our motion. -- ptt it in

:50:51. > :51:06.our motion. Defra And the Treasury is still

:51:07. > :51:12.refusing to put any long-term estimate on maintenance. Shd told us

:51:13. > :51:15.this year it is ?171 million and is ignoring Environment Agency's advice

:51:16. > :51:19.that flood protection requires 800 million per year. That would mean an

:51:20. > :51:25.annual maintenance expendittre of ?470 million. We cannot continue

:51:26. > :51:39.with their piecemeal panickdd approach of. The Universal Credit

:51:40. > :51:42.Work Allowance -- of Defra. The best Dorset Cabinet committee was quietly

:51:43. > :51:47.disbanded once floodwaters receded and immediate attention subsided.

:51:48. > :51:50.The promised annual review of national resilience never

:51:51. > :51:54.materialise so I asked Environment Secretary again as a digest of the

:51:55. > :51:57.public have confidence in ydt another review led by the rhght on

:51:58. > :52:02.board member by Westar cert? I notice he's not here this afternoon

:52:03. > :52:08.as he was not here. Perhaps the Secretary of State can tell us if we

:52:09. > :52:13.are -- if he is in Lancashire Yorkshire visiting people affected

:52:14. > :52:21.by the floods of ugly as more pressing matters to attend to. There

:52:22. > :52:26.is no greater sign that the government surely understands how

:52:27. > :52:30.people have been affected are high businesses have been affectdd.

:52:31. > :52:33.Members of the size spoke eloquently yesterday about how people have

:52:34. > :52:37.suffered and how their fears have not gone away. How can the secular

:52:38. > :52:45.state yesterday only given vague assurances considering the Leeds

:52:46. > :52:49.scheme? -- Secretary of State. I will make progress without

:52:50. > :52:53.interventions. I am sure he can intervene on somebody else later,

:52:54. > :52:59.perhaps his own Secretary of State. Why did she not review earlher about

:53:00. > :53:04.why her predecessors made the wrong decision to scrap the schemd? Why

:53:05. > :53:07.are members across the Housd urging the government to apply to the

:53:08. > :53:14.European solidarity fund for the Secretary of State only to say

:53:15. > :53:17.consider this? Why is she dhthering about this? Why do she not `s get on

:53:18. > :53:23.with it? Why is the comment refusing to supplement the recommend`tion on

:53:24. > :53:29.the Fire Service? The service has lost thousands of firefightdrs since

:53:30. > :53:33.the floods. Does she not thhnk that the pressures on the Fire Sdrvice

:53:34. > :53:38.and an extraordinary professionalism including flood response is a

:53:39. > :53:40.statutory duty? Sure our foreign rescue service -- Fire and Rescue

:53:41. > :53:51.Service not be supported? As the Environment Agency h`s said

:53:52. > :53:58.the UK needs a rethink of flood defences which must include better

:53:59. > :54:02.management of river catchments, estuaries and lower land ardas. The

:54:03. > :54:06.last Labour Government developed innovative thinking, agreed to all

:54:07. > :54:11.recommendations of the revidw and started the process of impldmenting

:54:12. > :54:16.them. We also cast B flat and water management Act 2010 but the

:54:17. > :54:20.Coalition Government wasted the next five years. Labour's Act gave powers

:54:21. > :54:26.to require land management to protect assets for flood protection.

:54:27. > :54:31.Why hasn't it make better use of these powers? Can't cheat -, can she

:54:32. > :54:34.tell us why they we requirelents for sustainable drainage in new and

:54:35. > :54:40.existing developments. Yestdrday the Environment Secretary welcoled the

:54:41. > :54:46.paper which highlights the critical role played by land use in causing

:54:47. > :54:50.and helping alleviate floodhng, especially the protection of natural

:54:51. > :54:53.-- natural capital. Pick ring in North Yorkshire has attractdd

:54:54. > :54:58.attention this week. It highlights how efforts to slow the flood of

:54:59. > :55:03.water from the hills prevented the town getting flooded this thme. I

:55:04. > :55:05.know it is not the only exalple The Environment Secretary said she wants

:55:06. > :55:13.the results used more widelx so I would like to know how she will make

:55:14. > :55:16.this happen. The thorny isste was also highlighted how agricultural

:55:17. > :55:21.policies and associated subsidies pay little or no attention to the

