10/05/2016

:30:53. > :54:58.He needs to hold up his hands, admit he has got it wrong and stop trying

:54:59. > :55:02.to blame others that his department's mistakes. It is time

:55:03. > :55:07.for him to engage properly with parents and teachers to establish an

:55:08. > :55:11.approach to primary assessment that has everybody's confidence and not

:55:12. > :55:14.just hears. He needs to look into the eyes of those ten and

:55:15. > :55:19.11-year-olds who are taking the tests today. He needs to look into

:55:20. > :55:26.their eyes and says sorry for getting it wrong. Sorry for letting

:55:27. > :55:29.them down. That is what we teach children to do, to admit their

:55:30. > :55:35.mistakes, apologise for them, learn from them and move on. Will he now

:55:36. > :55:39.learn his lesson and turn his attention away from the misguided

:55:40. > :55:43.obsession with structures at the expense of raising standards in

:55:44. > :55:45.schools and turned his focus and energy on what really matters to

:55:46. > :56:02.parents and get this right? I am grateful for the opportunity to

:56:03. > :56:11.respond to the honourable member for Scunthorpe. I have to say to the

:56:12. > :56:16.honourable member that this is a Government that is committed to

:56:17. > :56:23.raising standards in schools. I sometimes wonder with the way in

:56:24. > :56:28.which the opposition addresses this issue, whether they are as committed

:56:29. > :56:33.to raising standards as we are. In 2011, we conducted a review of the

:56:34. > :56:37.primary curriculum to ensure it was closer to the curricula being taught

:56:38. > :56:41.in the most successful education systems in the world. It was

:56:42. > :56:45.overseen by the national curriculum review panel of highly experienced

:56:46. > :56:49.head teachers and teachers in this country stop we introduced a funny

:56:50. > :56:54.check to ensure six-year-olds were being taught to read properly.

:56:55. > :56:59.120,006 -year-olds today reading more effectively as a consequence of

:57:00. > :57:02.that reform. We reviewed their reading curriculum, the English

:57:03. > :57:07.curriculum to ensure children became fluent readers who developed a habit

:57:08. > :57:14.of reading for pleasure. Rue reformed the maths curriculum so

:57:15. > :57:17.people could do long division by the Essex and knew their multiplication

:57:18. > :57:24.tables by heart by the end of year four. And the last Labour Government

:57:25. > :57:28.we have one in three primary school pupils leaving primary school is

:57:29. > :57:33.still unable to read and add up properly. We are determined to

:57:34. > :57:37.address those issues. Let me turn to the issues the honourable gentleman

:57:38. > :57:44.raised. Levels. He talked about the removal of levels. They were only

:57:45. > :57:49.ever intended to be used for the end of Key Stage statutory assessments.

:57:50. > :57:53.They became dominated by teaching practice and this had a damaging

:57:54. > :57:56.impact on teaching and failed to give parents an accurate

:57:57. > :58:00.understanding of how their children were doing at school. The removal of

:58:01. > :58:06.levels allowed classroom assessment to return to its real purpose of

:58:07. > :58:11.helping teachers evaluate pupils and their understanding of curriculum

:58:12. > :58:14.content. When we introduced the baseline in September last year, we

:58:15. > :58:17.said we would carry out a comparability study to establish

:58:18. > :58:21.whether it was feared that purpose. The study is now complete and has

:58:22. > :58:26.shown the three different assessments that schools use this

:58:27. > :58:30.year are not parable for us to create a fair starting point from

:58:31. > :58:33.which to measure progress. We can remain committed to the assessment

:58:34. > :58:36.of peoples and reception and over the coming months we will be

:58:37. > :58:49.considering options for approving these arrangements but beyond 2016/

:58:50. > :58:52.17. He wanted to bring up the spelling test. That investigation

:58:53. > :58:59.has cursed -- has uncovered further witnesses and some of the clearance

:59:00. > :59:03.processes. I initiated that investigation. They are taking

:59:04. > :59:07.appropriate management action with members of staff involved and we

:59:08. > :59:15.have already reviewed and tightened up their publication processes. This

:59:16. > :59:21.is a Government that is committed to reviewing the curriculum, raising

:59:22. > :59:24.academic standards in our schools. This was always going to be a

:59:25. > :59:29.challenging month as schools got used to the new more demanding

:59:30. > :59:32.curriculum and the more demanding assessments that follow that

:59:33. > :59:37.curriculum. I'm confident this is the right thing to do to raise

:59:38. > :59:41.academic standards in our schools to prepare young people for life in

:59:42. > :59:47.modern Britain and for an increasingly competitive global

:59:48. > :59:52.economy. Parents in Kettering of which I am one want their children

:59:53. > :59:59.when they leave primary school to be able to write neatly and spell

:00:00. > :00:04.correctly, we confidently, be able to add up, takeaway, multiply and

:00:05. > :00:09.divide, no one of their times by heart, to mix well with children and

:00:10. > :00:12.realise they themselves have lots of potential and a thirst for knowledge

:00:13. > :00:16.which they can develop in their secondary school career. To what

:00:17. > :00:24.extent are we achieving that in modern Britain? He rightly

:00:25. > :00:29.summarises the issues that we need to address. We need to make sure

:00:30. > :00:31.that the curriculum is a knowledge-based curriculum and

:00:32. > :00:39.children become fluent in arithmetic before they leave primary school and

:00:40. > :00:43.fluently does -- readers. Too many young people left primary school

:00:44. > :00:46.without those skills to equip them for secondary education. I am

:00:47. > :00:49.convinced the reforms we have introduced will deliver the

:00:50. > :00:56.objectives that my honourable friend has set out. The evidence is we have

:00:57. > :01:03.more sexy roles today reading more effectively than they were in 2012.

:01:04. > :01:06.Also 1.4 million more pupils are being taught in good and outstanding

:01:07. > :01:15.schools today than they were in 2010. Having listened to the

:01:16. > :01:20.Minister and heard the statement about the U-turn on academies, the

:01:21. > :01:25.Department for Education should be put in special measures. I think

:01:26. > :01:29.that what confidence can we have that when a minister can't even get

:01:30. > :01:33.the basics right in education, how can we have confidence that they

:01:34. > :01:43.will get the big issues right in education? This process of testing

:01:44. > :01:48.600,000 pupils is a complex arrangement as the honourable lady

:01:49. > :01:51.will know. We used contractors and on this occasion and error was made

:01:52. > :01:57.in uploading material onto a secure website. We take action swiftly when

:01:58. > :02:02.we discovered that error as we did win the spelling test was put on

:02:03. > :02:07.line three weeks ago. It is how you react to these issues that

:02:08. > :02:12.determines the competence and we acted swiftly on both occasions.

:02:13. > :02:18.This approach to testing six and seven-year-olds does require an

:02:19. > :02:22.element of trust by those people engaged in the process. We have to

:02:23. > :02:27.test and develop the test. There are a huge number of professionals who

:02:28. > :02:31.see the contents of these test at Mannie Witz before they go live and

:02:32. > :02:37.we have to trust those professionals to do their job properly and with

:02:38. > :02:41.integrity. On this occasion, one such professional decided not to act

:02:42. > :02:45.with integrity and I hope the honourable lady will take the same

:02:46. > :02:54.view that we do about professionals who act in that inappropriate way. I

:02:55. > :03:01.entirely agree with my honourable friend that testing forms an

:03:02. > :03:07.important and crucial part of our education system. If proof were

:03:08. > :03:13.needed that testing is important, one need look no further than the

:03:14. > :03:16.written statement which has been circulated in the Chamber today

:03:17. > :03:32.which says although this is a serious breach, unfortunately the

:03:33. > :03:42.word breach is spelt incorrectly. I thank my honourable friend for

:03:43. > :03:49.pointing that error out. I speak as a former Key Stage two marker and

:03:50. > :03:52.support effective testing of children but I don't think the

:03:53. > :03:59.Government understands what testing is for. If you look at the

:04:00. > :04:06.Minister's statement, he said it was a -- was for accountability at

:04:07. > :04:10.school. That is why we shouldn't put so much emphasis on a national test

:04:11. > :04:14.which is about school accountability and which leads to this kind of

:04:15. > :04:20.appalling behaviour from one teacher. We should focus on ensuring

:04:21. > :04:25.that children understand what they are learning and get appropriate

:04:26. > :04:28.tests for individual children. I don't disagree with the honourable

:04:29. > :04:35.lady. It is important that children are tested frequently. It helps with

:04:36. > :04:40.practice and schools do use in formal testing as part of the

:04:41. > :04:47.learning process. There is another purpose of testing for public

:04:48. > :04:51.accountability, to hold schools to account. That is why the assessments

:04:52. > :04:57.were introduced nearly 30 years ago. It was to hold schools to account.

:04:58. > :05:00.They targeted school improvement resources on those schools that are

:05:01. > :05:05.not delivering the quality of education that we want for our young

:05:06. > :05:10.people. We need to be able to do that. Children only have one chance

:05:11. > :05:14.at an education. My right honourable friend is committed to ensuring that

:05:15. > :05:17.we have educational excellence everywhere in every part of the

:05:18. > :05:22.country and to be able to identify those areas and schools that need

:05:23. > :05:31.that extra support. We need to have external assessments of children as

:05:32. > :05:35.they leave primary school. As opposed that has Key Stage one and

:05:36. > :05:42.another doing Key Stage two, it is outrageous that an individual has

:05:43. > :05:45.put my child's chances at risk by making this league. Could I the

:05:46. > :05:48.Minister if he would agree with me that it would be better for the

:05:49. > :05:57.opposition to take their point in mind rather than playing politics

:05:58. > :06:02.with children's testing? I do agree that as I said, the whole system

:06:03. > :06:07.does depend on the integrity of professionals. We have to have our

:06:08. > :06:11.senior markers having access to this material weeks before it goes live.

:06:12. > :06:18.We have to have test developers that have access to questions months

:06:19. > :06:24.before these tests go live. We test these before they have the right

:06:25. > :06:31.degree of demand. There are range of people that have access to this

:06:32. > :06:35.material. If we have people that don't carry their professional

:06:36. > :06:39.integrity, there will be problems. We will be investigating to identify

:06:40. > :06:45.the individual and ensure peace and's processes are tightened up so

:06:46. > :06:51.it can't happen again. He needs to move to the bottom of the class

:06:52. > :06:58.because he must try harder. The factors that this isn't the first

:06:59. > :07:03.time that tests have been compromised in this academic year.

:07:04. > :07:09.It is the second time on his watch. When he sincerely apologise to those

:07:10. > :07:16.parents, teachers and pupils who have taken the test today and will

:07:17. > :07:21.he also assured them that every particular measure that he needs to

:07:22. > :07:27.take will be taken so that this will not happen on May third occasion? I

:07:28. > :07:33.say to the honourable gentleman I did apologise for the problem with

:07:34. > :07:37.the spelling test when that material was inadvertently put online. I

:07:38. > :07:41.apologise for that. It is an issue that has not damage the integrity of

:07:42. > :07:46.the grammar and punctuation and grammar test taken by 16,010 and

:07:47. > :07:52.11-year-olds today. It was put onto a secure website are protected by

:07:53. > :07:57.password only available to markers. 93 of those markers examine at Oriel

:07:58. > :08:05.and we looked on the websites on social media. -- examine material.

:08:06. > :08:11.We look to see if there was any compromising of the test. There is

:08:12. > :08:15.no evidence. The agency are confident that has integrity and it

:08:16. > :08:21.will go ahead. This is a complex process of administering these test

:08:22. > :08:27.6000 pupils every year. This year was always going to be a challenging

:08:28. > :08:30.year and this is the first year that assesses the more demanding national

:08:31. > :08:37.curriculum that came into force on September 20 14th that schools have

:08:38. > :08:41.had since July 2013. There is an element of controversy to hit. We

:08:42. > :08:48.don't apologise for that policy because we believe in raising levels

:08:49. > :08:52.in schools and that is what we came in office to achieve. We will

:08:53. > :08:57.achieve and are achieving those standards. There are some and I am

:08:58. > :09:01.assuming there were no such people on the opposite benches who don't

:09:02. > :09:08.necessarily agree with is that it is important to raise academic

:09:09. > :09:13.standards. Somebody decided that their own opinions were more

:09:14. > :09:18.important than that professional integrity and breach the trust they

:09:19. > :09:22.have been given to breach the confidentiality contract they had

:09:23. > :09:30.entered into and leaks one of those tests to the media.

:09:31. > :09:35.Thank you very much mud and Deputy Speaker. May I begin by wishing the

:09:36. > :09:40.children taking ersatz this week very good luck. I'm sure they are

:09:41. > :09:44.taking place in places far calmer than this morning's chamber. If this

:09:45. > :09:49.is a deliberate leak, it is very serious. What does my honourable

:09:50. > :09:54.friend is due to continue the viability of this year's stats?

:09:55. > :09:59.Following the problem with the Key Stage one spelling test, we asked

:10:00. > :10:03.agency to go through with a fine tooth comb to ensure there are no

:10:04. > :10:07.further problems at by the Key Stage one or Key Stage two. We have been

:10:08. > :10:10.pursued by the chief executive of the standards and testing agency

:10:11. > :10:18.that those tests are safe and secure. I spoke to Rob Bristow, the

:10:19. > :10:25.president of Pearson UK this morning, and the issuers may they

:10:26. > :10:30.are doing a serious similar process. They want no further such

:10:31. > :10:34.incidences. Bad and Deputy Speaker, last Wednesday be Prime Minister was

:10:35. > :10:39.not able to tell the house his definition of a modal verb, but the

:10:40. > :10:44.past aggressive tens is, or to distinguish our subordinates in and

:10:45. > :10:49.coordinating subjunctive. I would like to give the Minister a second

:10:50. > :10:56.chance. In the sentence my baby was born in hospital, in the hospital

:10:57. > :10:59.where my father works", are the words where my father works a

:11:00. > :11:05.prepositional phrase, a relative clause, a main clause or a noun

:11:06. > :11:09.phrase? Well that's a very clever, clever question that the the lady

:11:10. > :11:22.asks, but I have learned through bitter experience do not respond to

:11:23. > :11:31.that kind of provocation. Order! Order! With the Minister agree with

:11:32. > :11:37.me that it is essential to... Maribor friend is right to question

:11:38. > :11:43.the importance of measuring progress, as well as attainment, and

:11:44. > :11:46.one reason people regard these assessments this year is as

:11:47. > :11:50.challenging is because there are questions in it that were previously

:11:51. > :11:55.not included in the standard test. They were level six tests and taken

:11:56. > :11:58.separately. We now include those tests within those tests so that

:11:59. > :12:05.schools can get credit for the progress of children that start

:12:06. > :12:13.there's cool with high levels of prior attainment. The Secretary of

:12:14. > :12:18.State appeared telling me the new regime had not been handled badly

:12:19. > :12:24.for Key stages. I am a and teachers, up and down the country, strongly

:12:25. > :12:27.disagree. We'll be Minister except that the Department actions are

:12:28. > :12:30.making the working lives of teachers more stressful and difficult, and

:12:31. > :12:37.expend how you think this will help to solve the already very worrying

:12:38. > :12:41.teacher recruitment crisis? Well, whenever have a platform, I talk

:12:42. > :12:44.about how important it is to go into teaching, that it is a very

:12:45. > :12:48.important profession, there are more teachers in our profession today

:12:49. > :12:57.then there have been in history. 30,000 more teachers than 2010.

:12:58. > :13:03.14,000 came into the profession last year. More than 11 thousand came in

:13:04. > :13:07.before that. Of course we want more to come into teaching, as the pupil

:13:08. > :13:12.population increases. That is why we have effective advertising

:13:13. > :13:15.campaigns, ?1.3 billion being spent on bursaries, very generous

:13:16. > :13:22.bursaries to attract best graduates into teaching. Thank you Madam

:13:23. > :13:26.Deputy Speaker. I too would like to wish all these children did like

:13:27. > :13:29.doing their exams. I know what that's like, having had three

:13:30. > :13:32.children going through state primary schools and I would like to say that

:13:33. > :13:35.tests are an imperative part of school life because we as parents

:13:36. > :13:45.want to know how to plan for them, and we will want to help fill the

:13:46. > :13:48.gaps. We would like our children do have better at maths qualifications

:13:49. > :13:53.for businesses, better writing skills, and under the Labour Party,

:13:54. > :13:57.all those years, the educational standards sank, so would be Minister

:13:58. > :14:01.agree with me that this is our driving force, better education, to

:14:02. > :14:07.raise the standards, and tests are an imperative part of that? Yes, my

:14:08. > :14:14.honourable friend is absolutely right. We have been declining in the

:14:15. > :14:22.Pisa tables internationally. We have to continually improve our system

:14:23. > :14:31.because other countries are continually improving. We have two

:14:32. > :14:34.review the primary curriculum, we have increased the demand and rigour

:14:35. > :14:38.in mathematics and in English, and it is why we are focusing so much on

:14:39. > :14:41.getting every chance to become a fluent reader, not only mastering

:14:42. > :14:46.the mechanics early on in their education, but also becoming a

:14:47. > :14:52.regular reader who reads books for pleasure and a lifelong love of

:14:53. > :14:56.reading. We've reformed the secondary curriculum, the GCSEs, so

:14:57. > :15:01.that they are more on a par with the qualifications in the best education

:15:02. > :15:05.jurisdictions in the world, and we have also reformed A-levels,

:15:06. > :15:09.responding to concerns of employers' and universities about the standard

:15:10. > :15:16.they were saying of undergraduate and employees. Returning to these

:15:17. > :15:19.tests, the minister can't the department can't organise, schools

:15:20. > :15:24.can't understand them. Does he agree with a headmaster in my area who

:15:25. > :15:28.wrote saying the primary assessment in our schools is nothing short of

:15:29. > :15:31.shambolic. Yet again, the professional judgment of experience

:15:32. > :15:34.educational professionals is ignored by politicians trying to make a

:15:35. > :15:41.short-term political gain. How does he reply? No, these tests were

:15:42. > :15:47.developed by educational professionals. A huge number of such

:15:48. > :15:51.professionals involved in the development of these tests, and a

:15:52. > :15:54.large number of professional educators headteachers, experienced

:15:55. > :15:58.teachers were involved in the review of the curriculum. These assessments

:15:59. > :16:05.are assessing the ability of schools to deliver the new curriculum. That

:16:06. > :16:11.curriculum is more demanding, and we don't retreat from that point. It

:16:12. > :16:15.was a deliberate decision to raise standards in our primary and

:16:16. > :16:18.secondary schools, as we respond to an increasingly demanding world, and

:16:19. > :16:22.as we respond to conservative employers -- the concerns of

:16:23. > :16:27.employers and universities and others. Thank you Madam Deputy

:16:28. > :16:31.Speaker. The government has made a big song and dance about testing

:16:32. > :16:40.which it now cannot deliver. No sooner was either this weekend in

:16:41. > :16:44.the Wirral this weekend, talking to governors, the government U-turn on

:16:45. > :16:47.academisation. Then I asked the Minister when he comes to dispatch

:16:48. > :16:52.box with a grand plan to improve education, why should teachers,

:16:53. > :16:57.parents, and peoples in the Wirral believe what he had to say? Thingy

:16:58. > :17:01.honourable lady simply overstates her case. We have a plan for

:17:02. > :17:06.reforming the education system put in place in 2010. We revive reviewed

:17:07. > :17:09.the curriculum, overseen by the national curriculum review panel of

:17:10. > :17:13.experienced teachers and heads teachers. It was advised by an

:17:14. > :17:20.expert panel of curriculum experts, consulted on widely between 2012 and

:17:21. > :17:25.2013, both in formally and informally. It was then published in

:17:26. > :17:30.final draft in July 2013, giving schools over a year to prepare for

:17:31. > :17:34.first teaching that new curriculum in September 2014. This has been a

:17:35. > :17:40.carefully planned review and reform of the curriculum. It has been

:17:41. > :17:44.swept, and it has been as swift as possible, because we believe

:17:45. > :17:53.children need the best education possible as quickly as possible, but

:17:54. > :17:56.it is important reforms. This will be a difficult month, it was always

:17:57. > :18:02.going to be, and schools will be assessed for time on this new

:18:03. > :18:06.curriculum. Schools have had significant amount of materials over

:18:07. > :18:09.the period, since July 2013, and they are ready and all our surveys

:18:10. > :18:14.are shown that schools have been confident of teaching the new

:18:15. > :18:18.curriculum. 90 Madam Deputy Speaker. I would hope the minister would

:18:19. > :18:24.agree with me that stability is one of the key things to a child

:18:25. > :18:27.thriving at primary school. The Department for Education has been

:18:28. > :18:30.set to change its document and resources every other day,

:18:31. > :18:35.compounded by this disgraceful leak of these test. The rewriting of

:18:36. > :18:46.history from the benches is office it which the statistics offices

:18:47. > :18:49.Woods tell them to stop doing. I would like to give them another

:18:50. > :18:53.chance to get them to apologise to parents teachers and pupils to allow

:18:54. > :18:56.them to get on with learning, to allow teachers to get on with

:18:57. > :19:02.teaching, and children to thrive. Apologise! Again, I think the

:19:03. > :19:08.honourable member overstates her case. The primary curriculum was

:19:09. > :19:16.published in final form in July 20 13. There were sample questions

:19:17. > :19:22.available as early as March 2014. The later sample questions in 2015.

