Mr.
Murphy: Remarkable progress is being made. I shall
respond, hopefully in a similar tone to that of the hon. Gentleman when
he raised his genuine point. As he knows, there is a greater propensity
and likelihood of continued poverty among those who are assessed to be
in the support group. That is the major reason why we anticipate having
two tiers of benefit payment on the basis that it would provide a
degree of financial support to those in the support group that
otherwise would be missing.
Customers in receipt of
incapacity benefit can undertake part-time work up to a maximum
of16 hours a week and earnings must not exceed £86 a
week. We intend to carry forward similar permitted work provisions for
the employment and support allowance. I recognise that there may be
people in the support group who are able to work in excess of the
16-hour limit. The fact that someone on the support group is able to
work is not of itself a reason why he or she should be removed from the
support group. A PCA would assess whether someone should still be in
the support group. It is important to get that across when we try to
encourage those in the support group who wish to work to have the
chance to do so. The
16-hour limit is there for two reasons. First, it is there to make a
distinction between allowing part-time work while on benefit as a
stepping stone to independence and to top up earnings. Secondly, 16
hours is the recognised boundary between the out-of-work benefits
system and the in-work tax credits system. We do not need the power in
the Bill to do what the hon. Gentleman wishes to do. We have the powers
to be flexible in this sort of area already. We are looking at ways to
continue to be flexible and to improve the permitted work
rules.
Mr.
Hunt: The Minister mentioned £86 as being the upper
earnings limit for people on IB. Will he confirm that that will be case
for people on ESA, even if they are coming on to ESA on an
income-related basis? Currently those people have an earnings disregard
of just £20, which is significantly
less.
Mr.
Murphy: On the contributory level it
will be £86. I cannot confirm that in terms of the
income-related scheme. The hon. Gentleman put his specific question
pretty fairly: the phrase he used was “careful
consideration”. I can assure him that we continue to look at the
most effective way of enabling improvements and flexibilities in
permitted work. We will look at the very carefully indeed in advance of
2008 and the national roll-outof
ESA.
Adam
Afriyie: Will the Minister give
way?
Mr.
Murphy: No. I am going to
conclude. In terms of
the specific point, we will give careful consideration to the matters
that the hon. Member for South-West Surrey raised. I hope that he
accepts that we do not need in the Bill the type of power that he seeks
to give us to do the type of thing that he wishes. We already have that
power to implement the flexibility. We will look at additional schemes
for permitted work that may reassure him and others in
future.
Mr.
Hunt: I am grateful to the Minister for that response. I
am somewhat reassured, and for the purposes of this sitting I am happy
to ask leave to withdraw the new
clause. Motion and
clause, by leave,
withdrawn.
Clause
27Local
housing
allowance
Danny
Alexander: I beg to move amendmentNo. 257, in
clause 27, page 19, line 15, at
end insert ‘and those
categories of tenants to whom it
applies’. In
proposing the amendment I feel a little like the minister in my
constituency whose sermon was eaten by his dog. When he arrived in the
pulpit he said, “I am going to speak to you as the Lord directs,
but I shall try to do better next week.” The purpose of the
amendment is fairly clear. There has been some controversy surrounding
the local housing allowance and we will no doubt go into that in more
detail in our next sitting. In respect of the amendment there has also
been some controversy about the categories of tenants. I notice that
the Minister’s supporting cast has left the room, so perhaps now
is a good time to get some concessions out of him.
The question to which I want an
answer from the Minister is which categories the local housing
allowance will apply to. Clearly, the Government’s intention is
to look at housing allowance for tenants in the private sector only;
tenants in social housing whether it is provided by registered social
landlords, housing associations or local authorities, and, if I
remember correctly, those in pre-1989 tenancies, would also be exempt
from the local housing allowance. However, that is not stated anywhere
in the Bill and as far as I can see from how the Bill is constructed it
does not allow that to be made clear in regulations, although the
Minister will correct me if I am
wrong. Concern has
been expressed about the possibility of rolling out local housing
allowance to the categories of tenancy that I have outlined—it
is not an exhaustive list, but the Minister knows what I mean. There
has also been a lot of concern to roll out the local housing allowance
to the social housing sector without further primary legislation. I
know that Ministers have decided that that is not what they want to do
and it would be worrying to the landlords. I hope that the Minister can
clarify that the provisions of the Bill will apply only to tenants in
receipt of housing benefit in private sector tenancies and not to any
other categories. Should any
proposals be made either to extend it to social housing or more
generally by virtue of a pilot, that would be subject to further
primary legislation and could not be achieved simply by regulation
under this Bill. Mrs.
McGuire: I congratulate the hon. Member for Inverness,
Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey on something that appeared to be off the
cuff. I am not being patronising; I thought that he made a good job of
a proposal that we did not expect to reach this
evening. I reassure
the hon. Gentleman that as set out in the draft regulations we do not
propose to apply the local housing allowance approach to tenants
currently excluded from it in the pathfinders including those in the
social sector. For a customer to be entitled to housing benefit there
must be an appropriate maximum housing benefit in his case. That is the
basic condition of entitlement. As members of the Committee are aware,
proposals for housing benefit were set out in the welfare reform Green
Paper. Although our plans for rolling out local housing allowance to
the private rented sector met with strong support across the sectors,
many of those who responded to our Green Paper raised concerns, which
the hon. Gentleman expressed tonight, about the introduction of a local
housing allowance into the social sector. We have listened carefully to
those concerns, and we stated in our response that we will not proceed
with local housing allowance in that
sector. Draft
regulation 13C, which has been circulated to the Committee, sets out
the circumstances in which a local authority must calculate an
appropriate maximum housing benefit using the LHA rules. It lists all
the categories of customer to whom the local housing allowance is not
to apply where circumstances in regulation 13C arise. For example,
local housing allowance will not apply where a landlord is a registered
social landlord, local authority or registered charity, where the rent
is payable—I admire the hon. Gentleman’s memory—in
respect of a pre-1989 tenancy agreement and includes a site charge or
mooring charge for a mobile home, caravan or houseboat, or where rent
under the tenancy is attributable to board and
attendance. I hope
that I have given the hon. Gentleman the reassurance that he sought. I
am delighted to offer reassurance to those who responded to the Green
Paper consultation to raise concerns, and I ask him to consider
withdrawing his amendment.
Danny
Alexander: I am grateful to the Minister for that
response. It has indeed offered me the reassurance that I was looking
for. I should have made it clear in my opening remarks that it is quite
right to say that local housing allowance has proved successful in many
ways in the pilots. I will have a chance to flesh that out more during
the clause stand part debate, but as she has put her response on the
record, and so that we can go home tonight, I beg to ask leave to
withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by
leave,
withdrawn. Further
consideration adjourned.—[Mr.
Heppell.] Adjourned
accordingly at six minutes past Ten o’clock till Thursday 2
November at ten minutes pastNine
o’clock.
| 