:55:22. > :55:26.flood risk. Examples includdd greater exposure to rapid rtn-off

:55:27. > :55:30.from planted maize, the burning of Heather when it would use is bland's

:55:31. > :55:34.retention of water, farming practices in the upper reaches

:55:35. > :55:43.catchments of flood creaturds. In response to an interventhon from

:55:44. > :55:47.the Honourable Member for Brighton Pavilion, the Environment Sdcretary

:55:48. > :55:51.spoke about getting better value for money for Defra funding on the

:55:52. > :55:55.environment and countryside stewardship schemes. Can shd clarify

:55:56. > :56:01.her comments today, does shd think some of these incentives ard not

:56:02. > :56:04.fully aligned to achieving flood resilience objectives? The NFU says

:56:05. > :56:10.services provided by farmers protecting urban areas downstream

:56:11. > :56:14.are unrewarded and often unplanned. Sustainable drainage systems could

:56:15. > :56:18.beg a positive difference btt progress has been slow and the scope

:56:19. > :56:22.for local -- local authorithes to make progress seems limited. As the

:56:23. > :56:26.climate change committee reported many are yet to finalise strategies

:56:27. > :56:31.despite this being a legal requirement for the last five years.

:56:32. > :56:35.We need a cross departmental approach to flood prevention. 1 00

:56:36. > :56:40.new homes the year are built in areas of high flood risk. Wd have

:56:41. > :56:45.seen her road networks, hospitals, schools and communications cannot

:56:46. > :56:47.withstand flooding. Will thd secretary of state make surd

:56:48. > :56:51.planning takes into account flood risk? Just as the Government cannot

:56:52. > :56:55.neglect in which regions we need to work across the UK for clim`te

:56:56. > :56:59.change to become adaptation. The Welsh Government this week provided

:57:00. > :57:04.?2.3 million for flood hit communities in Wales and we know

:57:05. > :57:07.flooding has caused havoc across Scotland yet there are fears of cuts

:57:08. > :57:12.to the Scottish Environment`l Protection Agency. People are not

:57:13. > :57:16.interested in more excuses, or empty promises. Put simply, they want to

:57:17. > :57:20.know this Government is doing everything it can to prevent this

:57:21. > :57:24.happening again. We cannot stop the rain but we can stop at least some

:57:25. > :57:30.of the devastation it causes. People are living in fear of floods and

:57:31. > :57:37.need reassurance and that is what they will hear from the Envhronment

:57:38. > :57:41.Secretary now. I am grateful to the opposition for securing this

:57:42. > :57:46.important debate today. We have seen extreme weather over the last month

:57:47. > :57:48.including the highest ever rainfall in the north-west, record rhver

:57:49. > :57:55.levels across Lancashire, and Yorkshire rivers and metre higher

:57:56. > :57:59.than they ever were before. I have every sympathy for those affected

:58:00. > :58:04.throughout the UK. To be flooded is a devastating experience at any time

:58:05. > :58:09.but is truly terrible at Christmas. I want to pay tribute to thd

:58:10. > :58:13.emergency services, the milhtary, the Environment Agency and other

:58:14. > :58:16.responders and volunteers from around the country working `round

:58:17. > :58:23.the clock to help. Many of whom gave up their Christmas. Through daily

:58:24. > :58:27.Cobra meetings we ensure thd necessary resources were deployed

:58:28. > :58:32.early and ahead of the flooding This the military, emergencx

:58:33. > :58:37.services and Environment Agdncy were on the ground and able to provide

:58:38. > :58:42.immediate help. We moved telporary flood barriers to the region and put

:58:43. > :58:47.pumps from across the country to support the response effort. Funding

:58:48. > :58:53.to support those communities, business and farmers has bedn

:58:54. > :58:58.provided in record time is, within three days of the flooding

:58:59. > :59:02.occurring. Money is now with the local authorities so they c`n help

:59:03. > :59:13.people as soon as possible. The Government is to what it takes to

:59:14. > :59:17.get people back on their fedt. I am grateful to my Honourable Friend for

:59:18. > :59:21.making way. She is right money has been distributed quickly but there

:59:22. > :59:25.is still concern amongst local authorities as to what that money

:59:26. > :59:30.can be spent on. I wonder if she could clarify for the benefht of

:59:31. > :59:41.local authorities to make it clear that the fund -- what the ftnds can

:59:42. > :59:45.be spent on what they cannot. He is right, there is the bellwether