:19:23. > :19:27.What this standards and testing agency have done in reference to her

:19:28. > :19:31.point about changes being made to materials on site is that they have

:19:32. > :19:37.responded to telephone queries from about certain aspects of the

:19:38. > :19:39.curriculum and sample materials, and to help teachers, they revised some

:19:40. > :19:44.of that material so that it responded to those concerns. There

:19:45. > :19:50.were other very minor changes, for example, when I change the decision

:19:51. > :19:57.in response to representations by the NAHT, about the date on which

:19:58. > :19:59.the STA collected the teacher assessment materials, when that

:20:00. > :20:02.decision was taken in response to those concerns, and there were real

:20:03. > :20:07.reasons why we wanted the dates to be later to ensure fairness between

:20:08. > :20:11.those schools which were moderated by local authorities and those that

:20:12. > :20:15.weren't full stop we responded to that concern and that of course

:20:16. > :20:19.required all documents online to have a dates change, so if the

:20:20. > :20:24.honourable lady can make a song and dance about those changes, but they

:20:25. > :20:28.were all done for professional regions -- reasons, by the standards

:20:29. > :20:34.and testing agency, I very experienced professionals and the

:20:35. > :20:38.right thing to do. I think what's on this side of the house we are most

:20:39. > :20:43.concerned about is that this is the second in a matter of weeks of major

:20:44. > :20:46.people testing errors, and it suggests quite strongly that the

:20:47. > :20:51.government has taken the eye of the ball. How has their preoccupation

:20:52. > :20:58.with enforced academisation affected their ability to monitor their

:20:59. > :21:07.contractors? We monitor contractors very carefully. The standards and

:21:08. > :21:11.testing agency monitor these issues. This was an error made by an

:21:12. > :21:17.individual who put the marking scheme and the test papers for one

:21:18. > :21:21.of the tests, the Key Stage two spelling, punctuation and grammar

:21:22. > :21:24.test, on a secure site 24 hours before they should have done. As

:21:25. > :21:30.soon as one of the markers alerted them to that fact they took it down.

:21:31. > :21:36.93 people had seen that material on the site, but all of those 93 people

:21:37. > :21:40.were subject to a confidentiality agreement with Pearson. So, this

:21:41. > :21:47.isn't some white bread breach. We checked to see whether the

:21:48. > :21:50.individual who did Lee gets to a journalist succeeded in spreading

:21:51. > :21:54.that test further. We saw no evidence overnight through social

:21:55. > :22:00.media or other platforms whether that material leaked further. We and

:22:01. > :22:04.the standards and test his agency believe that it wasn't on Myers and

:22:05. > :22:08.have continued with the test. This is a very public 's operation and I

:22:09. > :22:13.believe that parents, teachers and the public can have confidence with

:22:14. > :22:22.the tests that have been set this week. Order! Thank you madam debit

:22:23. > :22:25.is bigger. I would like to reuse a very serious point of order with the

:22:26. > :22:30.chair. I think we know from reports in the press that a chest to limited

:22:31. > :22:34.are apparently facing difficult again on costs. And the costs are

:22:35. > :22:39.being reviewed by no less than the cabinet secretary. And also a few

:22:40. > :22:43.issues on productivity which have been ever thus says the project was

:22:44. > :22:50.of course first announced. Bust a serious matter has arisen which I

:22:51. > :22:56.believe is an attempt by the civil servants who are paid for by the

:22:57. > :23:03.taxpayer and who run HS two Limited, through their agents, ever sheds, to

:23:04. > :23:09.gag members of this house. I don't know whether the chair is aware, but

:23:10. > :23:13.the locusts stand eye of no less than four ministers, three

:23:14. > :23:17.backbenchers, and I believe even the speaker, have been challenged, in

:23:18. > :23:23.other words, HS two Limited is trying to prevent members of this

:23:24. > :23:27.house speaking out for their constituents, and bringing

:23:28. > :23:31.information to the other place, to the house of Lords committee, who

:23:32. > :23:38.are now going to be deliberating this scheme. I think the question is

:23:39. > :23:43.begged is what are they afraid of, why shouldn't members of Parliament

:23:44. > :23:46.be able to speak directly to their constituencies and constituent and

:23:47. > :23:50.help to try and improve this legislation as it goes through?

:23:51. > :23:53.Quite frankly, I regard this as an interference with the freedom of

:23:54. > :23:57.speech of members of this house, and the ability and the right to

:23:58. > :24:03.represent the people that sent us here. So, I would very much ask the

:24:04. > :24:12.chair and the house authorities to look into this issue. Because I

:24:13. > :24:19.believe that on so many counts HS2 Ltd has been trying to corrupt what

:24:20. > :24:22.is happening, or even to gag or prevent to speak people against the

:24:23. > :24:27.project who wants to improve the project, making great against --

:24:28. > :24:39.greater gains for their constituents.

:24:40. > :24:50.There is a proposition that we should be gagged. In that section it

:24:51. > :24:54.says, no officer is allowed to transact private business before the

:24:55. > :24:59.House for his advantage either directly or indirectly. The sentence

:25:00. > :25:05.follows on that be members may not be agents though they can deposit

:25:06. > :25:08.petitions on behalf of parties. I hope there is not an implication

:25:09. > :25:12.that any of the members of Parliament will be making

:25:13. > :25:16.representations on behalf of their constituents on HS2 and are in

:25:17. > :25:28.receipt of advantage directly or indirectly. Could you look into it

:25:29. > :25:31.for me? Can I make it clear that the rules on local stand I are clear and

:25:32. > :25:47.we are following them to the letter. It is wrong to stop ministers,

:25:48. > :25:51.members of Parliament and even the speaker being able to perform the

:25:52. > :25:57.committee of the other house about a project that has been through this

:25:58. > :26:01.house in its first stage. This is a matter that is with the House of

:26:02. > :26:05.Lords at the moment and it applies to the House of Lords. Because the

:26:06. > :26:08.honourable lady is referring to a matter of privilege, I have eyes

:26:09. > :26:17.that she writes to the speaker to have a look at this and I hope she

:26:18. > :26:27.is happy with that. We now come to the ten Minute Rule Motion. I bring

:26:28. > :26:32.this bill for a number of reasons. I do not count myself as an animal

:26:33. > :26:36.rights activist but count myself as a common-sense activist. There are

:26:37. > :26:40.many reasons why we should have concerns that any act of animal

:26:41. > :26:46.transportation that imposes stress and unnecessary suffering with the

:26:47. > :26:49.most -- when the most logical answer is local slaughter and refrigerated

:26:50. > :26:53.transport of carcasses to their destination. This does not seek to

:26:54. > :26:58.change the law in the transportation of live animals for breeding or

:26:59. > :27:02.other aspects of animal husbandry, more -- merely to allow the

:27:03. > :27:07.discretion of the local authorities judice great -- to decide whether

:27:08. > :27:12.the facilities that they own should be used to facilitate transport for

:27:13. > :27:20.slaughter abroad. In short, this bill seeks to make amendments to

:27:21. > :27:26.section 33 of the Harbours, Docks and Piers Clauses Act of 1847. To

:27:27. > :27:29.allow local authority control ports to prescribe at their discretion the

:27:30. > :27:34.transport of animals for slaughter abroad. The primary reason for my

:27:35. > :27:39.interest in this matter is a local one to my constituency of sales --

:27:40. > :27:44.South Thanet. We have the active port of Ramsgate. It is on a

:27:45. > :27:50.long-term lease from the Crown Estate with all port operations

:27:51. > :27:56.being controlled and invoiced by the local authority of Thanet District

:27:57. > :27:59.Council. Following pressure from a ship, the council acquiesced legal

:28:00. > :28:06.demands that people be made available for small vessel Rolin,

:28:07. > :28:10.roll off operations of a few lorries carrying livestock. The first

:28:11. > :28:15.shipments happened on the 18th of May 2000 and 11. Not surprisingly

:28:16. > :28:21.the transportation attracted huge amounts of local opposition and more

:28:22. > :28:31.active campaigning by animal wide activists. The cost is estimated at

:28:32. > :28:37.?80,000 per time. Perhaps by a factor of ten more than the likely

:28:38. > :28:42.profit arising to the shipper. These regular shipments continued to local

:28:43. > :28:46.opposition until we can only describe it as a truly appalling

:28:47. > :28:53.events that occurred on the 12th of September 2000 and 12. A lorry was

:28:54. > :28:58.loaded with 548 sheep over three tiers will stop the animal health

:28:59. > :29:01.and veterinary laboratory agency 's war on site and discovered the lorry

:29:02. > :29:09.had been poorly loaded and was massively overstocked. One sheep had

:29:10. > :29:12.a broken leg, others were lame and had trapped limbs. The sheep were

:29:13. > :29:18.ordered to be unloaded and I will quote what happened next. The scene

:29:19. > :29:26.from the witness and I quote, all hell let loose with nearly 20 people

:29:27. > :29:29.made up of RSPCA, the veterinary Association of police and Port

:29:30. > :29:35.staff, some with camera in hand under paint spray in the other

:29:36. > :29:41.chasing over 500 sheep and trying to find lame ones. It was the chasing

:29:42. > :29:46.on the unsuitable surface that was causing the lameness. During the

:29:47. > :29:51.chase, six lambs went into the water resulting in four being rescued by

:29:52. > :29:55.the RSPCA and two been found dead. Later on that day some 13 hours

:29:56. > :30:02.later after the arrival of Kent Trading Standards and news crews, a

:30:03. > :30:09.further 37 sheep were identified as lame and were euthanised on site.

:30:10. > :30:14.Following a second and loading after sheep were again found to have

:30:15. > :30:20.trapped limbs. It was described by local press as simply a massacre.

:30:21. > :30:25.The day after Thanet District Council decided unilaterally to

:30:26. > :30:29.suspend any further animal live shipments from Ramsgate. This

:30:30. > :30:34.decision was supported by the wider council across all of the local

:30:35. > :30:39.political parties and by local residents. Legal fears were brought

:30:40. > :30:44.to bear and shipments resumed again will a little over a month after on

:30:45. > :30:49.the 19th of October 2012 following a grant of interim relief in the High

:30:50. > :30:52.Court. The ship is then entered the legal fray over a protected period

:30:53. > :30:59.resulting in a High Court judgment on the 27th of February 2014

:31:00. > :31:03.following a four-day hearing in December 2013. At that hearing,

:31:04. > :31:08.Thanet District Council relied heavily on section 40 of the

:31:09. > :31:13.harbours act 1964 which operas some discretion as to port use. The

:31:14. > :31:24.judgment went against Thanet District Council because primarily

:31:25. > :31:26.of the Harbours, Docks and Piers Clauses Act. It states shall be

:31:27. > :31:32.opened or persons for the shipping and shipping of goods. That is what

:31:33. > :31:37.I am seeking to change by this bill. The result of bad judgment has left

:31:38. > :31:43.local taxpayers with a compensation bill in excess of ?4 million. It is

:31:44. > :31:47.not a large authority. A resumption of trade that nobody wants through a

:31:48. > :31:51.port that is unsuitable with local residents appalled that it is their

:31:52. > :31:55.port that is now being used for a trade that they find both

:31:56. > :32:01.unnecessary and many find distinctly abhorrent. This is the nub of my ten

:32:02. > :32:07.minute rule Bill. In the true spirit of localism, a long overdue

:32:08. > :32:11.amendment would give a greater degree of certainty to local

:32:12. > :32:18.authorities so that in future they may not face this type of legal

:32:19. > :32:21.action and that they could oppose the use of their municipally

:32:22. > :32:27.operated facilities for such transactions. If life were only that

:32:28. > :32:31.simple, if this house were sovereign and able that an amendment that I

:32:32. > :32:36.put forward and have taken forward through this house were to be

:32:37. > :32:40.accepted, that would be the end of the matter. Unfortunately there is

:32:41. > :32:44.the big boot of the EU to consider under the protection of free trade

:32:45. > :32:50.and free movement of goods provided by Article 35 on the Treaty of the

:32:51. > :32:56.functioning of the European Union. That has been further added to 50

:32:57. > :33:06.years by European court judgments. Crank of itch in 1991 and the case

:33:07. > :33:12.of 2001. Drawing to a close I am is seeking leave to advance this bill

:33:13. > :33:15.to its next stage. An alteration to domestic law to prescribe such trade

:33:16. > :33:21.in the circumstances that clearly apply to Ramsgate and to Thanet

:33:22. > :33:27.District Council who controls that port. That could be brought forward

:33:28. > :33:30.under the assumption that this parliament is sovereign to do so.

:33:31. > :33:35.Part of the High Court judgment on this case, the conclusion was rather

:33:36. > :33:43.instructive and I feel quite alarming. I will quote the George's

:33:44. > :33:48.words. The law does not exist only to protect the interests of the

:33:49. > :33:52.popular. I say this is entirely the foundation of our democracy. The

:33:53. > :33:58.arguments about the intervention of EU law in this area is not an

:33:59. > :34:02.argument that day, from me. It is an argument for another day and

:34:03. > :34:13.possibly 23rd of June may be that time. On this basis, I commend this

:34:14. > :34:19.bill to the House. The question is the honourable member have leave to

:34:20. > :34:25.bring in the bill. I rise to oppose the motion which has so ably been

:34:26. > :34:29.proposed by my honourable friend. I want to start by thanking him for

:34:30. > :34:36.raising a matter which I know is a matter of concern for millions of

:34:37. > :34:42.our fellow citizens. At the time, the events to which my honourable

:34:43. > :34:44.friend has referred, I am sure I was not alone in receiving

:34:45. > :34:51.communications from constituents asking that we stop this trade. My

:34:52. > :34:58.honourable friend is responding to those calls for action but I want to

:34:59. > :35:03.deal with the elephant in the room. The two elephants in the room, one

:35:04. > :35:07.of which was briefly touched upon by my honourable friend. The first is

:35:08. > :35:12.to do with our own proceedings. The fact of the matter is that as we are

:35:13. > :35:18.in the last few sitting days of this session, even if this motion is

:35:19. > :35:23.passed today, there is no time left to consider the Bill further during

:35:24. > :35:27.this session of Parliament. It come along with all the dozens of others

:35:28. > :35:35.which are listed on the order paper will fall when the session ends in

:35:36. > :35:39.the next day or two. As the House will be aware, the procedure

:35:40. > :35:42.committee for which I am a member has put forward proposals to change

:35:43. > :35:47.our procedures to make them more readily understandable by those

:35:48. > :35:51.outside of the House. There is an interesting contrast between the two

:35:52. > :35:55.elephants because in respect of this first one, it is within our own

:35:56. > :36:00.power to do something about it. It is in our home and is to improve

:36:01. > :36:08.matters so we can remove the first elephant from the room. The second

:36:09. > :36:12.elephant is the effect on our law of European law. It was touched on

:36:13. > :36:19.briefly by my honourable friend in moving the ten Minute Rule Motion.

:36:20. > :36:27.No matter how much we would like the sad state of affairs that we find

:36:28. > :36:32.ourselves in means that we are powerless to do anything about the

:36:33. > :36:37.matters that have been raised. In the time available today, it is not

:36:38. > :36:43.possible to deal with every single detail of the matter but it will

:36:44. > :36:47.suffice, hopefully, in order to prove my case to the satisfaction of

:36:48. > :36:52.the House will stop if I quote briefly from the judgment of Mr

:36:53. > :36:56.Justice birds given in the case which was brought arising out of the

:36:57. > :37:04.FAQ set up by my honourable friend. The short title was bar-coded

:37:05. > :37:06.against Thanet District Council. It runs to 192 paragraphs and let me

:37:07. > :37:14.quote from three of those paragraphs. Paragraph eight

:37:15. > :37:17.states... The claimant 's' case outlines the ban amounted to a

:37:18. > :37:23.restriction on the export of goods within the European Union breach of

:37:24. > :37:30.Article 35. A cannot be justified under Article 36 or otherwise. One

:37:31. > :37:37.reason it cannot be justified is because the relevant legislation is

:37:38. > :37:41.regulation EC one/ 2005. They claim the ban is contrary to the

:37:42. > :37:47.regulation and that since the regulation harmonises the law in a

:37:48. > :37:50.relevant area, the ban cannot be justified and I should explain that

:37:51. > :37:57.the benefit of those not familiar with the acronym, it refers to the

:37:58. > :38:01.treaty on the functioning of the European Union, one of the basic

:38:02. > :38:08.treaties of the European Union which we are subject to. Let me jump to

:38:09. > :38:17.the very end of the judgment, when the judgment is delivered. The end

:38:18. > :38:25.of the penultimate 191st paragraph, he says... In my judgment, Thanet

:38:26. > :38:29.District Council are likely to pay damages to compensate the claimants

:38:30. > :38:37.for their losses caused by the breach of Article 35. No mention of

:38:38. > :38:45.the act which my honourable friend seeks to amend today. Finally, let

:38:46. > :38:49.me quote from the final paragraph. My honourable friend referred

:38:50. > :38:55.briefly to one part of that final paragraph but he did not real the

:38:56. > :39:01.whole -- we do whole paragraph. The final paragraph reads as follows.

:39:02. > :39:06.The animal export trade is not popular. It involves activities

:39:07. > :39:09.which are highly distasteful to many people stop however, the law does

:39:10. > :39:15.not exist only to protect the interests of the problem. I have

:39:16. > :39:20.found that Thanet District Council did not have the authority to impose

:39:21. > :39:26.the ban which prevented the claimants from using Ramsgate port

:39:27. > :39:33.to export livestock. The ban was an unjustifiable breach of Article 35.

:39:34. > :39:37.It was a disproportionate decision reached in haste without separate

:39:38. > :39:40.legal advice and breached a fundamental element of the rules

:39:41. > :39:45.governing of free trade in the European Union.

:39:46. > :39:51.In my judgment the council is liable to pay damages to the diamonds.

:39:52. > :39:57.There we have it, Madam Deputy Speaker. In the final judgment, it

:39:58. > :40:04.was nothing to do with the 1847 act, that is not kid ourselves, it was

:40:05. > :40:08.all down to Article 35, and our constituents will often hear that

:40:09. > :40:11.one of the reasons why those of us who believe the United Kingdom will

:40:12. > :40:16.be better off if we left the European Union is because our

:40:17. > :40:18.membership means the loss of sovereignty, not surprisingly, many

:40:19. > :40:24.people will not be all that clear about what that actually means. Is

:40:25. > :40:28.it some sort of just technical, theoretical matter, doesn't really

:40:29. > :40:33.matter? Well, this case brings the whole issue of sovereignty to life.

:40:34. > :40:37.In short, the loss of sovereignty means the loss of power, it's the

:40:38. > :40:44.loss of power of this house to do anything about certain matters. And

:40:45. > :40:48.it means that the power of ask constituents that has been given

:40:49. > :40:54.away, power that they have entrusted to us to enact legislation on their

:40:55. > :40:57.behalf has been lost. I believe we must be open and honest with the

:40:58. > :41:02.country about these matters. There is no point in continuing the

:41:03. > :41:05.pretence that this house has any power to stop these exports by

:41:06. > :41:11.merely amending domestic legislation. The less we leave the

:41:12. > :41:16.European Union and regain our sovereignty, that is to say regain

:41:17. > :41:22.the power to control our own affairs, we are simply wasting our

:41:23. > :41:25.time. We are simply giving the public the false impression that we

:41:26. > :41:30.are able to do something about this matter when we cannot. Madam Deputy

:41:31. > :41:34.Speaker in view of the fact that there is no prospect of this bill

:41:35. > :41:40.making further progress, I do not wish to divide the house, but I do

:41:41. > :41:44.trust that by the time my honourable friend brings the matter before the

:41:45. > :41:49.house again, voters across the country will have taken the

:41:50. > :41:56.opportunity afforded to them on June the 23rd to take back control over

:41:57. > :42:05.this matter. The question is that the honourable member have leave to

:42:06. > :42:13.bring in the bill? I think the ayes have it. Who will prepare and bring

:42:14. > :42:18.in the bill? Myself, Roger Gale, Martin Vickers, Kelly Tolhurst,

:42:19. > :42:30.Flick Drummond, Caroline Lucas, Mr Steve Baker, Doctor Tanya Mathias.

