Let me start by congratulating all the pupils who have received their exam results over the last few weeks. Having good qualifications is essential in today’s economy, and it is brilliant to see so many young people doing so well. However, the number of young people not in education, employment or training is one of the biggest challenges facing the country, and young people are much more likely to be NEETs if they lack basic skills. That is why I am so proud of the action that the Government are taking to increase the number of youth apprenticeships, overhaul foundation apprenticeships and, above all, introduce a youth guarantee so that every young person is earning or learning.
Harlow is full of fantastic schools, and I see the potential of young people there every single day, but that potential is often overlooked because of economic circumstances. Will the Secretary of State explain how the new crisis and resilience fund will support the poorest children in Harlow?
In the spending review we announced this first ever multi-year settlement for local support, replacing the household support fund. The crisis and resilience fund will provide £1 billion every single year, and will give families emergency help if, for example, their white goods break down or they need food urgently. However, we want to start shifting it increasingly towards tackling the root causes of poverty, helping people to become more financially resilient through the provision of debt advice. We recently held a meeting with more than 600 stakeholders to discuss how we could achieve that shift, because we want to prevent people from falling into poverty and to give them the tools that they need to emerge from poverty themselves.
I welcome the right hon. Lady back after the summer. She said recently that it had been “a bumpy…few months”—an understatement, in my view. Last time we stood here, she had just completed a rather humiliating climbdown on her welfare savings plans. She set out to save money, but ended up spending it. You couldn’t make it up, Mr Speaker, but here we are: the number of benefit claimants has hit a record high; the sickness benefit bill is heading up and up; and still the right hon. Lady has Back Benchers and Cabinet colleagues calling for even more spending on welfare. The Chancellor is busy doing her sums in advance of the Budget, so can the right hon. Lady tell us how much lifting the two-child benefits cap will cost?
I am not often called understated, but I thank the hon. Lady for her comments.
Welfare reform is always difficult because it involves real people and real lives, and it is a complicated and personal issue. However, we are investing £3.8 billion in employment support to help sick and disabled people into work, we are introducing the first ever right to try work, and we are dealing fundamentally with the perverse incentive left by the Conservative party which encouraged people to define themselves as incapable of work. We are addressing that by raising the standard allowance of universal credit and halving the health top-up for new claims. There is much more that we need to do, and we will be publishing our strategy to deal with child poverty in the autumn, but I am proud to say that the last Labour Government lifted 600,000 children out of poverty, while the hon. Lady’s party plunged 900,000 children into poverty. We will take action, and, as I said earlier, the hon. Lady should watch this space.
I asked the right hon. Lady a simple question, but I fear that she does not know the answer; she certainly did not reply to it. What is clear is that Labour wants to spend more on welfare. So do the Liberal Democrats, and so does Reform. Only one party here is telling the truth about the welfare bill: the country cannot afford it.
May I urge the right hon. Lady to take up my proposals? Will she stop giving people benefits for common mental health problems such as anxiety and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and give them help instead? Will she stop giving personal independence payments to foreign citizens who have not paid into our system and free cars to people who do not need them? Will she stop people scamming the benefits system over the phone and on the internet? Will she keep the two-child benefits cap, and get the benefits bill under control?
The Conservative party failed on welfare because it failed on work. The reason why we inherited such a dire situation with sickness and disability benefits is that the Conservatives failed to get people into work. We are turning that around, and it is about time the hon. Lady and Opposition Members put forward a proper plan of action that actually gets people into work. We believe in work; it is a pity the Conservative party does not.
T2. Meur ras, Mr Speaker. The number of young NEET people is often a reflection of a range of different factors: poverty, poor mental health services, lack of access to support services, and inadequate transport, SEND and care services, especially in remote coastal areas such as Camborne, Redruth and Hayle. Can the Minister reassure the House and these young people that joined-up, cross-departmental working groups have been set up to tackle this issue head-on?
Yes, that is exactly how we are working, and I thank my hon. Friend for his question. Our “Get Britain Working” plan identified Cornwall as a rural industrial legacy employment area, and we specifically pointed out the lack of connectivity. That is why, when it comes to our new jobcentres service, we are also trialling jobcentres on wheels: buses that can take support to where people are and which are designed for rural areas. They recently featured on “The One Show”.
The Government are right to want to see more people with disabilities and long-term sickness get into work. Sadly, this was used to justify the savage cuts to benefits that were proposed earlier this year. My colleagues and I are hearing reports of cuts to current awards through Access to Work, and to new payments, being done by the back door. Can the Minister cast any light on whether guidance has been given to civil servants on such cuts?
There has been no change at all to policy on Access to Work. As the hon. Member knows, we did consult, in the Green Paper earlier in the year, on reform to Access to Work. There has been a big increase in demand for it, and reform is needed. We are looking at the consultation responses at the moment. There may have been instances in the past where the published guidance was not always properly applied. It is being applied now, and that may give rise to some of the issues that have been drawn to his attention, but there has been no change at all in the policy.
T6. I warmly commend the locally led £100 million Connect to Work programme, which supports those facing complex barriers to employment to get into work and to stay in work. A constituent of mine, Charlie, has explained to me some of the barriers to work that he experiences living with autism spectrum disorder and ADHD, but he is a dedicated and focused young man who is to be commended for wanting to be a useful member of society. What support will Connect to Work, and other schemes like it, offer Charlie and other constituents of mine in Dartford?
We want to give people like Charlie the chances and choices in life that he deserves. Our Connect to Work programme will do everything from helping people access health treatment to providing work placements and building their confidence through training, skills—whatever meets their individual needs. That is the key to this: an end to a one-size-fits-all tick-box approach, and tailored support for him. We are also working closely with employers so that they remove the barriers to work and can employ people with all the skills and talent that people like Charlie have.
T3. One of the main benefits of saving into a private pension is the tax relief that people get from the Government, which is one of the smartest ways to save for later life. Any move by this Government to cut pension tax relief will devastate savings rates and the adequacy of pension provisions. I would hope that the Secretary of State knows that, so can she assure me that she has made it clear that when the Chancellor is looking to fill the fiscal black hole of her own making, she must not target pensions?