:59:46. > :59:48.funding councils can claim but also the money provided to counchls for

:59:49. > :59:52.local residents of businessds where they can claim up to ?5,000 for

:59:53. > :59:58.resilience measures for thehr homes. It is there to cover the costs

:59:59. > :00:03.councils have incurred but `lso to cover the immediate support to

:00:04. > :00:06.residents and businesses. I encourage residents to cont`ct their

:00:07. > :00:11.council so they can receive that support. Repairs have been completed

:00:12. > :00:15.to the Foss barrier in York and it is operational. It will now be

:00:16. > :00:20.upgraded with new pumps to dnsure it can cope with higher volumes of

:00:21. > :00:25.water. The flood recovery envoy for Yorkshire, with me today, whll be

:00:26. > :00:30.producing a plan to repair the tab Casterbridge early next week, and

:00:31. > :00:39.will be meeting local residdnts It is a national priority. I whll give

:00:40. > :00:43.way. Will the Minister accept the situation in climate change is that

:00:44. > :00:47.one in 200 year events are becoming one in 100 Gerry Adams, and Paris

:00:48. > :00:53.has accepted that with another degrees to world temperaturds, and

:00:54. > :00:59.surely there is no excuse for now bringing forward more investment,

:01:00. > :01:02.more than we planned under the 007 review, urging Government to bring

:01:03. > :01:07.in more investment than currently agreed. I thank the Honourable

:01:08. > :01:13.Gentleman for his point. In response to these weather events, whhch we

:01:14. > :01:19.haven't seen before, absolutely we are reviewing the resiliencd we have

:01:20. > :01:22.on a national level and looking up our climate change models. Currently

:01:23. > :01:31.climate changes in our six-xear plan but clearly in light of recdnt

:01:32. > :01:34.events we need to look at that again, and we are committed to do

:01:35. > :01:37.that. The Honourable Lady h`s been talking about our plans for flood

:01:38. > :01:40.investment. She has said we need a long-term strategy. This Government

:01:41. > :01:46.has put in the first ever shx-year plan for flood defence spending

:01:47. > :01:53.Unlike the party opposite who ran a year to year budget when thdy were

:01:54. > :01:58.in office. The Honourable L`dy's predecessor in the job, in the

:01:59. > :02:01.run-up to the election, reftsed to match our pledge, that we would

:02:02. > :02:10.increase flood defence spending in real terms. Her predecessor refused

:02:11. > :02:14.to confirm that during the general election campaign. The realhty is

:02:15. > :02:20.that we increase spending in real terms over the amount spent by the

:02:21. > :02:25.Labour Government from 2005,10, and we will increase it again in real

:02:26. > :02:31.terms under this Parliament. She asked about flood maintenance

:02:32. > :02:36.spending. We are spending ?071 million on flood maintenancd, and

:02:37. > :02:40.have said, in the Autumn St`tement, announced by the Chancellor, before

:02:41. > :02:46.the stewards took place, we said we would protect that as well hn real

:02:47. > :02:50.terms. So both those bits of money are protected. I want to answer what

:02:51. > :02:55.the Honourable Lady has said and I will give way to the Honour`ble

:02:56. > :02:59.Gentleman. She has asked about the ?800 million figure from thd

:03:00. > :03:03.Environment Agency, which w`s part of their long-term investment

:03:04. > :03:08.scenario. This analysis is based on total investment, not just central

:03:09. > :03:13.Government spending, both c`pital and maintenance spending, and if she

:03:14. > :03:18.read the entirety of that rdport, she will see that it concluded that

:03:19. > :03:22.current spending plans are hn line with the optimum levels of

:03:23. > :03:26.investment over the next ten years. The Honourable Lady needs to read

:03:27. > :03:32.the entire report, not just cherry pick sections of it. I will give way

:03:33. > :03:39.to the Honourable Gentleman. I'm grateful to her for giving way. We

:03:40. > :03:44.need to invest. Significant parts of the Proms are experiencing climate

:03:45. > :03:47.change. Can I ask therefore why they are stopping investment into

:03:48. > :03:51.renewable technologies and will they review the catastrophic dechsion to

:03:52. > :03:55.stop support for onshore wind, a technology that will help us in

:03:56. > :04:01.future which we desperately need in Scotland. My Honourable Fridnd the

:04:02. > :04:03.climate change secretary is doing an excellent job in achieving

:04:04. > :04:10.affordability for our consulers at the same time as hitting thd carbon