:42:31. > :42:53.Craig McKinley. Harbours, Docks and Piers Clauses

:42:54. > :42:59.Act 1847 Amendment Bill. Reading on what day, the 13th of May. We now

:43:00. > :43:03.come to the backbench business debate on the effects of universal

:43:04. > :43:09.credit on children, Stephen Timms to move. An extremely grateful for the

:43:10. > :43:17.opportunity to debate this subject. Once in place, it is estimated that

:43:18. > :43:24.about half of all the children in the UK will be in households

:43:25. > :43:29.entitled to use universal credit, a huge impact, one important for us to

:43:30. > :43:34.scrutinise. I am pleased to see my honourable friend in his place, and

:43:35. > :43:37.the minister in hers as well. I have always enjoyed debating these

:43:38. > :43:43.matters with the honourable lady. I often wish she felt as well willing

:43:44. > :43:50.to disagree with her honourable friends on her nest in it -- on her

:43:51. > :43:54.ministerial brief as she is as willing to disagree with the Prime

:43:55. > :44:00.Minister about Europe, but we will come to that. I do hope that in this

:44:01. > :44:07.debate we can shed some light in particular on the impact on child

:44:08. > :44:15.poverty of universe to credit -- universal credit in the UK. We have

:44:16. > :44:19.heard of the significant potential benefits of universal credit, simple

:44:20. > :44:23.binary system, merging six benefits into one, and in particular I think

:44:24. > :44:25.making it much easier for people to work out the effect on their

:44:26. > :44:30.financial position than if they were to move into work. Which is

:44:31. > :44:35.difficult for people to work out at the moment. Under universal credit

:44:36. > :44:39.it should be simpler. For the former Secretary of State, who has resigned

:44:40. > :44:46.for the government after the budget fiasco around disability benefits

:44:47. > :44:50.are I think he's entitled to a good deal of credit for coming up with

:44:51. > :44:56.the original idea, and for driving it through in government.

:44:57. > :45:02.Unfortunately, however, he's not entitled to very much credit for the

:45:03. > :45:06.way he implemented universal credit. The Department got itself into a

:45:07. > :45:12.terrible mess, the Cabinet Office has two step in to sort out a

:45:13. > :45:17.looming IT disaster, and the result is that universal credit is now

:45:18. > :45:22.running extremely late stop on the original timetable, set out in 2010,

:45:23. > :45:26.transitional from the older benefit system to universal credit would now

:45:27. > :45:33.be almost finished. The whole thing would be complete by next year. In

:45:34. > :45:36.fact, implementation of universal credit is only really now just

:45:37. > :45:43.beginning and on the most recent figures for March, there were

:45:44. > :45:48.225,000 people receiving universal credit, of whom almost 88,000 were

:45:49. > :45:54.in work. The initial plan was hopelessly unrealistic, as was

:45:55. > :45:58.pointed out on these benches at the time. Unfortunately, the government

:45:59. > :46:02.ignored the warnings it received. We were told at one stage there would

:46:03. > :46:06.be 1 million people claiming universal credit by April 2014. Two

:46:07. > :46:12.years after that, we still haven't reached a quarter of that number. It

:46:13. > :46:17.now looks as if the current plan, and it's a bit unclear, but I think

:46:18. > :46:24.the current plan has tradition -- transition complete by 2022. Five

:46:25. > :46:35.years later than announced. When the universal credit started... Does he

:46:36. > :46:39.think that it is right and third that as a result of the piecemeal

:46:40. > :46:43.approach to universal credit, plus other allowances, some families in

:46:44. > :46:49.the same circumstances will be through thousands of pounds a year

:46:50. > :46:55.worse off than they were if they were in an area where universal

:46:56. > :46:59.credit is available? There is a growing group of people who are

:47:00. > :47:02.significantly worse off than they would have been because of the

:47:03. > :47:06.misfortune that they are in an area where universal credit is paid

:47:07. > :47:10.instead of tax credit and my honourable friend is absolutely

:47:11. > :47:14.right to draw attention to that, but when the universal credit project

:47:15. > :47:19.started in 2011, we were told it was complete in six years. Today, five

:47:20. > :47:24.years later, we are told it is to be completed in another six years, by

:47:25. > :47:30.2022. Five years into this initiative, the end, the completion

:47:31. > :47:34.of it has been delayed by five years. We are no nearer the end is

:47:35. > :47:40.now than we were told we were five years ago. But it is not just the

:47:41. > :47:47.timetable that has changed. What is being implemented... I'm grateful

:47:48. > :47:51.for him to give way. He was generous in his support on the principle of

:47:52. > :47:54.this scheme. So he must accept that it is better to get this right, a

:47:55. > :47:57.steady phased imitation being the right way to ensure the benefits

:47:58. > :48:03.referred to are properly effective across the country? Of course that's

:48:04. > :48:06.right. That should have been a sensible timetable and a plan from

:48:07. > :48:11.the start and it was pointed out to ministers that the original plan was

:48:12. > :48:17.unrealistic, and unfortunately they didn't take notice of that. As I

:48:18. > :48:20.say, it isn't just the timetable that has changed but the substance

:48:21. > :48:23.was not what is being incremented is now very significantly different

:48:24. > :48:27.from what was originally going to be implemented, and this month's

:48:28. > :48:31.effect, last week but like report from the resolution foundation has

:48:32. > :48:35.made that very clear. I want to refer to that report in my speech a

:48:36. > :48:40.number of times but I want too great at this point one observation from

:48:41. > :48:46.the executive summary to that report. It is this. It says: the

:48:47. > :48:51.latest series of cuts announced in last year's summer budget risk

:48:52. > :48:56.leaving universal credit as little more than a vehicle for

:48:57. > :49:02.rationalising benefit Administration and cutting costs to the Exchequer

:49:03. > :49:08.will stop now, that is, at the heart of this debate. It is assessed to be

:49:09. > :49:16.a pale shadow of what ministers initially announced. The losers,

:49:17. > :49:21.above all from the cuts that have been made to those original

:49:22. > :49:27.proposals, and also the losers from floors in the original design which

:49:28. > :49:32.have never satisfactorily been addressed the losers will above all

:49:33. > :49:36.be the nation's children. The resolution foundation explained the

:49:37. > :49:43.impact of the ?3 billion cut, announced last summer. It says this:

:49:44. > :49:48.initially designed, universal credit gave broad parity with the current

:49:49. > :49:54.credit system. Now, universal credit will be less generous than the tax

:49:55. > :49:58.credit system for working families, and that is what gives rise to the

:49:59. > :50:02.anomaly, the unfairness that my honourable friend has drawn

:50:03. > :50:07.attention. I will give way. I thank my honourable friend. Busy as

:50:08. > :50:11.shocked as me to hear that a recent report from the children society

:50:12. > :50:14.same disabled children will get considerably less money under

:50:15. > :50:18.universal credit, many only receiving half of what they can

:50:19. > :50:21.currently get under tax credits? My honourable friend is absolutely

:50:22. > :50:29.right. That is a shocking aspect, and actually what has always been

:50:30. > :50:32.proposed with universal credit, the support for disabled children has

:50:33. > :50:38.been drastically reduced. I hope we will have time to discuss it. What I

:50:39. > :50:41.want to ask the Minister is this, will she published updated, an

:50:42. > :50:48.updated version of the impact report for universal credit that was

:50:49. > :50:52.published alongside the 2011 Bill which introduced universal credits?

:50:53. > :50:57.I will come back to that, because what is now being introduced is

:50:58. > :51:02.certain that Lee -- certainly not what the US Secretary of State had

:51:03. > :51:05.in mind when it was launched six years ago. Throughout the last

:51:06. > :51:11.Parliament, ministers repeatedly said, and I quote, committed to

:51:12. > :51:14.eliminating child property, and they cited the introduction of universal

:51:15. > :51:26.credit as a key measure for helping to achieve that. In... The impact

:51:27. > :51:30.assessment said it would reduce child poverty by 300,000. Now, there

:51:31. > :51:37.was then a written parliamentary answer to a question in January 2013

:51:38. > :51:46.giving a lower figure of 150,000. So, half. The impact on child

:51:47. > :51:55.poverty would be reducing it by a rather than the national 300,000. --

:51:56. > :52:00.the initial 300,000. Big cuts to universal credit were announced last

:52:01. > :52:06.summer will stop all of us will recall the few roaring when

:52:07. > :52:09.Chancellor announced swingeing tax cuts last summer, and I pay tribute

:52:10. > :52:14.to those members opposite who crossed, unlike the Chancellor, what

:52:15. > :52:20.it would mean too many hard-working families struggling to make ends

:52:21. > :52:25.meet, like the family of an ambulance driver, making ?20,000 a

:52:26. > :52:28.year, standing to lose a full ?2000 from the cuts announced by the

:52:29. > :52:33.Chancellor last summer. The Chancellor thankfully was forced to

:52:34. > :52:39.abandon its plans, but the equivalent cuts to universal credit

:52:40. > :52:47.claimant at that time by hardly anybody in work, those cuts went

:52:48. > :52:52.ahead, and so by stealth the Chancellor's cuts to tax credit will

:52:53. > :52:57.over time the implement. Working families, on use universal credit

:52:58. > :53:00.not tax credits, have seen a big income cuts last month, as my

:53:01. > :53:07.honourable friend has already pointed out. At the centre of this

:53:08. > :53:14.debate is... I will. He is making a very strong point about the value in

:53:15. > :53:17.the cuts to parents and the wider impact of the changes will stop go

:53:18. > :53:24.with me that there is a significant challenge any change in the system

:53:25. > :53:30.that from a weekly, fortnightly payments to monthly, leaving payment

:53:31. > :53:37.is to be paid in arrears, gives perhaps five weeks for money to be

:53:38. > :53:41.paid? Six in ten of the clients coming to universal credit have not

:53:42. > :53:45.been told about that so we could see many people out of pocket through no

:53:46. > :53:50.fault of their own, struggling by with a huge to children in

:53:51. > :53:55.particularly. He is absolutely right. It is an advice makes the

:53:56. > :53:59.point that this is the biggest practical problem that is a rising

:54:00. > :54:02.way universal credit has already been introduced. The assumption in

:54:03. > :54:05.universal credit is that people have got a monthly pay cheque, that will

:54:06. > :54:11.see them through the first month, and then they can start to receive

:54:12. > :54:14.credit from the end of that. Citizens advice say that over half

:54:15. > :54:18.of people claiming are in fact a wiki page, not monthly, so certainly

:54:19. > :54:26.haven't got a monthly pay cheque to keep them going for those five weeks

:54:27. > :54:31.and this causes serious problems. The point that I want to press again

:54:32. > :54:35.on the Minister is that if she will today give us an update on what she

:54:36. > :54:39.now believes, what the government now believes is going to be the

:54:40. > :54:43.effect of implement in universal credit on child poverty.

:54:44. > :54:51.Given the drastic cuts we have seen implementing Universal Credit will

:54:52. > :54:59.now increase child poverty rather than decrease it as we were told. I

:55:00. > :55:09.am no doubt the former secretary, it was his intention introducing this

:55:10. > :55:12.radical change. We do have some information on that question

:55:13. > :55:19.provided for the Institute with this caused it is in their February

:55:20. > :55:29.report. Living standards, poverty and inequality 2016 to 2021 showing

:55:30. > :55:41.relative poverty rates from 1997/82 2020/ 2021. Relative child poverty

:55:42. > :55:49.stood at 27%. By 2010/11 when that Government was replaced, the

:55:50. > :55:52.proportion was down to 18%. The statutory target enshrined in the

:55:53. > :55:57.child poverty act which I took through the House with all-party

:55:58. > :56:06.support in 2010 was that proportion should come down to 10% by 2020.

:56:07. > :56:16.Instead, after 2010, it flat lined for a number of years and now it is

:56:17. > :56:20.starting to rise. On the IFF protect -- projection, it will be back to

:56:21. > :56:34.the catastrophic level inherited by the Blair Government by the time we

:56:35. > :56:40.get to 2020. As the eye can -- I FS puts it, it will reverse the falls

:56:41. > :56:49.seen under Labour. It is interesting to contrast that with what the IFS

:56:50. > :56:53.says about child poverty. Pension poverty was at a very high level and

:56:54. > :57:00.unlike child poverty, it reduced that proportion down to around 17%.

:57:01. > :57:06.It was fairly stable through the last parliament from 2010 to 2015.

:57:07. > :57:14.The future project tree is that it is not going to go up. It will carry

:57:15. > :57:22.on at the level round about 17%. Child poverty is going to rock it

:57:23. > :57:26.back up to the levels that it was at in 1997. The rate of child poverty

:57:27. > :57:35.families with over three children is going to be over 30% by 2020. What

:57:36. > :57:39.we are seeing is the huge cuts that have been announced in Universal

:57:40. > :57:45.Credit will come about by reducing the income of working families,

:57:46. > :57:49.families with children. That means a lot of families are going to be much

:57:50. > :57:55.worse off, not only by comparison with what they would have received

:57:56. > :58:00.and the tax credit system but also by comparison with what they would

:58:01. > :58:05.have received if the Universal Credit proposals had gone ahead. It

:58:06. > :58:09.highlights the problems for lone parents. Lone parents will be hit

:58:10. > :58:16.particularly hard and stand to lose around ?554 per year if they are

:58:17. > :58:22.renting or over ?2600 per year if they are not. The children of single

:58:23. > :58:27.parents are twice the risk of living in poverty as those in cobbled

:58:28. > :58:35.families and this will exacerbate their disadvantage. It isn't just

:58:36. > :58:41.the cuts to Universal Credit which will drastically cut the income of

:58:42. > :58:44.working families. Just a bigger worry is the incentives for

:58:45. > :58:50.unemployed parents to get into work are going to be much weaker under

:58:51. > :59:00.the current proposals for Universal Credit than was originally intended

:59:01. > :59:05.as well. That spelt out in the report St Bees cuts don't just

:59:06. > :59:08.affect incomes, they also undermine this scheme's incentive in structure

:59:09. > :59:13.and returns to entering work are much lower than anticipated under

:59:14. > :59:23.the earlier design of Universal Credit. They warned that parents

:59:24. > :59:26.will find the incentives to work more hours very weak, particularly

:59:27. > :59:36.lone parents. Many will reduce their hours for very small income drops

:59:37. > :59:42.and I give way... Does he agree that the guidance instructing people to

:59:43. > :59:48.work an extra 200 hours a year for no extra money in order to make it

:59:49. > :59:55.up for the thousands of families that are set to lose out is an

:59:56. > :00:00.acceptable? This suggestion that people can make up these losses by

:00:01. > :00:11.working more hours is unrealistic in many of the circumstances. The

:00:12. > :00:14.foundation points out that for second earners in couples, the

:00:15. > :00:20.situation may be worse still with increasing numbers potentially

:00:21. > :00:25.declining to enter work at all. The whole point of Universal Credit was

:00:26. > :00:29.supposed to be to give people incentives to be in employment and

:00:30. > :00:36.the Secretary of State yesterday reiterated that point. The problem

:00:37. > :00:41.is that has now proposed, those incentives are not going to be in

:00:42. > :00:49.place Universal Credit is rolled out. Let me draw the Minister's

:00:50. > :00:55.attention to an article last month written by one of the original

:00:56. > :00:59.architects at the Centre for Social Justice of Universal Credit. He

:01:00. > :01:06.describes the cuts to Universal Credit work allowances introduced on

:01:07. > :01:09.the 11th of April last month and I quote as undermining the original

:01:10. > :01:16.intent of Universal Credit to make work pay. He goes on, the Government

:01:17. > :01:18.should maintain support for work incentives within Universal Credit.

:01:19. > :01:25.These cuts to work allowances will not help make work pay for low

:01:26. > :01:30.earners. That is a very deep problem about what is now proposed. The

:01:31. > :01:37.Minister will argue that calculations of child poverty, a

:01:38. > :01:42.reduction of child poverty announced by the Government in the original

:01:43. > :01:49.impact assessment for the legislation, the written answer, the

:01:50. > :01:54.Minister will say that those calculations don't allow for the

:01:55. > :02:00.dynamic effects of Universal Credit and encouraging people into jobs. He

:02:01. > :02:05.addresses that point and he says this. No work allowances will limit

:02:06. > :02:11.the dynamic affect of Universal Credit. He will make it harder for

:02:12. > :02:14.households to make up their shortfall by working additional

:02:15. > :02:26.hours to pick up the point made by my honourable friend a few minutes

:02:27. > :02:30.ago. Does he agree with me that many constituents have to make agonising

:02:31. > :02:34.decisions when making up shortfalls when it comes to their children.

:02:35. > :02:40.Basics like food or school clothes or things like a modest birthday

:02:41. > :02:46.present. Sometimes they get into further debt which compounds the

:02:47. > :02:49.situation may find themselves in. Many families will find themselves

:02:50. > :02:55.in difficult situations during the transition period and may end up

:02:56. > :02:59.getting further into debt. I noticed Citizens Advice made that point

:03:00. > :03:08.about the change through the support for disabled children. A large

:03:09. > :03:22.proportion said they would cut back on food. If I can conclude what

:03:23. > :03:27.Devon Gilarni said about this, it arises from work incentives within

:03:28. > :03:30.the Government's flagship. The Minister will understand why that is

:03:31. > :03:34.a problem for what the Government has been telling us for years about

:03:35. > :03:48.what Universal Credit was going to do.

:03:49. > :03:55.It is not only about Universal Credit, other factors have an impact

:03:56. > :03:59.also. Those projections are consistent not with Universal Credit

:04:00. > :04:02.reducing child poverty as we originally were told, but with

:04:03. > :04:09.Universal Credit increasing child poverty. His low -- it is low income

:04:10. > :04:13.families and children that are bearing the brunt of the cuts while

:04:14. > :04:22.better off people will not be affected at all. I do want to press

:04:23. > :04:32.the Minister to tell us what the Government's of the implementation

:04:33. > :04:43.on Universal Credit figures will be. There is a big impact from Universal

:04:44. > :04:48.Credit. There are other aspects that I want to touch on. The first is the

:04:49. > :04:53.eligibility of Universal Credit claimants to free school meals.

:04:54. > :05:03.Entitlement to so-called passport of benefits. At the moment it is

:05:04. > :05:07.dependent on the passport and what is given to means tested out of work

:05:08. > :05:11.benefits. That simple test is no longer available on Universal Credit

:05:12. > :05:15.because the benefit doesn't indicate whether the claimant is working or

:05:16. > :05:22.not. That is one of the advantages of credit. We have to devise a new

:05:23. > :05:28.test eligibility. There has been discussion about instead of free

:05:29. > :05:33.school meals, claims could be given a cash and it could be taken away

:05:34. > :05:37.with the rest of their universal payment. Much of the cash would not

:05:38. > :05:40.be spent on school meals, it would be spent on something else and that

:05:41. > :05:47.is a danger of the school meal system collapsing. The Government

:05:48. > :05:50.has rejected that option. We could envisage some electronic system

:05:51. > :05:55.where claimants were given credits which could be used to give school

:05:56. > :06:00.meals. Those could be tapered away. There is no IT system in place

:06:01. > :06:06.currently to do that. We asked about this in the welfare reform and work

:06:07. > :06:09.Bill committee in 2011 in a pre-legislative scrutiny. The

:06:10. > :06:15.Secretary of State at the time told us he would have an answer before

:06:16. > :06:19.the legislation gained Royal assent in summer 2011. Five years later we

:06:20. > :06:24.still haven't had an answer. Ministers often told us it is a

:06:25. > :06:28.matter for the Department for Education but the problem is that

:06:29. > :06:37.the way this question is an SID is crucial to whether or not it will

:06:38. > :06:42.achieve its goal. What has been hinted at is that free school meals

:06:43. > :06:47.will depend on the family's income being below the threshold. The huge

:06:48. > :06:54.problem with that is introducing an enormous new Cliff in the benefit

:06:55. > :06:57.system which is exactly the kind of perverse incentive which Universal

:06:58. > :07:06.Credit is intended to remove. Far worse than anything than at the

:07:07. > :07:10.moment. If your income is below this threshold, the last thing you would

:07:11. > :07:17.want is any kind of pay rise or hours increase which will cause you

:07:18. > :07:22.overnight to lose the benefit of free school meals for your children.

