-
Question
The Conservative shadow Secretary of State criticised the Labour Government's decision to adjust the triple lock, arguing that the plan was rushed and poorly communicated. She highlighted the costs of implementing a national care service and warned of a £15 billion black hole in the public finances.
Minister reply
Pat McFadden defended the Labour Government's decision, emphasising the need to ensure the state pension's sustainability and the positive impact of free personal care on pensioners, families, and the NHS.
-
Question
Critiques the government's decision to scrap the triple lock, arguing that it is a U-turn and a black hole in fiscal planning, and questions the government's commitment to pensioners. She also highlights the Labour Party's stance on the triple lock and criticises the government for not addressing the rising cost of working-age welfare.
Minister reply
Responds by highlighting the inconsistency within the Labour Party's position on the triple lock and the need for reform. The minister cited numerous instances where Labour Members of Parliament have expressed support for changes to the triple lock. He challenged the shadow Secretary of State to provide alternative funding solutions for social care and pension reforms, noting the lack of concrete plans from the opposition. He also pointed out the Labour Party's record on pensioner poverty and welfare reform during their time in government.
-
Question
Welcomes the improvements to social care mentioned in the statement and asks for confirmation that the new system will ensure individuals do not have to pay for their own care directly and that the burden on council tax payers will be reduced.
Minister reply
Confirms that the new national care system is designed to cover personal care costs that individuals currently have to pay for out of their own pockets. The minister also highlighted that the system will be less reliant on local differences and will be a national system.
-
Question
Acknowledges the Liberal Democrats' history in establishing the state pension system and highlights the positive impact of the triple lock on pensioner poverty and gender equality in state pension benefits. He questions the government's impact assessment on pensioner poverty and the validity of the Institute for Fiscal Studies' findings regarding the affordability of the new proposals.
Minister reply
Acknowledges the Liberal Democrats' role in introducing the triple lock but also notes their support for faster than expected rises in the state pension age. The minister stated that pensioner poverty is set to fall under the government's plans and that Baroness Louise Casey will report on the pace and scale of rolling out the national care service next summer.
-
Question
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and welcome the action that the Labour Government are taking, with a plan that will protect pensioners and ensure they have access to good quality care when they need it. Does he agree that pensioners deserve clarity from the Conservatives, given that the shadow Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat), has called the pensions triple lock a “Ponzi scheme” and “not sustainable”?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is quite right that we deserve clarity. If the Conservatives are going to set their face against the changes we have announced when so many of their Front Benchers past and present have supported change, why should they be believed for one instant on all the welfare savings they talk about elsewhere? If they cannot be believed on those things, I will tell the House what that leaves them with: a bunch of unfunded tax pledges. We are keeping score. They have not identified the funds to pay for them, and they are racking up promises, which they have not said how they will pay for.
-
Question
I think many of us agree with the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State about the need to tackle social care. The plans that have come forward are interesting, but there is a real concern about the £18 billion bill. The Secretary of State has identified £4 billion to go towards it—where is the other £14 billion coming from?
Minister reply
As I said to the hon. Member for Torbay (Steve Darling), the pace and scale of the rolling out of the national care service will be set out next year by Baroness Louise Casey. I remind the right hon. Member that I pointed out in my statement that the changes we have announced today will actually result in savings of £50 billion a year by 2050.
-
Question
One question that pensioners in Feltham and Heston ask is whether their pensions will continue to rise every year with the adjusted triple lock. Will the Secretary of State confirm that that will be the case?
Minister reply
Let me say to the pensioners in Feltham and Heston, and in every other constituency, that the state pension will continue to rise every year. It will rise by prices or by 2.5%, and the gains that it will show in relation to average earnings will be locked in from April 2030 onwards.
-
Question
When the triple lock was introduced by the coalition Government, many of us were surprised that the British basic state pension was bumping along the bottom of the European average. The aim was that it would improve over time, so that it would be at the top—as befits a country like the UK. Is it the Secretary of State’s judgment that by April 2030 we will have reached that point or not?
Minister reply
It is important to appreciate that in the UK we have a dual system of a state pension and additional second pensions. We have a very healthy second pension system—trillions of pounds of investment—and it is important to look at pensioner incomes taking both those things into account. By that measure, we have a healthy pension system. Under the plans that we have announced today, the state pension will continue to rise each and every year.
-
Question
The British public deserve politicians who will be honest with them about what is necessary in order to rewrite the social contract to make it work. Does the Secretary of State therefore share my genuine disappointment that the Conservatives chose to come here today and play politics rather than get behind our plan when so many of them say in private that they know it is in the interests of the British people?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is right. She knows that many MPs on the Conservative Benches agree with our position. However, their Front-Bench colleagues have chosen to adopt a different position, which is to talk about reducing the Department’s budget and then, when we make a decision to make it sustainable for the future, to run for the hills. That is what they have done today—everyone will have seen it—and it undermines everything else they say about savings in the DWP budget.