:04:11. > :04:18.budget targets. Not only th`t, she also helped negotiate the f`ntastic

:04:19. > :04:23.deal in Paris. I am extremely grateful to the Secretary of State

:04:24. > :04:27.for giving way. It has been a rather tedious backwards and forwards about

:04:28. > :04:31.the money, and the fundamentals are the Government is spending lore on

:04:32. > :04:34.flood defence. Once we get over that attempt at point-scoring whhch comes

:04:35. > :04:39.relentlessly from the party opposite we move onto the more important

:04:40. > :04:43.question, how to spend. Dat` Helms suggests the thinking behind the

:04:44. > :04:47.spending has not been sufficient with economic reality. How do we

:04:48. > :04:54.make sure we spend our limited money regardless of who's in power on the

:04:55. > :04:57.most most effective defence for the maximum number of people and

:04:58. > :05:01.corporate interests rather than in areas where it should not bd

:05:02. > :05:09.justified. My Honourable Frhend makes a good point, and that is

:05:10. > :05:13.exactly why, in December, I re-appointed DTS helm as ch`ir of

:05:14. > :05:20.the natural capital committde, so he can look at this issue and lake sure

:05:21. > :05:24.we are spending money holistically -- I re-appointed Dieter Helm. That

:05:25. > :05:29.works hand-in-hand with our 25 year environment plan. We will announce

:05:30. > :05:34.the framework that shortly. That will acquire a lot of work with a

:05:35. > :05:37.lot of people involved, what companies, the Environment @gency,

:05:38. > :05:41.local communities, farmers `nd landowners. I think we can get

:05:42. > :05:45.better value for money which is precisely why we are moving in that

:05:46. > :05:50.direction and carrying out that work. There is a famous Chinese

:05:51. > :05:56.problem, however, witches, the best time to plant a tree is 25 xears

:05:57. > :06:01.ago, and the next best time is today, so yes, we need to plan for

:06:02. > :06:07.the long term it does take time to ensure we get everything in order. I

:06:08. > :06:11.will give way. I'm grateful. She will be aware that chapter five of

:06:12. > :06:15.the Paris Agreement is about the need to protect forests and have

:06:16. > :06:18.more trees in the world of we are to tackle some of the problems of

:06:19. > :06:24.carbon, but doesn't it also have relevance for flooding? Wouldn't she

:06:25. > :06:28.agree that part of the work she has just described, it is important look

:06:29. > :06:31.at whether we need more tree-planting in this country, and

:06:32. > :06:34.of course the House itself has taken initiatives in the past through the

:06:35. > :06:39.Westminster would and the N`tional Forest to try to encourage tree

:06:40. > :06:43.planting, but perhaps we nedd more. I thank my Honourable Friend for his

:06:44. > :06:48.point. I want to make all mdmbers aware that we have a tree planting

:06:49. > :06:52.scheme for schools at the moment, which we are in collaboration with

:06:53. > :06:56.the Woodland Trust, and schools can apply, we are close to the deadline

:06:57. > :07:01.so people should look that tp. It is part of our pledge to plant 11

:07:02. > :07:05.million trees over the course of this Parliament, but of course, I

:07:06. > :07:08.think we can do more, and it is certainly something Dieter Helm will

:07:09. > :07:13.be looking at as part of thd work on the natural capital committde. I

:07:14. > :07:16.want to finish the point on the natural capital committee which

:07:17. > :07:25.number of members have menthoned, the issue of the Somerset Rhvers

:07:26. > :07:27.authority. That is a very good model for how we get better local

:07:28. > :07:30.engagement, how we get more decisions taken on the ground by

:07:31. > :07:35.people who understand the l`ndscape, how we look at wider issues. The

:07:36. > :07:39.Minister for development is looking at the Cumbria partnership to do

:07:40. > :07:44.that and we are interested to hear from local areas who want to develop

:07:45. > :07:49.those schemes. We need to move to a catchment basis. That is thd basis

:07:50. > :07:53.on which our environment pl`n is being developed, and we are working

:07:54. > :07:57.on that at the moment. We are due to announce the framework towards the

:07:58. > :08:03.middle of next year with a plan to finalise the 25 year plan l`ter this

:08:04. > :08:07.year, which will work closely in conjunction with our 25 year plan

:08:08. > :08:13.for food and farming. I will give way. In the same way she is now