:07:23. > :07:30.We are talking about three children and it could be well over ?1000 a

:07:31. > :07:37.year loss. What is the answer? I recognise this is genuinely

:07:38. > :07:42.difficult. I do criticise ministers for the fact that five years later

:07:43. > :07:47.we still haven't got an answer. It looks to me increasingly that the

:07:48. > :07:51.only viable solution will be to extend the current temporary

:07:52. > :07:57.solution that free school meals should be made available to everyone

:07:58. > :08:03.who claims Universal Credit weather in work or not. I want to ask the

:08:04. > :08:11.Minister when it is likely we will get a decision on that issue. My

:08:12. > :08:17.honourable friend has already drawn attention to the severity of the

:08:18. > :08:24.cuts that are proposed to incomes of disabled children with Universal

:08:25. > :08:30.Credit. Instead of the tax support around ?60 a week, that will be cut

:08:31. > :08:36.to ?29 a week and all of us can see that for an estimated 100,000

:08:37. > :08:42.families with disabled children, it is going to be a dramatic reduction

:08:43. > :08:44.in their income. The other point I wanted to highlight and my

:08:45. > :08:50.honourable friend has drawn attention to this, it is the problem

:08:51. > :08:55.is with the long delay between some of you making a claim they Universal

:08:56. > :08:59.Credit and actually receiving the money and the assumption which is

:09:00. > :09:03.simply proving to be unfounded that people will have a month's paycheque

:09:04. > :09:11.in the bank to keep them going. I did notice the trust published its

:09:12. > :09:15.annual statistics last month and the food bank demand showed another

:09:16. > :09:21.increase in demand in the past year drew attention to the fact that in

:09:22. > :09:27.some areas food banks report increased referrals due to delays

:09:28. > :09:34.and arrears in Universal Credit. I did want to ask the Minister as well

:09:35. > :09:37.if she would look again at the administrative arrangements for

:09:38. > :09:42.Universal Credit because the current arrangements are going to be a

:09:43. > :09:48.serious problem for many families with children.

:09:49. > :09:54.The final point I wanted to raise is at the moment, local authorities pay

:09:55. > :09:58.housing benefit and can say that claimants are going to be hit by

:09:59. > :10:04.cars to benefits of various kinds, they can provide additional help and

:10:05. > :10:10.tailored support, we have seen it in practice. Under Universal Credit,

:10:11. > :10:12.however, the payment will be by the Department for Work and Pensions.

:10:13. > :10:17.Local authorities will no longer have the data about people's

:10:18. > :10:22.circumstances. I want to ask the minister if the department is going

:10:23. > :10:25.to provide the data which will have, instead of local authorities, and

:10:26. > :10:29.provide the data to local authorities so that they will be in

:10:30. > :10:34.a position to continue to provide the tailored support have seen in

:10:35. > :10:43.the last couple of years. Madam Deputy Speaker, my fear is that the

:10:44. > :10:48.implementation of Universal Credit may well have a deeply damaging

:10:49. > :10:56.impact on Britton raise children. In particular, I would like the

:10:57. > :11:01.Minister to give us an update on the department's estimates published in

:11:02. > :11:06.2011 and updated in 2013 on the impact of Universal Credit on the

:11:07. > :11:10.number of children living in poverty. The question is on the

:11:11. > :11:17.order paper. Peter Heaton Jones, sorry. Thank you very much, Madam

:11:18. > :11:23.Deputy Speaker. I echo the words of the member for East Ham. The

:11:24. > :11:26.backbench business committee, they have very properly allowed this

:11:27. > :11:30.debate and I think the member for East Ham has introduced it vitally

:11:31. > :11:34.indeed. I think that there is a difficulty in my mind with the

:11:35. > :11:40.motion as it currently stands on the order paper. It is this, it seeks to

:11:41. > :11:44.look at Universal Credit in isolation. It is a problem because

:11:45. > :11:50.what we should be looking at, what we need to consider, is the entire

:11:51. > :11:57.package of measures that this cup and has quite properly introduced

:11:58. > :12:00.when it comes to changes in benefits and significant movements forward in

:12:01. > :12:03.tackling difficulties with child poverty.

:12:04. > :12:08.-- government. We have to look at the measures in the round and as a

:12:09. > :12:12.whole, not solely focusing on Universal Credit, in my view.

:12:13. > :12:16.The package of measures we have to be thinking about are the increases

:12:17. > :12:20.in personal tax allowance, for instance, the introduction of the

:12:21. > :12:23.national living wage, and significantly, I think better

:12:24. > :12:26.childcare provision. Which is really talking to the heart of what this

:12:27. > :12:31.debate seeks to address. I will give way to the gentleman.

:12:32. > :12:36.The honourable member speaks about the need to take these issues in the

:12:37. > :12:39.round, but does he accept that the IFS interbred this year predicted

:12:40. > :12:47.child poverty is predicted to increase from 15.1% in 2015, two to

:12:48. > :12:51.-- to 28.3% by the end of this Parliament, they say that is taking

:12:52. > :12:56.everything into the round including planned tax and benefit reforms.

:12:57. > :12:59.This is something else the IFS said, I'm glad the honourable gentleman

:13:00. > :13:05.brought it up. They said Universal Credit will make the system easier

:13:06. > :13:08.to understand, ease transitions into and out of work, and "Largely get

:13:09. > :13:11.rid of the most extreme disincentives to work or to Alan

:13:12. > :13:16.Moore created by the current system". IFS seemed to quite like

:13:17. > :13:21.the introduction of Universal Credit, I had to say.

:13:22. > :13:24.It has to be looked at in the round, the government is introducing a

:13:25. > :13:29.whole package of measures. I was listing some of them, the growing

:13:30. > :13:34.economy, rising employment, and help. The other issue which is not

:13:35. > :13:37.taken into account, I think, when we consider Universal Credit is

:13:38. > :13:40.sometimes referred to as the dynamic impact.

:13:41. > :13:45.A horrible bit of jargon. But the dynamic impact of Universal Credit,

:13:46. > :13:49.which seeks to take into account changes in behaviour, individual

:13:50. > :13:54.behaviours, in response to the introduction of Universal Credit. It

:13:55. > :13:58.is difficult to analyse but it means improved opportunities for people to

:13:59. > :14:03.move from welfare to work, changing people's behaviours.

:14:04. > :14:06.It is a vital point. Even though it is in its early stages of

:14:07. > :14:11.introduction, that has already been pointed out, there is significant

:14:12. > :14:15.evidence Universal Credit is doing well, and succeeding in ensuring

:14:16. > :14:19.that more people do move off welfare and into work.

:14:20. > :14:28.The latest figures show that for every 100 people, who found work

:14:29. > :14:33.under the old JSA system, 113 payments have moved into a job. It

:14:34. > :14:38.is the quality of the job and pay as well. People are actively looking to

:14:39. > :14:44.increase hours and earnings as well. I feel the gentleman is seeking to

:14:45. > :14:49.intervene. Just beginning to touch on it, would he welcomed the fact

:14:50. > :14:52.that the emphasis on in work progression, the story does not end

:14:53. > :14:56.when someone gets into a role but it is how they are encouraged through

:14:57. > :15:02.job centre plus, to improve ours and their standing in the firm and get

:15:03. > :15:07.paid more over time? I agree. That is important, and the latest figures

:15:08. > :15:11.we have are that 86% of claimants on Universal Credit are actively

:15:12. > :15:16.looking to increase their hours, compared to 38% under JSA.

:15:17. > :15:19.A significant difference. The poor are actively looking to increase

:15:20. > :15:27.their earnings as well, which goes to the heart of the point -- people

:15:28. > :15:32.are actively looking. Compared to 51% on JSA. That is an

:15:33. > :15:37.important part of the Universal Credit package. Let me now move... I

:15:38. > :15:41.will give way. Is the honourable member really trying to tell us that

:15:42. > :15:47.the dynamic impact will actually compensate for the loss of income

:15:48. > :15:50.that families are going to receive with these Universal Credit changes?

:15:51. > :15:57.Particularly those children with disabilities? The honourable member

:15:58. > :16:01.leads me on to talk about children in particular. The essence of what

:16:02. > :16:05.this motion seeks to address. Let's talk about what the government is

:16:06. > :16:10.seeking to do, as far as the reduction of child poverty is

:16:11. > :16:15.concerned. The latest households below average income statistics show

:16:16. > :16:20.child poverty in the UK remains at the lowest level, the lowest level,

:16:21. > :16:23.since the mid-19 80s. For 30 years, Madam Deputy Speaker.

:16:24. > :16:28.The number of workless households has fallen by about three quarters

:16:29. > :16:32.of a million since 2010. The crucial point, which goes to the

:16:33. > :16:37.heart of this, there are now very nearly half a million fewer children

:16:38. > :16:42.living in workless households. This government has a good and sound

:16:43. > :16:46.record on reducing child poverty, and making sure that we target the

:16:47. > :16:49.welfare system very carefully at those who need it most.

:16:50. > :16:56.That is the key to what Universal Credit seeks to do. The honourable

:16:57. > :17:00.gentleman mentioned particularly young children, the government has

:17:01. > :17:05.invested ?2.5 billion in the troubled families initiative, the

:17:06. > :17:10.same amount to the pupil premium, providing extra funding for the most

:17:11. > :17:15.disadvantaged children in schools. This is a measure we sometimes don't

:17:16. > :17:18.hear much from the party much, income inequality is down under this

:17:19. > :17:22.government. That is what the statistic shows,

:17:23. > :17:26.and it is important to remember this government is having some success.

:17:27. > :17:31.One very particular issue I want to touch on now is the government's

:17:32. > :17:34.announcement on the introduction of the new and significantly

:17:35. > :17:41.strengthened approach to life chances, it for Britain's most

:17:42. > :17:46.disadvantaged children. I sat for 17 sessions last autumn on the

:17:47. > :17:50.legislation committee for the welfare reform and work act, along

:17:51. > :17:54.with the Minister and a number of other honourable member 's eye can

:17:55. > :17:58.see on all sides of this house. For those who were not there, this was

:17:59. > :18:02.an important part of what the legislation committee discussed. The

:18:03. > :18:07.welfare reform and work act seeks really to ensure the life chances of

:18:08. > :18:14.the most disadvantaged children are front and centre in the welfare

:18:15. > :18:19.reforms we are seeking to introduce. It will be central to the one nation

:18:20. > :18:23.approach over the next five years, and ministers are committed. I have

:18:24. > :18:26.heard them say it a number of times, to a much more effective measure

:18:27. > :18:30.focused on the real causes of poverty.

:18:31. > :18:35.I say again, what we have to do is be looking at it as a whole. Whilst

:18:36. > :18:39.I do not seek to say that the debate isn't worthwhile, I question the

:18:40. > :18:44.wording of the motion. The fact that it merely isolates Universal Credit,

:18:45. > :18:49.and what we need to be doing is looking in the round at all of the

:18:50. > :18:53.various measures, all of the welfare reforms, that this government has

:18:54. > :19:00.introduced. It creates, I think, a significant and beneficial package

:19:01. > :19:02.of reforms. I understand the concerns. I'm coming to a

:19:03. > :19:07.conclusion, if the gentleman will forgive me. I understand the concern

:19:08. > :19:11.is the gentleman has raised. And, that this motion seeks to

:19:12. > :19:18.address. But, in the long run, having sat through the delegated

:19:19. > :19:24.registration committee, Universal Credit will have longer beneficial

:19:25. > :19:27.times, it needs to be seen as part of their package and it is not

:19:28. > :19:33.important that we look at what children people are being affected

:19:34. > :19:37.by these measures -- I know it is important.

:19:38. > :19:41.I know the effect that welfare reforms are having on children and

:19:42. > :19:44.we want to ensure that the effects are beneficial, I believe that they

:19:45. > :19:48.will be and I believe the government is moving in the right direction.

:19:49. > :19:56.Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to thank the right

:19:57. > :19:59.honourable member, my friend from East Ham, for your eloquent

:20:00. > :20:03.introduction to this motion. I would like to thank the backbench business

:20:04. > :20:08.committee, for bringing this debate to the main chamber. This debate is

:20:09. > :20:12.of particular concern to my constituency, where there is a high

:20:13. > :20:18.proportion of people claiming welfare benefits. As of April 2015,

:20:19. > :20:24.there were 14,500 people on tax credits, and it is estimated that by

:20:25. > :20:30.2020 - 21, 19,000 people will be on Universal Credit. According to

:20:31. > :20:35.figures from the child poverty action group, reductions of work

:20:36. > :20:40.allowance means Universal Credit introduced in April 2016 will result

:20:41. > :20:48.in a working single parent in rental accommodation losing up to ?554 a

:20:49. > :20:54.year. A working single parent who owns their own home will lose up to

:20:55. > :20:58.?2000 per year. In both cases, this is more than double the loss

:20:59. > :21:02.suffered by working couples. The majority of these single parents are

:21:03. > :21:10.women. Once again, this is a cut that comes at the expense of women.

:21:11. > :21:15.Women who account 486% of benefit and tax savings, and the has

:21:16. > :21:16.increased, not decreased, as a result of the Chancellor 's latest

:21:17. > :21:28.budget Cash 86%. They will have to work an extra 46

:21:29. > :21:32.days per year, more than two additional working months, to make

:21:33. > :21:37.up for what they would lose. While the government may paint these

:21:38. > :21:41.reductions in income as an incentive to work, for single parents who are

:21:42. > :21:48.already in full-time work, extra hours are not realistic. Support for

:21:49. > :21:52.childcare may have increased from 70% to 85%, but the fact remains

:21:53. > :22:00.that this does not compensate for the losses families will see due to

:22:01. > :22:04.changes in Universal Credit. In my constituency, Endcap Amat child

:22:05. > :22:09.Property estimates 49% of children live in relative poverty, making it

:22:10. > :22:14.the constituency with the sixth highest level of child poverty.

:22:15. > :22:18.A four-year freeze on support for children under Universal Credit is

:22:19. > :22:24.expected to reduce the value of key children's benefits by 12%.

:22:25. > :22:31.By the end of the decade, inflation, which creeps up, will also add to

:22:32. > :22:34.the cost of living. In 2011, the government forecast that Universal

:22:35. > :22:42.Credit would lift up to 350,000 children out of poverty. In 2013,

:22:43. > :22:50.this figure was amended to 150,000. The government today refuses to give

:22:51. > :22:55.a figure. There remains significant gaps between the goblet's aims

:22:56. > :22:58.through making paid work through the new Universal Credit regime, and the

:22:59. > :23:04.reality of families facing huge cuts to their income. I would like to ask

:23:05. > :23:08.the Minister two questions. Firstly, with a government review on the

:23:09. > :23:17.IMPAC on working families, especially single families, with the

:23:18. > :23:23.government review the decision to freeze most key children's benefits

:23:24. > :23:31.in the next four years? As I have stated in this debate, the impact of

:23:32. > :23:34.changing tax credits to Universal Credit will affect families in my

:23:35. > :23:42.constituency, and I am here representing them and get their

:23:43. > :23:46.voices heard in this chamber. What I ask is that you take seriously the

:23:47. > :23:54.effect these changes will have on families, women, and, more

:23:55. > :23:58.importantly... Honourable friend makes a powerful case, but does she

:23:59. > :24:04.agree with me, that we should particularly concerned about the

:24:05. > :24:06.plight of the self-employed, and increasing group of income insecure

:24:07. > :24:16.people. Their Doshi share my concern that an

:24:17. > :24:19.employed people will lose 1000 pounds per year as a result of the

:24:20. > :24:24.cuts to Universal Credit? I totally agree with the point you

:24:25. > :24:28.have made. In my constituency, I have many lone workers, many people

:24:29. > :24:31.who actually have their own businesses, they have come to me in

:24:32. > :24:36.my office and said to me they are very concerned because they need to

:24:37. > :24:38.use benefits to top up their salaries. It is an issue I hope the

:24:39. > :24:55.goblet is taking on board as well. I want to end by asking the Minister

:24:56. > :24:58.to please review the impact impact work allows reductions are having

:24:59. > :25:10.and will the Government agreed to review the decision to freeze most

:25:11. > :25:15.key children's benefits for years? Richard Graham, were you hear the

:25:16. > :25:25.beginning of the debate? Not for all of it. Today's debate comes at an

:25:26. > :25:29.interesting time and the Right honourable member for East Ham

:25:30. > :25:33.introduced it with his usual reasonableness on an issue of

:25:34. > :25:39.concern to everybody in the House list stop there are or three things

:25:40. > :25:45.and a brief contribution that I wanted to highlight today. The first

:25:46. > :25:50.one is the big strategic challenge for the Right honourable member for

:25:51. > :25:54.East Ham and his colleagues which is where the balance of the strategy

:25:55. > :26:00.that his party is trying to pursue will lead the country. I offer two

:26:01. > :26:04.thoughts. The first is that they still haven't yet told us what

:26:05. > :26:12.reforms to welfare changes they would make.

:26:13. > :26:19.At a time when the country is still spending more on the interests of

:26:20. > :26:24.our debts than on the education of our children, it has to be wrong to

:26:25. > :26:30.ignore that part of the equation. In the last Parliament, they opposed

:26:31. > :26:34.every one of the welfare reforms the Coalition Government pushed through,

:26:35. > :26:42.some 20 billion of reductions in expenditure and indeed everything

:26:43. > :26:47.since in this Parliament as well. That comes at the same time as they

:26:48. > :26:52.have also consistently imposed measures which the Government has

:26:53. > :26:57.taken to improve conditions for businesses which generate directly

:26:58. > :27:02.and indirectly 75% of all attacks that pays for the services come at

:27:03. > :27:12.the welfare and the pensions which all of us know so important to our

:27:13. > :27:20.constituents. I will give way. Does he believe that giving a tax cut to

:27:21. > :27:25.the richest people in society and introducing the married person's tax

:27:26. > :27:36.allowance are a better use of public money than the investment? The first

:27:37. > :27:42.point is I subscribe on the issue of generating more tax to the

:27:43. > :27:46.philosophy of the former Chinese leader Hu said it matters not

:27:47. > :27:50.whether the cat is white or black. What matters is does it catch mice?