-
Question
Based on the Government’s own figures, pensioners in Scotland will be £4 billion worse off by 2050. [Interruption.] Those are the Government’s own figures. That is £2,000 for every pensioner in Scotland in the context of what has already been referred to as one of the worst state pensions in Europe. We already have free personal care in Scotland, and suspicions abound that Scottish pensioners are now being asked to fix a failed English social care system. Will the Secretary of State give me a cast-iron assurance that for every pound spent on fixing that English social care failure, there will be a Barnett consequential for Scotland so that we can restore that money to Scottish pensioners?
Minister reply
Let me say first that Scottish pensioners will see a rising state pension every year. The IFS has said that the First Minister was wrong to claim that was not the case. I turn to the hon. Member’s complacency. It is hugely complacent to suggest that somehow the social care system in Scotland is not in need of improvement. Let me remind him that almost 10,000 Scots are waiting for social care assessments or packages. It is Scotland’s place in the UK that means that the Scottish Government secured a record financial settlement—what have they done with the money? It is Scotland’s place in the UK that means there will be extra funding for social care in Scotland as a result of the changes we have announced.
-
Question
I know the Secretary of State shares my pride that it was a Labour-led Government in Scotland who introduced free personal care for elderly people in 2002. Since then, our ambition has grown in Scotland, and we have campaigned for 10 years to introduce a social care system—something that the SNP promised, spent £28 million trying to establish and then dropped. Will the Secretary of State confirm that the money spent on social care in England will be replicated by Barnett consequentials that will be available to the Scottish Government to spend on social care, or anything else they wish to spend it on?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is quite right to remind the House that it was Labour in Scotland who introduced free personal care. I notice that she did not make the claim that somehow the Scottish system is perfect and not in need of improvement; it certainly can be improved. Barnett consequentials—in plain English, a suitable share of the extra money spent in England—will be there to be spent on social care. The Scottish Government could decide to do something different, but that money will certainly be there to be spent on social care. Perhaps it needs to be when almost 10,000 Scots are waiting for social care assessments or care packages.
-
Question
I welcome the Government’s stated commitment to tackling the crisis in social care. It does pensioners no favours if we kick the can down the road and continually fail to address it. This requires a cross-party approach and an honest and comprehensive conversation, including about the triple lock and other potential sources of funding. However, that conversation must be comprehensive. As the Secretary of State has pointed out today, this will not kick in until 2030, and yet the social care crisis is urgent. We need money now to fix it and much more money than will be released through the changes. Does the Secretary of State agree that funding to fix the crisis in social care also requires taxing wealth fairly?
Minister reply
It is right that we do not wait until April 2030 before trying to improve the system. Extra money is going into the social care system as a result of decisions made by this Government. We also need to do more to support the social care workforce through the fair pay agreement that this Government have promised. We will certainly not wait until April 2030 before improving the system. This announcement gives a long-term plan, which makes it different from many of the previous reviews and reports that have been issued. It identifies a sustainable and growing source of funding to pay for the national care service that the Prime Minister set out in his conference speech.
-
Question
The Secretary of State says that a range of options has been put forward, but what about taxing the wealth of multimillionaires and billionaires? Funding social care should come from taxing them instead of reducing pensioner security. There are 2 million pensioners in the UK living in poverty, and that is even with the triple lock. Why will the Government not tax the wealthiest to pay for social care instead?
Minister reply
Since we came into office, we have changed the system of non-doms and the taxation regime for the wealthiest in society. More broadly, tax is a matter for the Chancellor and he has to weigh all these things up. The way that we are doing this is fair. It is a new settlement for pensioners that ensures a rising basic state pension, but also tackles the long-running issue of social care. It is a new settlement not just for pensioners but for their families, who often are worried about what will happen to their elderly relatives as they approach their final years.
-
Question
Diolch, Madam Dirprwy Lefarydd. This Government have said more than once that pensioners who rely on the state pension as their only source of income will not have to pay tax on it during this Parliament. However, the proposed reforms to the triple lock would take effect in the next Parliament. Will the Secretary of State confirm that pensioners reliant on the state pension alone will not have to pay tax when the reforms come into place?
Minister reply
Many pensioners pay tax at the moment. For those who are purely reliant on the basic state pension for their income, the Prime Minister and Chancellor have made clear that they will not have to pay income tax for the duration of this Parliament. The Chancellor will announce further details at the Budget.
-
Question
In Ealing Southall, there is a wonderful culture of extended families living together and looking after elderly relatives at home. Family members—mainly women—do that often without Government support and at a cost to their own opportunities in life. Does the Secretary of State agree that the national care service, funded by today’s adjustment to the triple lock, will make a real difference for families and unpaid carers, all while ensuring the state pension continues to rise every year for pensioners in Ealing Southall?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the immense contribution made by carers at home. The package that we have announced is good news for carers, as I said. This is a new settlement not just for pensioners but for the many younger relatives who look after older relatives and who can look forward to a new national care service being developed in the coming years.