:27:51. > :27:58.On this occasion when we lower the top tax rate from 50 to 45%, the

:27:59. > :28:06.additional tax revenue was millions. Will he -- was ?8 billion. Would you

:28:07. > :28:11.rather have that all enjoyed the ideological thrill of raising the

:28:12. > :28:17.tops -- top tax rate and collecting less revenue and having less to

:28:18. > :28:22.spend on services? I know what I would go for. She is shaking their

:28:23. > :28:25.head which suggest my colleague on the Work and Pensions Select

:28:26. > :28:29.Committee is still from the school of thought that prefers to raise

:28:30. > :28:36.taxes and get less tax revenue. I would have thought that the period

:28:37. > :28:39.of Thatcher and Reagan was you incentivise people to grow and

:28:40. > :28:44.generate more revenue and employ more people by giving them a

:28:45. > :28:51.business friendly environment. That is something that she and her party

:28:52. > :28:54.will have to work out. She did make a second question somewhere in

:28:55. > :29:01.there. The marriage tax allowance. The point there is that all the

:29:02. > :29:07.evidence that has come out research done by people over a period years

:29:08. > :29:13.shows you get happier families, less dysfunctional behaviour when you

:29:14. > :29:19.have closer families and marriage plays a key part in that. I

:29:20. > :29:24.recognise not everybody in the House subscribes to the importance of

:29:25. > :29:28.marriage as a contributing factor to a happy society. We should probably

:29:29. > :29:33.leave that debate for another day. My second point was on the point

:29:34. > :29:38.raised by the Right honourable member for East Ham on the question

:29:39. > :29:45.of Universal Credit and whether the motion touches on this. Many may

:29:46. > :29:49.struggle with the approaches to pavement and administration. There

:29:50. > :29:54.is a philosophical issue here. Originally, the current minister in

:29:55. > :30:12.the other place, the local noise -- the local zero -- noble Lloyd fraud

:30:13. > :30:16.-- noble Lloyd Freud. I asked him once what the difference was between

:30:17. > :30:19.the work that he had done for the previous Labour Government and our

:30:20. > :30:33.own Government and he said the difference was that we will

:30:34. > :30:36.implement it. Lord darning -- Lord Darling said the reason the Labour

:30:37. > :30:43.Party haven't implemented Universal Credit was because it was too

:30:44. > :30:47.difficult. His party has always struggled with the fact that we are

:30:48. > :30:51.implementing something which they had decided was too difficult. They

:30:52. > :30:54.haven't been able to work out whether to oppose it all in

:30:55. > :31:00.principle which will be given they had looked at it or attack it in

:31:01. > :31:03.detail on the basis it is too conjugated to do. As Universal

:31:04. > :31:10.Credit continues to move forward on its journey across the country and

:31:11. > :31:13.to implement towards a growing number of people I suspect that

:31:14. > :31:18.challenges going to be more difficult and won the front bench

:31:19. > :31:24.opposite are going to have to reconcile. His assumption today is

:31:25. > :31:29.it is basically too complicated and with the twist that it now can't be

:31:30. > :31:35.understood by those going on, I don't know how many people in the

:31:36. > :31:42.House today have been to bed Jobcentre plus. Have they spoken

:31:43. > :31:46.about the implementation of Universal Credit and to their

:31:47. > :31:52.customers who are receiving Universal Credit? I suspect that

:31:53. > :31:56.those that have done so will find that people working in the Jobcentre

:31:57. > :32:06.plus find Universal Credit is a huge step forward, a quiet revolution and

:32:07. > :32:12.those who are receiving it find it much easier to understand than the

:32:13. > :32:16.plethora of often contradictory benefits systems which our country

:32:17. > :32:21.has built up over a long period of time. I fundamentally disagree with

:32:22. > :32:26.the Right honourable member, with reluctance, but I disagree with him

:32:27. > :32:30.on the idea that it can't be understood by those who are

:32:31. > :32:38.receiving it for those responsible for administering it. He gave us an

:32:39. > :32:43.example for his case that there were long delays to Universal Credit

:32:44. > :32:50.claims and that the trust had said once again that the increasing

:32:51. > :32:54.demand of food banks was largely down to the delays in benefits. I

:32:55. > :33:01.have heard this argument over quite a long period of time and last year

:33:02. > :33:06.I set up with my local Citizens Advice Bureau on a service agreement

:33:07. > :33:13.which advises them to refer to me any incident where constituents are

:33:14. > :33:19.waiting longer to receive benefits due to them than is the accepted

:33:20. > :33:26.norm from DWP. Any situation and in the last six months, how many people

:33:27. > :33:29.have been referred to my office that having unnecessary delays to their

:33:30. > :33:37.benefits? One. One single constituent. It could be argued that

:33:38. > :33:41.there is not a complete correlation between people referred to the food

:33:42. > :33:46.bank by the CABG and those who go to the food bank. A number of

:33:47. > :33:50.organisations in the city of Gloucester including my own office

:33:51. > :33:56.refer people to our food bank. Nonetheless, the CBeebies probably,

:33:57. > :34:00.and I don't have the precise statistics, it is probably the

:34:01. > :34:04.biggest single organisation handling welfare difficulties amongst my

:34:05. > :34:08.constituents. It is telling that over the last six months, there has

:34:09. > :34:17.only been one case of these unnecessary delays to the this. he

:34:18. > :34:24.has got the wrong end of the stick of what I was saying. The five-week

:34:25. > :34:28.delay is built into the design of the benefit. That is not a fault.

:34:29. > :34:33.That is how it is supposed to work. The assumption is you have your last

:34:34. > :34:38.month's paycheque in the bank and you don't get anything for five

:34:39. > :34:42.weeks. That is the problem and what the Trussell Trust is starting to

:34:43. > :34:49.pick up. It is proving a very serious problem for many claiming

:34:50. > :34:52.the new benefit. It is not that I grasped the wrong end of the stick

:34:53. > :34:56.but may have grasped a different part of the stick. It is important

:34:57. > :35:04.that all parts of the search -- stick considered. I have sought

:35:05. > :35:16.approval from the DWP and my local Jobcentre plus to install a DWP

:35:17. > :35:19.adviser in the building, where we have the food bank and a health

:35:20. > :35:23.service for the homeless. Should I be fortunate enough to receive

:35:24. > :35:29.approval from the Department and from my Jobcentre plus, then I hope

:35:30. > :35:34.that adviser with access to his or her computer, will be able to see

:35:35. > :35:40.precisely where the problems are and if there is a real issue about the

:35:41. > :35:45.in-built delay on Universal Credit, I hope there will be revealed. I put

:35:46. > :35:51.it to him gently that there are a number of alternative scenarios. One

:35:52. > :35:55.of which is that when people go to the food bank and they are asked

:35:56. > :36:00.what are the reasons they'll come to the food bank, it very easy indeed

:36:01. > :36:05.to say, I have had problems getting my benefits. They hope one of the

:36:06. > :36:11.advantages of having the DWP adviser there will be to actually see to

:36:12. > :36:15.what extent that claim is correct or possibly slightly exaggerated. I

:36:16. > :36:18.think the reality of life is people get into financial difficulties

:36:19. > :36:23.through no fault of their own and get into financial difficulty --

:36:24. > :36:27.difficulties in a series of ways matters the aspect of the feedback

:36:28. > :36:35.that hasn't been explored in enough detail so far. It is not just the

:36:36. > :36:42.Trussell Trust that are reporting these issues where people are

:36:43. > :36:45.finding themselves requiring the emergency food aid from food banks.

:36:46. > :36:52.The poverty Alliance in Scotland last year commissioned a report that

:36:53. > :37:01.delays and benefits cut asthma to support was the direct contributing

:37:02. > :37:13.factor in people needing additional food aid. -- benefit cuts. It is

:37:14. > :37:18.many that are saying this. I thank him for that contribution. The issue

:37:19. > :37:24.is rather than just relying on statements made by particular

:37:25. > :37:27.charities that tend to generalise, I would encourage the honourable

:37:28. > :37:32.gentleman to look at it in great detail in his own constituency so

:37:33. > :37:38.that he can see what the issues are. He will have to face the same

:37:39. > :37:47.strategic issue that I addressed to the right honourable member which is

:37:48. > :37:49.if his party's position is that all welfare expenditure is sacrosanct

:37:50. > :37:55.from now until the end of all days, then he will have to think about

:37:56. > :37:58.whether revenue is going come from that is going to fund that without

:37:59. > :38:02.building up excessive debt on which interest has to be paid, which

:38:03. > :38:10.reduces the amount of money available to be spent on services.

:38:11. > :38:14.If he studies the ratio of expenditure from budget is being

:38:15. > :38:23.spent on welfare in our country compared to the largest come to us

:38:24. > :38:27.in Europe, he will see we spend more on welfare. -- largest countries. He

:38:28. > :38:36.is shaking his head but reality is going to have to intervene one day.

:38:37. > :38:41.There are other people who wish to speak. Can I finish by addressing

:38:42. > :38:44.one particular aspect of the issue of child poverty. There is a

:38:45. > :38:50.physicist -- philosophical divide between different parties on this

:38:51. > :38:54.issue. Since this is an important part of the motion that the right

:38:55. > :38:59.honourable member for East Ham has put forward, that the Government

:39:00. > :39:02.should ensure the number of children in poverty falls as a result of the

:39:03. > :39:10.introduction of the new Universal Credit system, I do believe strongly

:39:11. > :39:14.that the evidence on the highest poverty exit rate is strongly linked

:39:15. > :39:19.to the children of families who have gone into work and moved from

:39:20. > :39:26.part-time employment into full employment. The figure is 75% and it

:39:27. > :39:32.enables children to leave the poverty figure that is being used in

:39:33. > :39:37.the motion today. What I think that is telling us is any welfare system

:39:38. > :39:42.which encourages people to work longer hours and to get promotion

:39:43. > :39:46.and advance themselves in different jobs is going to have a hugely

:39:47. > :39:54.beneficial impact on the number of children in poverty. The steps taken

:39:55. > :39:57.by the Government to improve the chances of those on Universal Credit

:39:58. > :40:03.moving up the ladder in the workforce will undoubtedly have a

:40:04. > :40:09.positive effect on the number of children in relative poverty.

:40:10. > :40:15.There are three points, one is about the philosophical strategy on

:40:16. > :40:19.welfare relativity tax revenue, the second is about the value of

:40:20. > :40:23.Universal Credit to our own constituents, and the third is

:40:24. > :40:27.challenging gently some of the Trussell Trust assumptions about why

:40:28. > :40:33.people are going to food banks and the role of DWP advisers in shedding

:40:34. > :40:36.more light on the issue. Lastly, the relationship in getting into the

:40:37. > :40:40.workplace and moving on, and relative child poverty. On that

:40:41. > :40:49.basis, I cannot support the motion today. Neal Gray. Thank you Madam

:40:50. > :40:52.Deputy Speaker, I appreciate your flexible to this afternoon.

:40:53. > :40:55.I congratulate the right honourable member for East Ham and the

:40:56. > :40:57.backbench committee for securing this debate.

:40:58. > :41:05.I think the right honourable member displayed measure in his brilliant

:41:06. > :41:09.speech about it, well researched and came across with powerful points.

:41:10. > :41:12.The new Secretary of State has been keen to push the line that his

:41:13. > :41:18.department needs to look at people, not just statistics. I completely

:41:19. > :41:22.agree, but where is the evidence of that happening? Where is the camp

:41:23. > :41:27.ashen being brought into Social Security policy?

:41:28. > :41:30.-- compassion. The Secretary of State would want to be reminded of

:41:31. > :41:33.the quote from Doctor Seuss, a person is a person, no matter how

:41:34. > :41:36.small. He has to think about the impact the

:41:37. > :41:41.policies of his department are having on children. While he is

:41:42. > :41:46.relatively new to the job, we can call them inherited policies. But,

:41:47. > :41:49.as he starts his tenure by marching to the defence of everything that

:41:50. > :41:55.went before him, these policies will become his own, and he will be the

:41:56. > :41:58.one responsible for what unfolds. He has the opportunity to make his

:41:59. > :42:02.mark on the Department, make a genuine part you from what happened

:42:03. > :42:04.before -- departure. And that starts with cuts to

:42:05. > :42:15.Universal Credit. If he does not, not, how is he any different from

:42:16. > :42:19.his predecessor? Perhaps the Minister can relay this and other

:42:20. > :42:23.issues raised in the debate today to be absent Secretary of State, the

:42:24. > :42:28.cost of bird from tax credits are going to have a very real impact on

:42:29. > :42:32.the quality of children's lives and their long-term life chances.

:42:33. > :42:37.Slashing the only work incentives in Universal Credit will see families

:42:38. > :42:40.and lone parents hit the hardest. Lone parents, without housing costs,

:42:41. > :42:47.will experience the largest reduction in their work allowance

:42:48. > :42:52.from ?8,800 last year to ?4764 this year, a cut of ?4000, according to

:42:53. > :42:55.the House of Commons library. They are working families, the children

:42:56. > :43:01.of single parents are already twice as likely to have the risk of living

:43:02. > :43:05.in poverty as those in coupled families, according to the child

:43:06. > :43:08.poverty action group, it will exacerbate this disadvantage.

:43:09. > :43:12.Lastly, the resolution foundation published a devastating report for

:43:13. > :43:17.this covenant, seeing and a Universal Credit, half a million

:43:18. > :43:18.working families will be significantly worse off --

:43:19. > :43:28.government. With changes to the the tax allowance accounted for.

:43:29. > :43:33.Analysis published by the IFS and debris this year said that absolute

:43:34. > :43:42.child poverty is good to rise from 15.1% in 2015 to 23.1% in 2020.

:43:43. > :43:48.I thank my honourable friend for giving way. Families with a disabled

:43:49. > :43:53.child, prevented from working due to this, they look set to be

:43:54. > :43:57.particularly badly affected by the government's changes. It is

:43:58. > :44:00.estimated that these families will be ?1600 worse off by the end of the

:44:01. > :44:04.year. Does my honourable friend agree with me that the change

:44:05. > :44:08.directly discriminates against these families and the government should

:44:09. > :44:11.go back to the drawing board. I thank my honourable friend for that

:44:12. > :44:17.interventional and I completely agree. I will touch on what is

:44:18. > :44:22.happening in Scotland later in my speech. The IFS say that an increase

:44:23. > :44:26.projected in child poverty is driven directly by a sharp rise in poverty

:44:27. > :44:28.with children I could kill families with three or more children, a

:44:29. > :44:40.result of planned -- with families with three or more

:44:41. > :44:45.Jordan. If it is universally applied by the

:44:46. > :44:49.end of this Parliament, there will be a quarter, rather than a faith,

:44:50. > :44:54.of all children living in poverty because of this government's tax and

:44:55. > :44:58.security changes. Surely, it is time for the secretary of state to see

:44:59. > :45:03.these statistics and the children behind them. Every child in four in

:45:04. > :45:08.my constituency will be in poverty if he accepts the changes he

:45:09. > :45:18.inherited. The child poverty action group agrees, that to lift children

:45:19. > :45:23.out of poverty, a second earner allowance for couples to support

:45:24. > :45:30.owners getting into work without a withdrawal of Universal Credit, and

:45:31. > :45:31.higher employment support, it recognises people's individual

:45:32. > :45:37.circumstances so that Universal Credit can meet its aspiration to

:45:38. > :45:41.promote in work progression through the provision of high-quality advice

:45:42. > :45:44.rather than through the threat of sanctions. Certainly food for

:45:45. > :45:50.thought in that. Universal Credit was supposed to be a streamlined

:45:51. > :45:56.way of tackling poverty and reducing the scope for error and fraud,

:45:57. > :46:00.instead we have massive delays, is huge overspend is and fundamental

:46:01. > :46:05.changes in cuts to awards, driving more children and families into

:46:06. > :46:10.poverty. This is not what was intended but under this government's

:46:11. > :46:13.austerity at any cost obsession, this is the reality. Universal

:46:14. > :46:19.Credit has been watered down and completely undermined, especially by

:46:20. > :46:23.cutting the allowance to ribbons. Under the latest Scotland Bill, the

:46:24. > :46:28.newly re-elected SNP Scottish Government will have power over 15%

:46:29. > :46:36.of social security spending. While I would prefer... I hear some

:46:37. > :46:39.chuntering across the chamber, 15% would be determined in Scotland,

:46:40. > :46:43.meaning the issue of Social Security will be determined in Westminster,

:46:44. > :46:48.that is why it is important we challenge whenever we can. While I

:46:49. > :46:52.prefer my colleagues up the road had control over all Social Security

:46:53. > :46:55.decisions, the SNP is determined to use the powers it will get to

:46:56. > :46:59.transform the service people receive. An area of change will come

:47:00. > :47:04.when we scrapped the role but sees income from families of children

:47:05. > :47:07.with disabled children if they are in hospital for 84 days remain.

:47:08. > :47:13.And the carers allowance the same level of jobseeker's allowance,

:47:14. > :47:18.putting dignity and respect at the heart of the new Scottish social

:47:19. > :47:22.security agency, supported by a ?200 million investment.

:47:23. > :47:27.We will also scrap the bedroom tax. In conclusion, one of the key

:47:28. > :47:32.elements of the motion before us today is the call for a proper

:47:33. > :47:38.impact assessment to take account of the significant cuts to the work

:47:39. > :47:43.allowance. My call is to reassess what went before, and assess what

:47:44. > :47:49.impact these cuts will have on children up and down the aisles. And

:47:50. > :47:57.set its own path is sending its own into work rather than threatening

:47:58. > :48:02.with poverty. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. When

:48:03. > :48:06.the government announced plans to introduce Universal Credit, the

:48:07. > :48:11.rationale was to lift people out of poverty, and help them into work. It

:48:12. > :48:15.was built as a mechanism to end cycles of poverty. And, for parents,

:48:16. > :48:20.it would give their children the best start in life. In 2011, the

:48:21. > :48:27.government forecast Universal Credit would lift 350,000 children out of

:48:28. > :48:31.poverty. In 2013, this was downgraded to 150,000 children.

:48:32. > :48:37.Today, the government cannot exactly say how many children will be helped

:48:38. > :48:41.by this process. Will the government outlined how many families

:48:42. > :48:47.they are helping with this system, based on estimates by the Children's

:48:48. > :48:51.Society and the Child poverty action group, it looks like this downward

:48:52. > :48:56.trend has reached a point where children will be helped out of

:48:57. > :49:03.poverty. It will heavily outweigh those who are from poorer families.

:49:04. > :49:07.It is deeply concerning. As an MP, I often hear from constituents that

:49:08. > :49:10.they are struggling under this government 's programme of austerity

:49:11. > :49:15.and I want their voices to be heard today. I want the Minister to

:49:16. > :49:18.seriously consider the fully unintended, I'm sure, consequences

:49:19. > :49:23.and negative impact Universal Credit is having on many families and their

:49:24. > :49:29.children. He most damaging part of the welfare reform takes into

:49:30. > :49:32.account the eligibility criteria from April 20 17 -- the most

:49:33. > :49:35.damaging part. Only two children per family will be

:49:36. > :49:39.eligible for these elements of Universal Credit, and they are

:49:40. > :49:42.intended to allow families to meet children's basic needs.

:49:43. > :49:47.How dare the government to discriminate on the possibility of a

:49:48. > :49:52.third or fourth child in the family, how dare they discriminate on any

:49:53. > :49:59.child? One of the most disgraceful aspect of this, aside from the

:50:00. > :50:03.clause my honourable friend has raised repeatedly, when you are

:50:04. > :50:06.planning a family, you plan a family based on the circumstances you find

:50:07. > :50:10.yourselves in at the time. Two parents working, what happens if

:50:11. > :50:14.they are unable to work further down the line having had three children,

:50:15. > :50:19.what happens to the two child policy? It is a disgrace. I

:50:20. > :50:22.wholeheartedly agree, this government has no right or reason to

:50:23. > :50:27.dictate to families how many children it ought to have and how

:50:28. > :50:31.much the monetary value would place on a child's life, or their

:50:32. > :50:38.livelihood. The first premium for a child this government has removed

:50:39. > :50:43.the possibility of a 545 pounds per year equivalent to the family

:50:44. > :50:48.element of tax credits designed to help families with extra costs of

:50:49. > :50:51.their first child. Obviously the government does not prioritise the

:50:52. > :50:55.needs and best interests of giving every child the best possible start

:50:56. > :50:59.in life, something the Scottish Government and First Minister has

:51:00. > :51:02.ensured every child in Scotland, newborn child, will receive a box

:51:03. > :51:07.that will allow every single family to deliver the best possible care,

:51:08. > :51:14.health and support needed to any family. Childcare, what it initially

:51:15. > :51:19.appears to be a benefit to low income families, support for

:51:20. > :51:23.childcare has increased from 70% to 80% of the cost. However the policy

:51:24. > :51:26.will not compensate for the far greater losses families will see due

:51:27. > :51:33.to other changes in the benefit system. Bringing me onto my final

:51:34. > :51:38.point on disabled claimants, disabled individuals are often the

:51:39. > :51:44.worst off in any reforms, as a result of the Universal Credit, they

:51:45. > :51:49.are the worst off group, wholly ignored in this process. At present,

:51:50. > :51:54.families of a disabled child can claim ?60 a week through the

:51:55. > :51:58.disability element of child tax credits, and Universal Credit, ?29

:51:59. > :52:03.per week worth of support will be claimed under disability additions.

:52:04. > :52:07.According to the government's own estimates, that means 100,000

:52:08. > :52:12.children will stand to lose more than half their entitlements. How

:52:13. > :52:15.can the government honestly look at their figures and justify the

:52:16. > :52:25.actions? Disabled lone parents with carers stand to lose ?58 per week as

:52:26. > :52:31.a result of the loss. The government has built to take any consideration.

:52:32. > :52:40.What's more, lone parents and those under 25 are to lose ?15 a week, as

:52:41. > :52:42.a result of these under Universal Credit.

:52:43. > :52:46.It brings me to my final point, the government must commit to fare

:52:47. > :52:53.arrangements, especially for those at risk and it is worth considering

:52:54. > :52:57.ultimately while this government balances its books on the backs of

:52:58. > :53:02.the poor, many more children will continue to grow up in poverty.

:53:03. > :53:06.While this government continues to allow tax avoidance and big business

:53:07. > :53:10.to benefit, those working hard to put food on the table will lose out.

:53:11. > :53:13.When will the government learn that the fact is one child growing up in

:53:14. > :53:22.polity acquittal poverty is one too many? -- in poverty is one too many.

:53:23. > :53:26.We have had an unexpectedly concise nonetheless interesting debate this

:53:27. > :53:28.afternoon. Others have paid tribute to the

:53:29. > :53:32.right honourable member for East Ham for securing the debate and giving

:53:33. > :53:36.us all the opportunity to highlight the impact Universal Credit will

:53:37. > :53:41.have on children. Right at the heart of this is the

:53:42. > :53:47.recent cuts to work allowances, implemented last month, set to drive

:53:48. > :53:49.child poverty up considerably in the months and years ahead.

:53:50. > :53:54.Back in January when the government made a U-turn on tax credits, it was

:53:55. > :53:59.clear relief for many families would be temporary.

:54:00. > :54:02.As we have heard today, for 3 million working families, the

:54:03. > :54:06.transition to Universal Credit means they are no longer eligible for any

:54:07. > :54:10.support that they would have had under the tax credits system, and

:54:11. > :54:14.for a further 1.2 million working families, they will still get

:54:15. > :54:18.support but be worse off. That is 4.2 million families who

:54:19. > :54:23.will, according to the resolution foundation, on average be more than

:54:24. > :54:29.?40 per week worse off. Even taking into account the increase to the

:54:30. > :54:32.minimum wage, and increases to tax allowances. When Universal Credit

:54:33. > :54:36.was first introduced, we were told it would simplify and streamline the

:54:37. > :54:40.benefit system, introducing greater flexibility for those in seasonal

:54:41. > :54:47.jobs or with fluctuating earnings. Crucially, it would remove financial

:54:48. > :54:51.disincentives to work created by the previous system, but that is not

:54:52. > :54:55.what is happening now. The introduction of Universal Credit has

:54:56. > :54:59.simply been an excuse to cut family incomes, taking ?3 billion per year

:55:00. > :55:02.out of the pockets of low pay parents. As the resolution

:55:03. > :55:06.foundation report puts it, the latest cuts to Universal Credit

:55:07. > :55:11.risks leaving its little more a vehicle for rationalising benefits

:55:12. > :55:15.and administration and cutting costs to the Exchequer.

:55:16. > :55:23.Cutting the work alignment has destroyed the aspect of Universal

:55:24. > :55:27.Credit that reduced work disincentives, the thing that made

:55:28. > :55:30.it a distinctive policy. The most valuable aspect of Universal Credit

:55:31. > :55:33.has been butchered and we are now left with a system that will reduce

:55:34. > :55:39.the incomes of over 4 million low-income families and people

:55:40. > :55:45.already working hard to support their families but are still

:55:46. > :55:48.struggling to make ends meet. It is set to see child poverty

:55:49. > :55:53.skyrocketing in the next few years. Far from quitting work incentives,

:55:54. > :55:58.cuts mean work -- parents in low-paid jobs face marginal taxation

:55:59. > :56:07.if they take on extra hours. There is no way round the fact that it is

:56:08. > :56:12.-- reduces the incentive to work. The extra earnings that you're going

:56:13. > :56:16.to get might not even cover your transport costs much less your

:56:17. > :56:20.childcare costs. Single parents working single parents are going to

:56:21. > :56:25.be will badly affected by these changes because they are being hit

:56:26. > :56:29.by a dramatic income cuts. There is a big disparity between those in

:56:30. > :56:35.rented accommodation and those who are owner occupiers. A working

:56:36. > :56:40.coupled with children in rented accommodation will lose ?234 a year

:56:41. > :56:47.while working single parent will lose ?554 a year. But those are not

:56:48. > :56:50.in rented accommodation, the reductions are even more stark. A

:56:51. > :56:55.working couple with children would lose over ?1000 a year but a working

:56:56. > :57:04.single parliament is set to lose ?2628 a year on average. I will give

:57:05. > :57:08.way. A single parent already working full-time on the national living

:57:09. > :57:14.wage, otherwise known as a modern increase on the minimal wage of ?7

:57:15. > :57:22.20 now have to work an extra 70 -- 46 days a year. Does my honourable

:57:23. > :57:26.friend that this is an acceptable? It is unrealistic. When these

:57:27. > :57:28.measures were debated, the Government tried to debate their

:57:29. > :57:32.families affected by these losses could work if you extra hours to

:57:33. > :57:42.cover the shortfall. Notwithstanding the availability of extra hours been

:57:43. > :57:48.dependent on an employees circumstance, there may not be extra

:57:49. > :57:52.hours going around at the moment. A single parent who is already working

:57:53. > :57:58.on a full-time job on the minimum wage would have to work essentially

:57:59. > :58:02.an extra day a week just to make up that shortfall. It is already hard

:58:03. > :58:06.for single parents to manage full-time work and family

:58:07. > :58:11.responsibilities. I can't believe it is good for them good their children

:58:12. > :58:15.to be taking on extra day a week when they are already working

:58:16. > :58:19.full-time. Something has got to give. Health will collapse and

:58:20. > :58:26.children and family life will suffer. It is not the right thing to

:58:27. > :58:28.do. Families that are affected by disability are going to be

:58:29. > :58:34.disproportionately affected. Yesterday at DWP questions, I read

:58:35. > :58:38.the impact that the introduction of Universal Credit will have on

:58:39. > :58:44.disabled children some time ago now. There was a report showing holes in

:58:45. > :58:49.the safety net which warrants the introduction of Universal Credit and

:58:50. > :58:53.it would mean cuts in allowances for disabled children. There are 100,000

:58:54. > :58:58.disabled children in the UK likely to be affected too will see their

:58:59. > :59:04.support halved to around ?29 a week. We have heard that families with a

:59:05. > :59:10.disabled child twice as likely to be low income families living in

:59:11. > :59:14.poverty. Those who live with significant disability face extra

:59:15. > :59:18.living costs. It is too easy to gloss over the realities of

:59:19. > :59:22.day-to-day life with these children, their parents and brothers and

:59:23. > :59:31.sisters. Their disability will affect the whole family. Some time

:59:32. > :59:37.ago I worked for Carers Scotland and I will never expect the parents

:59:38. > :59:39.talking about their children. They found it enormously challenging

:59:40. > :59:44.financially and emotionally. One working mother describing how she

:59:45. > :59:47.gave up a full-time professional career to work part-time in a

:59:48. > :59:52.low-paid job simply because she couldn't find a nursery that was

:59:53. > :59:57.with complex needs. I remember with complex needs. I remember

:59:58. > :00:04.another mother talking about the realisation that she would have to

:00:05. > :00:10.become a stay at home parent. She and her husband had bought a three

:00:11. > :00:14.bedroomed house to accommodate this. They had to sell up and down size

:00:15. > :00:19.because that was all they could afford on one income. They needed

:00:20. > :00:22.more space to accommodate growing toddlers, space to accommodate a

:00:23. > :00:27.wheelchair, space to ensure their eldest child could sleep through the

:00:28. > :00:30.night without being woken up by a disabled sibling who needed

:00:31. > :00:35.scheduling the night. They became a family struggling to make ends meet.

:00:36. > :00:40.It is families like this who have been put on the front line. ?30 a

:00:41. > :00:46.week makes an enormous difference. The difference to the quality of

:00:47. > :00:49.life. The other side of this coin cuts their severe disability premium

:00:50. > :00:55.that is paid to disabled adults. That will affect around 25,000

:00:56. > :00:59.children who live with a severely disabled parent. The level of

:01:00. > :01:05.support will be ?58 a week less than these families and even for those in

:01:06. > :01:10.the support group who have no prospect of being fit for work, they

:01:11. > :01:14.will be entitled to ?28 less a week than the present system. That will

:01:15. > :01:17.have an impact on the children in these households got most of whom

:01:18. > :01:22.don't get any extra support at the moment. It will make life harder for

:01:23. > :01:32.young people who are already in some cases taking on age inappropriate

:01:33. > :01:35.levels of domestic responsibility. Slashing subwoofer disabled children

:01:36. > :01:41.and the children of severely disabled adults who have no prospect

:01:42. > :01:52.of work is going to harm life chances that these children. --

:01:53. > :01:59.slashing amounts for disabled children. They have to bear the

:02:00. > :02:04.brunt of the agenda. We have had suggestions put forward today by

:02:05. > :02:09.many organisations as to how the failing Universal Credit programme

:02:10. > :02:13.-- project could be redeemed, not least the name for a credible and

:02:14. > :02:19.up-to-date impact assessment of the overall impact on child poverty.

:02:20. > :02:22.Instead of trying to defend the indefensible, the vomit has an

:02:23. > :02:26.opportunity to go back to the drawing board on Universal Credit

:02:27. > :02:31.and restore its original policy intent of supporting low-income

:02:32. > :02:35.working families. They will be confirming their reputation as the

:02:36. > :02:40.sort of people who think it is okayed to make disabled children and

:02:41. > :02:51.parents working hard in low-paid jobs paying tax breaks enjoyed by

:02:52. > :02:54.the wealthiest in our society. I am grateful to the backbench business

:02:55. > :02:59.committee were holding this debate in the main Chamber. I pay duty to

:03:00. > :03:06.my right honourable friend the member for East Ham who -- whose

:03:07. > :03:09.erudite speech was a great contribution to the debate. We had a

:03:10. > :03:13.number of contributions to the member for North Devon talking about

:03:14. > :03:35.the broader context. The honourable member for Gloucester

:03:36. > :03:42.who is no longer in his place, where I did agree with him was on the idea

:03:43. > :03:52.of making sure we visit Jobcentre plus to see Universal Credit in

:03:53. > :03:55.action. It was important to be in contact with the local Citizens

:03:56. > :04:00.Advice Bureau and visiting food banks to see what goes on, on the

:04:01. > :04:07.ground. A useful contribution from the honourable member from Airdrie

:04:08. > :04:11.pointed out the new approach that has been promised by the new

:04:12. > :04:14.Secretary of State to look at people, not statistics. I look

:04:15. > :04:22.forward to the honourable lady telling us how she has changed her

:04:23. > :04:26.approach and under her new boss. We also had contributions from the

:04:27. > :04:32.honourable lady for Lanark and Hamilton East and the honourable

:04:33. > :04:39.lady. A number of contributions for the members from Cardiff South,

:04:40. > :04:47.Hamilton West and Westminster North. This debate comes at a key moment of

:04:48. > :04:54.test for the new Secretary of State. Because the outlook is a bleak one,

:04:55. > :05:04.the Institute for Fiscal Studies expects absolute child poverty to

:05:05. > :05:11.increase from 15.1% in 2015/16 to 18.3% in 2020/ 21. The resolution

:05:12. > :05:16.foundation believes 200,000 more children predominantly from working

:05:17. > :05:24.households will fall into poverty this very year. The charity

:05:25. > :05:27.gingerbread, making the point that the honourable member made about

:05:28. > :05:34.cuts to the work allowance hitting single parents particularly hard.

:05:35. > :05:39.There is a set of damning statistics on this. The Children's Society have

:05:40. > :05:49.set out these. A working single parent can lose up to ?2628 a year.

:05:50. > :05:55.What was the Government's response? They toured the social security

:05:56. > :06:11.advisory committee that parents can work for additional hours. To expect

:06:12. > :06:24.when permit work 200 extra hours is an outright insult. The honourable

:06:25. > :06:27.member for North Durham button -- North Devon wanted to take this into

:06:28. > :06:33.account. A single parent already working full-time on the National

:06:34. > :06:38.with lush national living rage -- wage will have to work 46 extra days

:06:39. > :06:44.a year, more than two additional working months. How one Earth can

:06:45. > :06:58.that be put forward as a reasonable proposition by anybody? -- how on

:06:59. > :07:02.earth. They were warned about this. The social mobility and child

:07:03. > :07:07.poverty commission report which was released before Christmas on the

:07:08. > :07:13.17th of December last year said that the immediate priority is to be that

:07:14. > :07:17.the cuts to the work allowance planned for this April did not go

:07:18. > :07:22.ahead. I am afraid the Government simply did not listen. The problem

:07:23. > :07:29.that the Government are getting to is that their approach is actually

:07:30. > :07:33.starting to deny the very purposes that Universal Credit was set up

:07:34. > :07:41.for. This is what the resolution foundation says. It is also changed

:07:42. > :07:45.as a result of the increasingly tight financial constraints placed

:07:46. > :07:50.upon it in recent years. These are involving more than just a reduction

:07:51. > :07:54.in the money available under Universal Credit. They have also

:07:55. > :08:00.altered the very structure of policy-making, the composition of

:08:01. > :08:07.winners and losers and fundamentally damaging the ability to deliver

:08:08. > :08:12.against its purported AMs. That is why the Government is so terrified

:08:13. > :08:18.to publish and up-to-date impact assessment. Perhaps it explains why

:08:19. > :08:21.they are terrified to tell us the figures as to what it expects will

:08:22. > :08:30.happen to child poverty over the course of this Parliament. I will

:08:31. > :08:36.give way. Does my honourable friend agree that we need an urgent gender

:08:37. > :08:42.impact analysis of the Government's policy since 2010? The desires of

:08:43. > :08:48.Universal Credit, like other Government policies, seems to have a

:08:49. > :08:54.disproportionate impact on women. He is right. We know the brunt of cuts

:08:55. > :08:56.have fallen upon women and that is precisely what the Government should

:08:57. > :09:02.be taking into account and should do. It isn't as if it would be

:09:03. > :09:07.difficult for them to come up with these figures. My honourable friend

:09:08. > :09:12.chose the all-party Parliamentary group on health in all policies. The

:09:13. > :09:19.excellent enquiry report they produced was absolutely clear. --

:09:20. > :09:22.inquiry. There is a danger of the progress on child poverty going into

:09:23. > :09:28.reverse as a result of what the Government is doing. It isn't just

:09:29. > :09:35.about the Government's lack of compassion on this. It is also about

:09:36. > :09:40.their complete lack of confidence. Let us not forget how Universal

:09:41. > :09:44.Credit has been implemented. On the 1st of November 2011, the former

:09:45. > :09:48.Secretary of State told us that in a press release there would be no

:09:49. > :09:57.fewer than 1 million people claiming Universal Credit by April 20 14th.

:09:58. > :09:58.By November 2015, the figure was 155,000 568. On my reckoning, less

:09:59. > :10:09.than a fifth of the target he set. The day when the roll-out is

:10:10. > :10:14.complete seems to be for ever going back. When I was younger, Mr Deputy

:10:15. > :10:19.Speaker, my great aunt and uncle used to own a part and in the park

:10:20. > :10:26.there was a brass plaque above the bar. It said free beer tomorrow. The

:10:27. > :10:30.problem is every time you went in it said free beer tomorrow. That is

:10:31. > :10:34.where we are getting too with Universal Credit. We are still

:10:35. > :10:39.waiting six years ahead for it to be implemented. But it is not just

:10:40. > :10:45.about the speed of implementation. It is about the risks the government

:10:46. > :10:50.have identified. Let's not forget the Universal Credit risk register

:10:51. > :10:55.which they fought tooth and nail not to be disclosed, but they were

:10:56. > :11:01.forced to disclose it. They were spending legal fees on defending the

:11:02. > :11:05.indefensible. It identified 65 open risks to the programme, including

:11:06. > :11:09.skilled staff resources not being in the right place at the right time.

:11:10. > :11:15.The list of incompetence does not end there. The former Secretary of

:11:16. > :11:24.State made it clear, and this is a point made by my right honourable

:11:25. > :11:32.friend, the member for East Ham, and this is what the former Secretary of

:11:33. > :11:37.State said, here is the key, he said, I have already said that those

:11:38. > :11:40.who are on Universal Credit at the moment will be supported by their

:11:41. > :11:45.advisers through the flexible support fund to enjoy their status

:11:46. > :11:51.is not changed. The idea is that it would make a difference. We have

:11:52. > :11:58.here the letters that the DWP are sending out. I do not know whether

:11:59. > :12:01.the honourable lady has seen it. Since she declared for the British

:12:02. > :12:09.exit, she does not get to see all the documents in her department! I

:12:10. > :12:14.am happy to show it to her. Do you know something, as it sets out here

:12:15. > :12:17.what your new amount of money is, not in one place in that letter is

:12:18. > :12:25.the flexible support fund mentioned. Not one place. I suppose when we are

:12:26. > :12:30.talking about incompetence it is like some of the DWP ministers have

:12:31. > :12:35.been in competition for it. We will have to give the top award to the

:12:36. > :12:39.member for North West Cambridgeshire, and he is only a

:12:40. > :12:47.part timer in the Department. What was his answer back in January about

:12:48. > :12:52.mitigating the effects of cuts? Let us not forget, he said, the fact

:12:53. > :12:56.that any time we fill up our time with petrol, it is a saving on the

:12:57. > :13:02.basis of the freeze of the fuel duty. That is in Hansard. If the

:13:03. > :13:08.answer therefore in 2016 from the Tories to those who lose out is, go

:13:09. > :13:13.and fill up your car, that shows how out of touch they are. I should say

:13:14. > :13:17.this to the honourable lady, I know I picked the honourable member for

:13:18. > :13:22.North West Cambridgeshire for top spot in incompetency, but in recent

:13:23. > :13:39.months she is used to missing out on the top spot. I will certainly carry

:13:40. > :13:43.on. But, Mr Deputy Speaker, the problem is that naked politics is

:13:44. > :13:48.interfering with Universal Credit. Do not take my word for it, take the

:13:49. > :13:52.word of the former Secretary of State who said this on the 20th of

:13:53. > :13:58.March on the Andrew Marr show. It looks like we see benefits as a port

:13:59. > :14:03.of money to cut because they did not vote for us. Let's never forget what

:14:04. > :14:09.was said by the former Secretary of State that day. What does that say

:14:10. > :14:13.to children in poverty? We are only interested in your parents if they

:14:14. > :14:18.voted for us, or are likely to vote for us at the next election. What

:14:19. > :14:22.else did the former Secretary of State say about what was happening

:14:23. > :14:30.to the government Social Security changes? He said this, there has

:14:31. > :14:34.been too much emphasis on money-saving exercises and not

:14:35. > :14:39.enough awareness from the Treasury, in particular of the government's

:14:40. > :14:44.vision of a new welfare to work system which cannot be salami slice.

:14:45. > :14:48.It got even worse in terms of the damning criticism he made of the

:14:49. > :14:53.Treasury. I am unable to watch passively he said, while certain

:14:54. > :14:57.policies are in a dip in order to meet the fiscal self-imposed

:14:58. > :15:01.constraints that I believe I more and more perceived to be distinctly

:15:02. > :15:07.political rather than international, economic interest. Any argument that

:15:08. > :15:12.was made... I will give way in a moment. Any argument made today by

:15:13. > :15:16.the honourable member for Gloucester that all these cuts are about a

:15:17. > :15:21.reduction in our deficit were blown apart by what was said by the former

:15:22. > :15:25.Secretary of State that day. What he was saying is it is all about the

:15:26. > :15:32.politics and the career of the Chancellor. I thank the honourable

:15:33. > :15:36.member for giving way. Does he also remembered that the former Secretary

:15:37. > :15:40.of State made it very clear that the way in which the Treasury was

:15:41. > :15:47.imposing these cuts was by use of the welfare cap which was supported

:15:48. > :15:50.on both sides of the House in the last parliament, but it has become

:15:51. > :15:58.the search engine for cup after cup and it needs to be addressed. Yes,

:15:59. > :16:02.it does need to be addressed and as ever the honourable member for Foyle

:16:03. > :16:09.makes a distinctly useful contribution to these matters. But,

:16:10. > :16:13.Mr Deputy Speaker, there is no greater moral and economic purpose

:16:14. > :16:18.that we could have in this place than eradicating child poverty. It

:16:19. > :16:25.is what the last Labour government in 1999 said it would do by 2020. To

:16:26. > :16:29.do it and to achieve it is to ensure every single child has the ability

:16:30. > :16:36.to unlock their potential regardless of their background. Mr Speaker, the

:16:37. > :16:44.European Union, dare I say it, has pledged to take at least 20 million

:16:45. > :16:48.out of poverty and social exclusion by 2020. I very much via the

:16:49. > :16:52.honourable lady does not only want to leave the European Union, but her

:16:53. > :16:59.policies will mean it will plunge more people into poverty by 2020.