-
Question
Pensioners in Ayoub Khan's constituency are concerned about the potential cuts to their social safety net and the impact of lifting the triple lock during a cost of living crisis. What is the Secretary of State doing to ensure that the poorest pensioners are not left worse off?
Minister reply
The Minister refers to the introduction of pension credit and the increase in claims, stating that pensioner poverty is set to fall under current plans. The Pensions Commission has been asked to look at measures to further reduce pensioner poverty.
-
Question
While welcoming the Government's ambition for free personal care and maintaining the triple lock, Maskell expresses concern about pensioner poverty levels and the lack of claims for pension credit. She calls for an ambition to end pensioner poverty and a publication of an impact assessment.
Minister reply
The Minister acknowledges the importance of reducing pensioner poverty and mentions that the published document shows a reduction under the plans. The Pensions Commission is reviewing measures to reduce pensioner poverty further.
-
Question
Dave Robertson highlights the difficulties faced by families navigating the current care system, expressing support for the steps taken to address the issue.
Minister reply
The Minister thanks Dave Robertson for his support and emphasises the importance of addressing the care system's deficiencies, highlighting the pressures on the NHS and the need for social care improvements.
-
Question
Johanna Baxter criticises the SNP's social care plans as a waste of taxpayers' money and asks the Minister to reassure constituents about the funding available under the new proposals.
Minister reply
The Minister acknowledges the importance of the social care workforce and the extra funding for the Scottish Government. He also criticises the SNP's claims as not reflecting the experience of constituents.
-
Question
John Grady seeks confirmation that Scottish pensioners are protected under the proposals, and that no pensioner will lose money as a result. He also asks about the Labour party's commitment to Scottish pensioners.
Minister reply
The Minister confirms that the state pension will continue to rise for Scottish pensioners and that the Scottish Government will receive extra funding for care spending. He criticises the Labour party's lack of clarity on funding the triple lock and social care improvements.
-
Question
Chris Murray expresses outrage at the SNP's politicization of the social care issue and asks for confirmation that Scottish pensioners will continue to benefit from the state pension and that the Scottish Government will receive extra funding.
Minister reply
The Minister confirms that the state pension will continue to rise for Scottish pensioners and that extra funds will be allocated to the Scottish Government. He also criticises the SNP's claims as being unsupported by independent voices.
-
Question
Neil Duncan-Jordan questions the direction of the policy and the justification for pensioners paying for the care of other pensioners. He asks why the cost is not shared among all.
Minister reply
The Minister explains that the future indexation will be linked to average earnings in April 2030, ensuring a rising state pension while releasing funds for social care improvements. He acknowledges the need for a new settlement to address the issue.
-
Question
Graeme Downie thanks the Secretary of State for addressing the issue and asks for an update on a new settlement for younger people to ensure they have opportunities and can contribute to the system.
Minister reply
The Minister acknowledges the need for a new settlement for pensioners and highlights the importance of addressing long-term issues such as social care.
-
Question
Acknowledging the state pension increase and the upcoming national care service, which aims to provide free personal care, cap lifetime costs, and improve the conditions of the care workforce, Jim Dickson inquires about the benefits for pensioners and the care system.
Minister reply
Pat McFadden agrees that the social care workforce deserves better recognition and has plans to address their concerns and provide a better deal before the proposed implementation date of April 2030.
-
Question
Markus Campbell-Savours highlights the challenges faced by rural pensioners, including higher heating and travel costs and stricter council support criteria. He asks how the changes to the triple lock will not leave rural communities behind.
Minister reply
Pat McFadden acknowledges the concerns of rural pensioners and outlines measures such as lowering energy bills and providing special help to local authorities in areas reliant on home heating oil, as well as plans to remove VAT from electricity bills to assist with energy costs.
-
Question
Andrew Lewin congratulates the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for addressing the pension issue and questions whether the adjusted triple lock will continue to reduce pensioner poverty in the 2030s.
Minister reply
Pat McFadden agrees that the reforms will continue to reduce pensioner poverty and references the wisdom of age, noting that even the Father of the House, Sir Edward Leigh, supports reform of the triple lock.
-
Question
Douglas McAllister questions whether the pensions of his constituents will continue to rise and if the Prime Minister’s reforms will result in billions of pounds flowing to Scotland to help its social care system.
Minister reply
Pat McFadden assures that the state pension will continue to rise annually and confirms that funds released from the package will flow to the Scottish Government to spend on social care if they choose to do so.
-
Question
Josh Fenton-Glynn criticises the delays and lack of action in addressing the care system's issues and urges the Minister to commit to implementing the Baroness Casey report.
Minister reply
Pat McFadden agrees that there have been many reports and reviews but emphasises that the current approach identifies a sustainable funding source and showcases political will to resolve the issue.
-
Question
Gordon McKee emphasises the fundamental problems in the social care system faced by his constituents and his family and suggests that the Scottish and Welsh Governments should collaborate with the Prime Minister to design a national care service.
Minister reply
Pat McFadden agrees that collaboration between the Scottish, Welsh, and UK Governments is ideal and supports the Prime Minister's approach to resolving the social care issue.