:17:00. > :17:04.The levels of child poverty today are a damning indictment of this

:17:05. > :17:08.government. They bring shame on this country. The government has an

:17:09. > :17:16.urgency that it must act upon and I commend this motion to the House.

:17:17. > :17:20.Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Let me start by welcoming today's debate

:17:21. > :17:25.and I want to congratulate the right honourable member for East Ham on

:17:26. > :17:30.both securing the debate today, but for also making his contribution. I

:17:31. > :17:35.pay tribute to him because I spent time in committee with him. When he

:17:36. > :17:40.mentioned the previous stages of the development of Universal Credit and

:17:41. > :17:44.the first welfare reform act, I was also on that committee as well and

:17:45. > :17:48.he made notable contributions to the discussion around Universal Credit

:17:49. > :17:52.and the change is the government were undertaking at the time. I

:17:53. > :17:56.wanted that members from all sides of the House who contributed to the

:17:57. > :18:01.discussion today. My honourable friend for North Devon, the

:18:02. > :18:07.honourable lady for Edmonton, the honourable gentleman for Airdrie and

:18:08. > :18:12.Shotts, Lanark and East and Hamilton East and the honourable lady for

:18:13. > :18:17.Banff and Buchan. I will come on too many of the points discussed today.

:18:18. > :18:22.It is worth me setting out, before I go on to the details of Universal

:18:23. > :18:28.Credit, but just to set out the government's commitment to Universal

:18:29. > :18:33.Credit, but also very much to what has been at the heart of Universal

:18:34. > :18:36.Credit in our welfare reform changes, which is that Universal

:18:37. > :18:43.Credit has been revolutionising the welfare system by focusing on making

:18:44. > :18:47.work pay. I will go into detail on incentivising people to work. We are

:18:48. > :18:53.helping people into work and we are also able to help people in work

:18:54. > :18:57.with personalised support and we are seeking to transform individuals'

:18:58. > :19:03.outcomes when it comes to employment support, and also ensuring they are

:19:04. > :19:08.supported in work and with sustained employment outcomes as well. This

:19:09. > :19:12.has been at the heart of our welfare reforms. It is important when we

:19:13. > :19:17.discuss Universal Credit in the broader sense that, yes, it has been

:19:18. > :19:23.instituted and developed so it is easier to start work and earn more

:19:24. > :19:32.because of the personalised support it offers. Under the old system

:19:33. > :19:37.there was little or no support. Members and honourable members have

:19:38. > :19:43.discussed work coaches today and we are focused on providing support and

:19:44. > :19:47.in work progression. Other factors about Universal Credit is it mirrors

:19:48. > :19:54.the world of work. It is paid in a single monthly amount. It makes work

:19:55. > :19:57.pay. Universal Credit stays with the claimant after they moved into work

:19:58. > :20:01.and on top of that Universal Credit is part of a package of reforms

:20:02. > :20:07.alongside the introduction of the national living wage, which I will

:20:08. > :20:12.also come onto. There have been comment about Universal Credit

:20:13. > :20:19.itself and the delivery of Universal Credit, so I want to emphasise that

:20:20. > :20:24.what we have seen with Universal Credit is the national roll-out is

:20:25. > :20:28.now complete. The digital service for all claimants will start to roll

:20:29. > :20:33.out nationally from me. Once completed in June 2018, it will no

:20:34. > :20:41.longer be possible to make legacy benefits. We have been focused on

:20:42. > :20:44.the delivery of Universal Credit and my right honourable friend the

:20:45. > :20:47.Secretary of State yesterday emphasised the fact we would rather

:20:48. > :20:52.have an agile delivery, rather than going with the big bang approach

:20:53. > :20:57.which jeopardises the delivery of our benefits system. Did the

:20:58. > :21:04.honourable gentleman have something to contribute, or is he chuntering

:21:05. > :21:09.for the sake of it? Well, it is a well-developed system and he is

:21:10. > :21:13.shaking his head in acknowledgement with that. Universal Credit is in

:21:14. > :21:20.every Jobcentre and the vast majority of claimants are now

:21:21. > :21:23.receiving the support that previously did not exist through the

:21:24. > :21:29.legacy system. If the honourable gentleman would like to intervene,

:21:30. > :21:33.he is very welcome to. Gucci defined for us what agile delivery actually

:21:34. > :21:39.means? Secondly, could she tell us how it will take into account the 65

:21:40. > :21:45.open risk that have been identified in the Universal Credit programme

:21:46. > :21:51.going for? He is speaking about the risk register that was published

:21:52. > :21:56.many years ago. The point about agile delivery is this is a system

:21:57. > :22:02.that is adapting and has adapted through feedback through work

:22:03. > :22:06.coaches and the delivery is attested system. All honourable members on

:22:07. > :22:11.the front bench will be aware of that because we have been public

:22:12. > :22:17.about that. We are supporting people. The reality is that it is

:22:18. > :22:20.out there and it is supporting people in work and we are seeing

:22:21. > :22:25.positive benefits on that basis as well. I am very conscious there are

:22:26. > :22:32.a number of points that were made with regards to child poverty and

:22:33. > :22:36.this was subject to much debate in the welfare reform and work out. The

:22:37. > :22:45.government has a statutory obligation to report annually on

:22:46. > :22:51.educational attainment. Two factors that make an impact on children's'

:22:52. > :22:54.life chances. Previous debates on poverty have focused purely on the

:22:55. > :22:59.symptoms, rather than tackling the root causes and we now believe that

:23:00. > :23:03.through our commitment to end child poverty and improving life chances

:23:04. > :23:08.our two measures will make sure there is real action in the areas

:23:09. > :23:12.that will make the biggest difference to poor children. We have

:23:13. > :23:17.committed to publishing a life chances strategy later this month

:23:18. > :23:22.and it will set out a comprehensive plan to fight disadvantage and

:23:23. > :23:26.extend opportunity. It will include a wider set of non-statutory

:23:27. > :23:30.measures on the root causes of child poverty and that will go into the

:23:31. > :23:37.scope of family breakdown, a range of other aspects such as drug and

:23:38. > :23:39.alcohol addiction. When this strategy is published eye, working

:23:40. > :23:43.not just with colleagues on this side of the House, but with all

:23:44. > :23:48.members of the House, because this is an important issue... The

:23:49. > :23:54.honourable member for Edmonton raised this in particular to her

:23:55. > :23:57.constituency and I was alarmed to hear her constituency is ranked so

:23:58. > :24:02.highly when it comes to child poverty, we will need to tackle

:24:03. > :24:07.these deep rooted social problems and work collectively to transform

:24:08. > :24:10.children's lives so they can reach their full potential. It is

:24:11. > :24:17.important all members of this house work constructively on that. What is

:24:18. > :24:22.the government's current estimate for the impact on the number of

:24:23. > :24:23.children growing up in poverty from the implementation of Universal

:24:24. > :24:34.Credit? I do not have that information at

:24:35. > :24:40.hand right now. Previously the Government had published figures in

:24:41. > :24:45.relation to child poverty and I would be very happy, I know that

:24:46. > :24:49.other members have mentioned this, and commented on this in the debates

:24:50. > :24:53.today, I would be happy to write to members of the House and him as well

:24:54. > :25:02.and update on those numbers, in particular. Of course. Does the

:25:03. > :25:07.Minister think there will be more or less numbers than the 200,000

:25:08. > :25:12.additional children going into poverty with the resolution quoted?

:25:13. > :25:18.As he heard me say, when we publish our strategy, when we focus on

:25:19. > :25:21.tackling the root causes of child poverty, we are committed to

:25:22. > :25:28.eradicating Charles poverty and we will drive those numbers down. --

:25:29. > :25:35.child poverty. I'm extremely grateful. She make sure that when

:25:36. > :25:38.this life chances strategy is published, significant thought will

:25:39. > :25:44.be given to integration with lessons learned from the troubled families

:25:45. > :25:46.programme to make sure the range of interventions across multiple

:25:47. > :25:51.departments are integrated to give the best chance of success? My

:25:52. > :25:56.honourable friend makes a very important point. The point about the

:25:57. > :26:01.life chances strategy is it will be a cross government strategy. It will

:26:02. > :26:05.go across government and the focus will be on integration. And the

:26:06. > :26:09.support that is required. He referenced troubled families

:26:10. > :26:13.programmes are which have been successful in helping families and

:26:14. > :26:19.turning them around in terms of their circumstances, supporting work

:26:20. > :26:22.and outcomes as well. We are incredibly focused and conscious of

:26:23. > :26:25.the need to integrate and when that strategy is published, all

:26:26. > :26:33.honourable members of the House will see that completely. The point about

:26:34. > :26:36.universal credit is it is removing barriers preventing people from

:26:37. > :26:41.finding work and increasing hours and earnings. Universal credit

:26:42. > :26:46.provides the right support to incentivise work and in particular

:26:47. > :26:51.it removes the barriers we have seen in terms of restricting hours

:26:52. > :26:57.previously in place with the 16 hour rule. I think the point to make

:26:58. > :27:01.here, and I know not just in this debate but in many others and in

:27:02. > :27:08.committee in this House as well, we have been clear the support

:27:09. > :27:13.universal credit claimants receive of course focuses on yes, support

:27:14. > :27:18.with work coaches, and also the fact that there is additional support

:27:19. > :27:24.when it comes to child care costs, we have seen the in work aggression

:27:25. > :27:27.trials have begun testing how work coaches can continue providing

:27:28. > :27:31.tailored support to claimants so they can progress and also

:27:32. > :27:37.importantly increase earning capacity as well. I will give way.

:27:38. > :27:42.On the issue she raises in work claimants, I know that this is at an

:27:43. > :27:47.early stage, but 40% of the Department staff are likely to be

:27:48. > :27:51.affected by the in work condition approach. I know various people in

:27:52. > :27:54.this House have asked for answers from the Department about when they

:27:55. > :28:01.will offer those starving extra hours they need to avoid sanctions

:28:02. > :28:07.and avoid tax credits and universal credit being cut. Would the minister

:28:08. > :28:12.like to comment on that now? We have been very clear about universal

:28:13. > :28:16.credit. Being there to secure employment opportunities and

:28:17. > :28:22.progression in work for everyone that is on universal credit. I also

:28:23. > :28:26.come back to the wider support universal credit does provide for

:28:27. > :28:31.families and it has been touched on in this debate as well, parents with

:28:32. > :28:36.universal credit can claim back a divide percent of childcare costs

:28:37. > :28:40.when they move into work, compared to 70% under legacy benefits. It is

:28:41. > :28:44.a significant change. It means a working family with two children can

:28:45. > :28:51.receive up to ?13,000 in childcare support under universal credit. We

:28:52. > :28:56.do know and interestingly, before the recent elections in Scotland, I

:28:57. > :29:00.met with the Scottish childcare Minister to look at the development

:29:01. > :29:05.of childcare policy in Scotland and the uptake as well, mirroring many

:29:06. > :29:10.of the programmes we have in the rest of England and the need for

:29:11. > :29:14.affordable childcare is crucial for working families. That is something

:29:15. > :29:18.that I think this government and I look forward to working with, with

:29:19. > :29:23.the new government in Scotland, to make sure we can provide all the

:29:24. > :29:27.relevant support possible. The point about support for disabled children

:29:28. > :29:32.was also mentioned. We should all be very clear and I recall debating

:29:33. > :29:38.these points in committee as well in the Welfare Reform Bill, there is a

:29:39. > :29:41.clear recognition of the extra costs associated with disabilities and

:29:42. > :29:48.universal credit will provide support for families with disabled

:29:49. > :29:50.children. And the point about the disabled child edition is it

:29:51. > :29:54.provides extra support for low income families of a disabled child.

:29:55. > :30:02.We no care and responsibilities are enormous for parents with disabled

:30:03. > :30:11.children. -- we do know that. That is something that we are focused on.

:30:12. > :30:17.Points were made regarding the Resolution Foundation report... I

:30:18. > :30:21.thank the Minister for giving way. Again, she referred to the additions

:30:22. > :30:26.and giving extra support for children with disabilities. It is

:30:27. > :30:31.not extra or additional to what they would receive now. It is in fact a

:30:32. > :30:35.reduction. Will she properly address the terms in the motion and not the

:30:36. > :30:41.fantasy world she is trying to serve up? Let me be very clear, the

:30:42. > :30:47.Government has been absolutely clear about protecting and supporting the

:30:48. > :30:51.vulnerable and also the support we provide for people, for families

:30:52. > :30:57.with disabled children and we are clear on that. I would also like to

:30:58. > :31:02.dress some points raised in the debate regarding the Resolution

:31:03. > :31:05.Foundation. -- address. The report failed to take into account the

:31:06. > :31:07.highest barriers to entry work. Second earners in the current

:31:08. > :31:11.system, virtually laminated under universal credit. Through increased

:31:12. > :31:17.childcare, for example. -- eliminated. There are no reductions

:31:18. > :31:21.in Dean of hours work for these households with children. The

:31:22. > :31:25.foundation report also talks about boosting claimant earnings and that

:31:26. > :31:29.is what universal credit does. For the first time ever, people are

:31:30. > :31:34.getting the personalised support to progress in work and earn more.

:31:35. > :31:40.Universal credit makes sure people are better off for every extra hour

:31:41. > :31:42.worked. Our own research shows 86% of people on the universal credit

:31:43. > :31:48.were actively looking to increase working hours compared to 38% on JS

:31:49. > :31:53.A. 70% of people universal credit were looking to increase earnings,

:31:54. > :31:57.compared to just 51% of people on jobseeker's allowance. The point is

:31:58. > :32:01.it very much is focused on the type of support universal credit does

:32:02. > :32:11.give through the personalised work coaches that we have. And the

:32:12. > :32:16.support that actually brings. In closing, Mr Deputy Speaker, I hope I

:32:17. > :32:19.have made clear the case bought universal credit because it is

:32:20. > :32:23.supporting people in work and transforming lives. We have evidence

:32:24. > :32:27.already with some indications I have already given. I would like to

:32:28. > :32:32.reiterate and emphasise again, Mr Deputy speaker, when it comes to

:32:33. > :32:35.dealing with very challenging issues like Child poverty, the Government

:32:36. > :32:40.will be publishing the life chances strategy shortly and I look forward

:32:41. > :32:44.to working with all right Honourable members on tackling these

:32:45. > :32:47.fundamental issues, which are being supported by the implementation of

:32:48. > :32:55.universal credit. Thank you very much. Let me reiterate my thanks to

:32:56. > :33:04.the business community and thank everybody who has contributed in

:33:05. > :33:12.this debate. A valuable debate, we have had. A couple of points I would

:33:13. > :33:16.like to make in concluding. I appreciated the Minister telling us

:33:17. > :33:22.that everything is now going to be fine with the ID system because it

:33:23. > :33:27.is agile. She will remember as I do in the 2011 Bill committee we were

:33:28. > :33:30.told that system was agile and everything was going to be fine

:33:31. > :33:34.goals in the Department has discovered agility and a couple of

:33:35. > :33:37.years into that one, the Government realised it was running into the

:33:38. > :33:42.sand and they started a new system and told us, this one is agile. We

:33:43. > :33:46.will look forward to seeing how it works out. I am also grateful to

:33:47. > :33:51.everybody who has pressed the Minister for an up date on the

:33:52. > :33:56.impact of universal credit, on the number of children growing up in

:33:57. > :34:03.poverty, including the honourable member for Airdrie and members on

:34:04. > :34:06.these benches and the front bench. I'm disappointed the Minister was

:34:07. > :34:11.not able to give us a bigger. But I am grateful to her for committing to

:34:12. > :34:17.write to us and set out what the gamut... Current estimate will be.

:34:18. > :34:23.My worry is -- the Government's current estimate will be. I am

:34:24. > :34:27.worried it will no longer get anywhere near the objectives the

:34:28. > :34:33.Government set out for it. We will return to this. Having that specific

:34:34. > :34:37.estimate the Minister has committed to providing us with will be a very

:34:38. > :34:41.helpful piece of information for us to continue assessing the impact of

:34:42. > :34:44.universal credit on children. I do. The question is as on the order

:34:45. > :34:56.paper. Sentence -- As many as are of the opinion,

:34:57. > :35:05.say "aye". To the contrary, "no". I think nobody has it. I have the

:35:06. > :35:08.pleasure today of presenting a petition for 360 UK residents,

:35:09. > :35:11.overwhelmingly from the Carshalton constituency calling for the

:35:12. > :35:18.withdrawal of the housing and planning Bill. I would like to thank

:35:19. > :35:21.in particular councillors Manuel Alain, Jean Crosby, J McCoy, Joyce

:35:22. > :35:27.Melligan and the leader of Sutton Council, Ruth Dombey for helping to

:35:28. > :35:32.promote this petition and all my constituents who have signed. The

:35:33. > :35:35.Housing and planning Bill not only fails to address critical shortages

:35:36. > :35:39.of housing, but worse than that, could lead to a dropping in the

:35:40. > :35:42.number of affordable homes. This Bill will do nothing for millions

:35:43. > :35:47.would like to get on the housing ladder and will damage the prospects

:35:48. > :35:53.of finding an affordable decent home to rent for those who cannot. The

:35:54. > :35:56.petition requests the House of Commons urges the Government to

:35:57. > :35:58.withdraw proposed bans for housing set out in the planning Bill. --

:35:59. > :36:19.plans. Petition, withdrawal of the housing

:36:20. > :36:27.planning Bill. I beg to move that the House now adjourn. The question

:36:28. > :36:31.is this House now do adjourn. Thank you. Can I start by telling the

:36:32. > :36:36.House that I am not actually going to take the full-time up until five

:36:37. > :36:44.o'clock! People will be spared. I thank the Minister for responding to

:36:45. > :36:47.this debate. I was alarmed and disappointed I had to apply for that

:36:48. > :36:53.its debate and be granted it, so soon after the debate we had on the

:36:54. > :36:58.HMRC closures on April the 29th in this chamber. The Minister will know

:36:59. > :37:03.there is a concerning unilateral change on the part of HMRC to close

:37:04. > :37:07.the Walsall office on June 20. That has been brought forward, to the

:37:08. > :37:11.shock of people working here. This is about public servants and those

:37:12. > :37:18.who have worked in the public interest and how we treat them. If

:37:19. > :37:23.we want society to thrive, we must have a balanced public sector and

:37:24. > :37:26.private sector. The public sector provides the framework of a good

:37:27. > :37:30.society, doing things that it is hard for the private sector to do.

:37:31. > :37:34.The private sector so they want government to do them. The debate

:37:35. > :37:39.last week showed how important it was for tax to be collected. All of

:37:40. > :37:46.it should go into public services, the NHS, education, skills,

:37:47. > :37:50.infrastructure and other things. I referred in the debate to the

:37:51. > :37:57.difference between the tax owed and collected. The Minister referred to

:37:58. > :38:03.it in summing up. And a recently undertaken survey by Richard Murphy

:38:04. > :38:08.in 2014 said it stands at almost ?119 billion from invasion. That

:38:09. > :38:14.figure has not been challenged. -- tax evasion. That is what needs to

:38:15. > :38:18.come back into the public purse. That is what we need to collect to

:38:19. > :38:23.pay for everything the Government has invested into public services.

:38:24. > :38:28.Today I hope to persuade the Minister of the case for retaining

:38:29. > :38:38.the office and dealing with the issues of BH MRC staff in Walsall

:38:39. > :38:44.urgently. -- HMRC. What happened to the office is offending British

:38:45. > :38:49.values and natural justice. It was announced in November 2015 the

:38:50. > :38:55.office would close by March, 2017. On May the 4th, HMRC decided all

:38:56. > :39:03.personal tax start would be compulsorily moved to Birmingham on

:39:04. > :39:08.June 20, some six weeks later. A collected grievance had been brought

:39:09. > :39:12.against the office and many staff now fear this situation could be

:39:13. > :39:17.seen as a reprise of all the agreements and petition. I am

:39:18. > :39:20.pleased to see my colleague for Walsall North is here. We were in

:39:21. > :39:22.the town centre that day and we saw how the public responded to the

:39:23. > :39:34.petition. The public supported the retention

:39:35. > :39:38.of the office. I do not believe I have had a response to that petition

:39:39. > :39:42.from the department or the Select Committee. The grounds for the

:39:43. > :39:48.collective grievance was that HMRC build to follow Cabinet Office

:39:49. > :39:52.redundancy protocol, including moving the admin assistants into

:39:53. > :39:55.redundancy procedures are necessary. They were denied trade union

:39:56. > :40:00.representation and one-to-one discussions to staff about whether

:40:01. > :40:06.they could practically travel to Birmingham HMRC failed to carry out

:40:07. > :40:11.a quality impact assessment. They refused to offer the stuff the offer

:40:12. > :40:18.to move to other alternative site apart from Birmingham. HMRC have

:40:19. > :40:24.also ignored evidence of increased journey times for Walsall starred in

:40:25. > :40:29.favour of an unproven news of a variant of Google maps to estimate

:40:30. > :40:33.journey times. They refused to subject the closure plans to

:40:34. > :40:39.Parliamentary scrutiny or accountability. HMRC eventually

:40:40. > :40:43.responded to the grievance, but only to claim it failed to reach the

:40:44. > :40:47.Department's test of legitimate grievance and they refused to

:40:48. > :40:51.investigate it. It cannot be right that the guidelines have not been

:40:52. > :40:59.followed and that this closure has been brought forward to June. The

:41:00. > :41:02.Minister has said giving answers to the House himself that HMRC have

:41:03. > :41:05.given a commitment to start they will have one-to-one meetings with

:41:06. > :41:09.their manager to discuss their options. That will be at least one

:41:10. > :41:14.year ahead of their office closure and that has not happened in the

:41:15. > :41:17.case of Walsall. The minister also said changing locations is not

:41:18. > :41:22.cutting staff, but the staff in Walsall have been given no choice

:41:23. > :41:29.and some have been made redundant. The Minister has also said it is an

:41:30. > :41:35.operational matter, but he is the person that HMRC is accountable to.

:41:36. > :41:41.When the minister said we asked HMRC to reduce costs, that is a policy

:41:42. > :41:44.matter, not an operational matter. The Minister has said the change

:41:45. > :41:47.will make it quicker and easier for taxpayers to pay their taxes online.

:41:48. > :41:53.Does that include those who have offshore accounts? Mr Deputy

:41:54. > :41:58.Speaker, there are still appeals outstanding. Some people do not know

:41:59. > :42:02.what will happen to them and there are concerns about travel support,

:42:03. > :42:08.the union has not been consulted. They were told that a resource

:42:09. > :42:12.planning project had been announced and now staff have been given six

:42:13. > :42:17.weeks to reorganise their lives and their caring responsibilities. They

:42:18. > :42:22.were expecting it to be almost a year. I want to touch on the impact

:42:23. > :42:26.of Walsall. Walsall South has consistently high levels of

:42:27. > :42:30.unemployment claimants than the rest of the region. 4.4% of constituents

:42:31. > :42:38.claimed unemployment benefits compared to the UK wide figure of

:42:39. > :42:44.2.5%. With the loss of quality jobs, and I have used this figure before,

:42:45. > :42:53.almost ?1.5 billion is taken out of the local economy. That is something

:42:54. > :42:58.that Walsall cannot afford to lose. My honourable friend is putting the

:42:59. > :43:01.case so well indeed. Would she not agree that in fact it would have a

:43:02. > :43:08.negative effect if this decision goes ahead in the borough as a

:43:09. > :43:18.whole? Is it not the case that a public body like what we are

:43:19. > :43:23.discussing today should not act in an arbitrary manner, which she has

:43:24. > :43:28.explained very well? Would it not be useful when the Minister replies to

:43:29. > :43:33.try and persuade HMRC to change their decision accordingly? I thank

:43:34. > :43:36.my honourable friend for that intervention. I agree with him. It

:43:37. > :43:42.seems to be something this government does well, impose

:43:43. > :43:47.contracts on junior doctors, arbitrarily change employees'

:43:48. > :43:52.contracts, and dismissed them with no consultation or negotiation. You

:43:53. > :43:57.would think the government would be a model for industrial relations

:43:58. > :44:02.bearing in mind that we passed legislation in this place. Instead

:44:03. > :44:08.it is becoming the worst employer. There have been cases where there

:44:09. > :44:12.have been long delays, I have had them over the Christmas period, so

:44:13. > :44:19.at the end of the day there is an impact on the public as well as the

:44:20. > :44:23.staff. I absolutely agree with that. You can see how well unions and

:44:24. > :44:26.employers work together and you can have a situation like the steel

:44:27. > :44:32.industry were it just does not collapse and you can move forward on

:44:33. > :44:36.that. You cannot move forward unless you have negotiation consultation

:44:37. > :44:40.and that was clearly lacking in this case. Mr Deputy Speaker, the sad

:44:41. > :44:45.thing about this is that the majority of employees are women. The

:44:46. > :44:50.vast majority have worked in that Walsall office for 15 years and some

:44:51. > :44:55.of them for over 30 years. The average age is 50, women of a

:44:56. > :45:00.certain age yet again been discriminated. Those with long

:45:01. > :45:04.service and knowledge being ignored. This will have a huge impact on

:45:05. > :45:09.their lives. Where is the consultation discussion and

:45:10. > :45:12.negotiation which is the bedrock of a civilised society? Could the

:45:13. > :45:16.Minister look at why some redeployment appeals are still

:45:17. > :45:21.outstanding? It is not clear how many will fall within the reasonable

:45:22. > :45:25.daily travel to Birmingham. What of those members who are out of scope?

:45:26. > :45:31.What is their position? Could staff be offered redeployment in an era

:45:32. > :45:35.office such as Wolverhampton? Could the three admin assistance be

:45:36. > :45:40.offered promotion? Good long serving staff be offered enhanced earning

:45:41. > :45:44.retirement? It is in everyone's interest to have a modern, fit for

:45:45. > :45:49.purpose of faith and up-to-date facilities. Everyone is agreed on

:45:50. > :45:55.that. But I would ask at best not to close the office. With the lengthy

:45:56. > :46:01.experience in that office, new work could be taken on and it would save

:46:02. > :46:04.in rent and relocation. Mr Speaker, the staff have given all those years

:46:05. > :46:11.to that country. This is an accountability issue. HMRC is a

:46:12. > :46:14.non-ministerial government. If HMRC is accountable to Parliament, the

:46:15. > :46:19.Minister ought to look at these reasonable suggestions I have made.

:46:20. > :46:25.The Minister may say it is an operational matter, but that means

:46:26. > :46:30.the Minister is powerless and HMRC is not accountable to Parliament.

:46:31. > :46:34.This would make a mockery of the Prime Minister's anti-corruption

:46:35. > :46:38.Summit which will be held on Thursday. HMRC should be focusing

:46:39. > :46:43.their efforts on closing the tax gap, not closing offices. There will

:46:44. > :46:47.be no one with local knowledge and can assist the public to pay their

:46:48. > :46:55.taxes with our accountancy or illegal trickery. We owe it to the

:46:56. > :47:04.staff and their families for their years of public service. Thank you,

:47:05. > :47:08.Mr Deputy Speaker. They are congratulate the honourable member

:47:09. > :47:15.for Walsall South for securing this debate. I welcome the opportunity to

:47:16. > :47:22.discuss HMRC's proposals and to address some of the points that have

:47:23. > :47:28.been raised. Before doing so, it is worth re-capping briefly on what we

:47:29. > :47:33.are trying to achieve with HMRC. This is an organisation that

:47:34. > :47:36.provides an essential service to people in the UK, not only helping

:47:37. > :47:41.working families with the benefits they need, but also making sure

:47:42. > :47:48.taxes, which won our vital public services, get paid. We want to help

:47:49. > :47:54.HMRC do it better, we want it to be faster, more efficient, cost less

:47:55. > :48:02.and Livermore for taxpayers and tax credit recipients. We want to focus

:48:03. > :48:07.on tax evasion and avoidance. There is a lot we have already done to

:48:08. > :48:15.move in this direction. Since 2010 we have already driven down the tax

:48:16. > :48:20.gap. It is now just over 6%, one of the lowest rates in the world. That

:48:21. > :48:25.progress is important, without it we would not have collected ?14.5

:48:26. > :48:30.billion in extra tax. I have to say to the honourable member that she

:48:31. > :48:35.quoted the ?119 billion estimate of the tax gap by Richard Murphy and

:48:36. > :48:39.she said as far as she is aware that figure has not been challenged. It

:48:40. > :48:46.has been challenged repeatedly and it is not a number that we accept by

:48:47. > :48:52.any means. Nonetheless, it is important that we reduce the tax

:48:53. > :48:57.gap. We have also committed to investing ?1.3 billion in HMRC to

:48:58. > :49:01.make sure it can offer the digital services as well that people expect

:49:02. > :49:07.in the 21st century, and millions more to improve customer services.

:49:08. > :49:11.By the end of this Parliament customers will start to see some

:49:12. > :49:17.real improvements, whether that is reduce call waiting times, finding

:49:18. > :49:23.it quicker and easier to pay taxes online, or using HMRC's special

:49:24. > :49:28.telephone line for businesses. By 2020 we expect HMRC to be saving

:49:29. > :49:38.?700 million a year as well as delivering an additional ?1 billion

:49:39. > :49:45.in revenue in 2020-2021. But we want to save ?100 million a year by 2025

:49:46. > :49:50.by transforming the estates and creating a smaller, but more highly

:49:51. > :49:58.skilled organisation. When HMRC was formed in 2005, it had 570 offices

:49:59. > :50:04.spread all over the country. This could hardly be termed efficient and

:50:05. > :50:10.even now in 2016 it has around 170 offices ranging in size from 5700

:50:11. > :50:19.people to fewer than ten. In the case of the Walsall office, there

:50:20. > :50:26.are 56 employees. Back in November, HMRC announced its intention to

:50:27. > :50:30.finish the job of making HMRC more efficient. Over the next ten years

:50:31. > :50:36.the Department will bring its employees together in a large modern

:50:37. > :50:41.office in 13 main locations, serving every region and nation in the UK,

:50:42. > :50:44.equipped with a digital infrastructure and training

:50:45. > :50:49.facilities they need to work effectively. Not only will these new

:50:50. > :50:52.offices encourage people to work more closely together, they will

:50:53. > :50:59.provide more opportunities for them to develop their careers. Mr Deputy

:51:00. > :51:04.Speaker, HMRC is fully aware that its most valuable asset is its

:51:05. > :51:08.people. I commend the honourable member for Walsall South for her

:51:09. > :51:13.interest in the arrangements we are making for those people working at

:51:14. > :51:17.the HMRC office in Walsall, 56 employees, when the office is

:51:18. > :51:22.closed. I would like to reassure honourable members we are equally

:51:23. > :51:26.committed to making sure that people in Walsall, indeed in every HMRC

:51:27. > :51:32.office, will be supported through these changes and informed every

:51:33. > :51:36.step of the way. First I should remind the House this is about

:51:37. > :51:44.changing the locations, not cutting staff. Although the Walsall office

:51:45. > :51:49.will be closed in the 2016-2017 year, HMRC hope that everyone who is

:51:50. > :51:52.able to will transfer to an office in central Birmingham and then to a

:51:53. > :51:59.regional centre in Birmingham which will be home to over 3000 staff. In

:52:00. > :52:03.February, HMRC made sure everyone in Walsall had a chance to discuss on a

:52:04. > :52:07.one-to-one basis how this will affect them, in particular that

:52:08. > :52:11.meant checking whether they are still within a reasonable daily

:52:12. > :52:17.commute to the office and finding out what support they may need to

:52:18. > :52:28.make the move. That could include an extra contribution towards travel.

:52:29. > :52:32.It is worth pointing out that, for example, if someone lives within a

:52:33. > :52:38.reasonable daily commute to another office, they could get support for

:52:39. > :52:44.up to three years in terms of any additional costs for their

:52:45. > :52:49.transport. For those outside the reasonable daily travel requirements

:52:50. > :52:57.they could receive support with their fares for up to five years. So

:52:58. > :53:03.there is support for individuals to be considered on a one-to-one basis.

:53:04. > :53:09.We do remain confident that most people will be able to travel to the

:53:10. > :53:14.new office in central Birmingham. HMRC will also be asking its staff

:53:15. > :53:19.in Walsall to change their area of expertise. As the honourable member

:53:20. > :53:26.will be aware, many of them currently specialise in the area of

:53:27. > :53:30.personal tax. As part of HMRC's restructuring, HMRC will be asking

:53:31. > :53:35.them to put their skills to use in new roles in debt management. To

:53:36. > :53:40.help them make that change, HMRC will be running a full programme of

:53:41. > :53:46.induction and learning. To address the point as to why this has been

:53:47. > :53:50.accelerated, to use the word of the honourable member for Walsall South,

:53:51. > :53:59.the fact is that there are jobs that are now available in Birmingham in

:54:00. > :54:08.terms of debt management and the desire is for those jobs to be

:54:09. > :54:12.filled as quickly as possible. The staff in Walsall, HMRC believe, are

:54:13. > :54:21.well placed to perform those roles. That is the reason why that has been

:54:22. > :54:27.offered. I want to address the point he made earlier. If he disputes that

:54:28. > :54:32.figure of ?119 million of tax, could he drop me a note, a letter, to say

:54:33. > :54:37.how he calculates it, so I can put it to the source? This has not been

:54:38. > :54:41.communicated to the staff in Walsall, they have not been told

:54:42. > :54:46.they have been given other jobs. All they were told was that the office

:54:47. > :54:47.would close. I do not think the minister has addressed the point as

:54:48. > :54:57.to why it has been accelerated. The point is these roles are

:54:58. > :55:04.available for debt management. It makes sense for those people

:55:05. > :55:08.currently working in Walsall, who are capable of moving to Birmingham,

:55:09. > :55:15.to fill these roles at the earliest opportunity. That is the reason why

:55:16. > :55:18.this has been done. The announcement in November was Walsall was going to

:55:19. > :55:28.close in the course of the 2016-17 year. As there are roles available,

:55:29. > :55:33.it makes sense to move quickly and fill those roles in debt management.

:55:34. > :55:41.In terms of the tax gap measure, I can assure, I am happy to write to

:55:42. > :55:49.the honourable member. HMRC publishes its own estimate of the

:55:50. > :55:55.tax gap, which is based on considerable work and makes use of

:55:56. > :56:01.the highly skilled statisticians. It has been described as being credible

:56:02. > :56:08.by the National audit office, if I can remember the line correctly. Mr

:56:09. > :56:14.Murphy's testaments are well known to be controversial. When it comes

:56:15. > :56:21.as a surprise to him, years very well aware that HMRC have a very

:56:22. > :56:25.different estimate of the tax gap. I can certainly in my letter set out

:56:26. > :56:29.some of the reasons why HMRC believes this estimate is not

:56:30. > :56:33.credible. It is an issue I have debated on a number of occasions. It

:56:34. > :56:42.will be more than a pleasure to set it out again. I will give way to the

:56:43. > :56:49.honourable member. There is a feeling that the staff feel strongly

:56:50. > :56:54.that the manner in which closure is going to take place has been dealt

:56:55. > :56:59.with in an arbitrary manner. They are clearly not satisfied, despite

:57:00. > :57:04.what the Minister is saying. And as I said in the intervention earlier,

:57:05. > :57:13.this is having a negative effect on the borough as a whole. I note his

:57:14. > :57:18.points. I would say to him that this was announced in November last year.

:57:19. > :57:23.The PCS were present for that announcement and have Dean involved

:57:24. > :57:30.throughout this period of time. If I can pick up one point involved by

:57:31. > :57:35.the honourable member for Walsall South, which was about the

:57:36. > :57:39.administrative assistance, where there are no suitable roles in debt

:57:40. > :57:46.management, I know that personal tax, a team in HMRC are working with

:57:47. > :57:50.these individuals to see if they are suitable for promotion to a higher

:57:51. > :57:56.grade and if so, if they can be offered posts in debt management. I

:57:57. > :58:04.just wanted to respond to that point. I do not accept HMRC have

:58:05. > :58:09.acted in an arbitrary way. They have been a series of one on one

:58:10. > :58:15.meetings. But it is necessary, in the view of HMRC and this does have

:58:16. > :58:21.the support of the Government, to move towards fewer offices where

:58:22. > :58:27.there is the ability to concentrate staff, have greater flexibility in

:58:28. > :58:30.the work undertaken, to make sure there is greater availability of

:58:31. > :58:36.career opportunities within these regional centres. That is the

:58:37. > :58:39.direction in which they are going. We do support that. That does

:58:40. > :58:47.require staff to be moved from some smaller offices to the regional

:58:48. > :58:52.centres, in this case, Birmingham. I thank the Minister for giving way.

:58:53. > :58:55.This is the first time I have heard the word debt management. As a

:58:56. > :59:01.previous practising lawyer I know what it means. These staff have been

:59:02. > :59:07.going from personal taxation to debt management, which is just chasing

:59:08. > :59:14.debt. I do not accept that description of debt management being

:59:15. > :59:20.a decent you'll roll. Very often they have to make judgments for

:59:21. > :59:24.example in terms of if a business should enter in time to pay

:59:25. > :59:36.arrangements. -- lesser skilled role. I do not accept the point. The

:59:37. > :59:40.assessment the HMRC made is that the team in Walsall is well-placed to be

:59:41. > :59:45.retrained and perform this role in debt management. I do not accept

:59:46. > :59:54.debt management is a lesser skilled role in HMRC. The staff that would

:59:55. > :00:00.be transferred to Birmingham, would they be on the same grades of pay?

:00:01. > :00:04.Would there be changes? What would happen to somebody put on a lower

:00:05. > :00:09.grade and did not want to go on the lower grade? As far as I am aware

:00:10. > :00:17.there is no suggestion that people will be put into a lower grade as a

:00:18. > :00:21.consequence of these changes. As I say, in a couple of cases here, HMRC

:00:22. > :00:26.are looking as to whether the move will involve a promotion for members

:00:27. > :00:32.of staff. I do not think there is any suggestion that anybody would

:00:33. > :00:38.have a reduction in pay. As I outlined earlier, this has to be

:00:39. > :00:43.worked out on a one-on-one basis. Staff may find they are getting a

:00:44. > :00:46.contribution for up to three years for additional travel costs as a

:00:47. > :00:56.consequence of any move. I will give way at one last time. How many jobs

:00:57. > :01:00.have become available in Birmingham? I think the rising of them to number

:01:01. > :01:05.available. I think the question is how many -- I think there is a

:01:06. > :01:10.significant number available. The question is how many can move. I do

:01:11. > :01:13.not think there is a suggestion that those who are capable of moving to

:01:14. > :01:20.Birmingham are entering into a redundancy. There are jobs available

:01:21. > :01:30.for Walsall staff. Those jobs in debt management, I do not think they

:01:31. > :01:34.should be demeaned, criticised, or suggested that they are of a low

:01:35. > :01:41.skill nature. We are determined to keep moving forward and help HMRC do

:01:42. > :01:48.its crucial job more effectively. That is why we are supporting these

:01:49. > :01:54.changes, which put the interest of the taxpayer at the heart of HMRC.

:01:55. > :01:57.HMRC are working closely with all those staff who will play their part

:01:58. > :02:02.in this important reform. They are determined to continue to do so in

:02:03. > :02:07.this process. I hope members will enjoy me in commending the work done

:02:08. > :02:14.by HMRC and although I might not have persuaded the honourable member

:02:15. > :02:18.for Warsaw South, I would like to reassure her that HMRC will continue

:02:19. > :02:25.to work with staff based in Walsall. -- Walsall South. These changes will

:02:26. > :02:31.move HMRC forward and it will become a more effective, efficient and

:02:32. > :02:34.successful organisation. The question is this House do now

:02:35. > :02:42.adjourn. As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary,

:02:43. > :02:54."no". Positive-macro -- the eyes have it.

:02:55. > :03:00.That is the end of the day in the House of Commons. We will go live to

:03:01. > :03:02.the House of Lords. You can watch recorded coverage of all the

:03:03. > :03:07.business in the Lords after the daily politics later tonight. We are

:03:08. > :03:14.recognising what the Government has done and he talked about various

:03:15. > :03:17.changes, going bankrupt and the declining footfall on our high

:03:18. > :03:23.streets. In fact, footfall is increasing. Some high streets have

:03:24. > :03:28.responded very well to the changing patterns of the high Street. The

:03:29. > :03:32.ones that have responded well are seeing very good results. In my own

:03:33. > :03:33.town of Altrincham, the market has