Tim Boswell (Shadow Minister, Work & Pensions; Daventry, Conservative)

I have no difficulty with this clause. These are sensible administrative provisions, and the idea of having at least the chance to notify an award in advance, before it comes into effect, is a good one.

I should like to take a moment of the Committee’s time to re-emphasise a point that I made in our opening debates on Tuesday about the importance of information. The clause paves the way for somebody whose applicable amount may rise after the assessment period when they get, for example, a work-related activity supplement or a support component, then to reach the qualifying zone and receive the benefit. There is nothing wrong with that, but it means that they will, in effect, get a piece of paper that says, “From X, you will get Y” before either they are entitled to Y or that payment is made. The problem is a wider issue with which the Minister will be familiar—changes in circumstances. Circumstances may well change in the intervening time, but I am anxious to avoid a situation in which changes in circumstance during the lead-up period become more likely, giving rise to confusion and the clawback of benefits.

We could have a wide debate about the circumstances in which the Department must move against individuals to whom it has overpaid benefits. As a constituency MP, I get a fair amount of traffic—almost the greater proportion of my traffic on departmental affairs—from people who might not have explained that their circumstances have changed. That might be entirely innocent and not at all fraudulent or malicious, but when the Department gets wind of it, it seeks to claw back the benefit.

Nobody wishes to caricature the situation by saying that people have a charter to fail to notify the Department or that they should be allowed to pocket the benefit if they have been careless. I am simply flagging up to the Committee what is, in my view, a slightly enhanced risk. As the award will be conditional and made before the decision comes into reality, it might happen in some circumstances. I doubt that it is unprecedented. It occurs to me that lots of people are told what their pension entitlement will be before they receive it, and a change in circumstances—the death of a spouse, the arrival of a dependant or whatever—might alter that.

Given that the match between what people should get and what they actually get is quite difficult to find, I should like the Under-Secretary’s reassurance that this sensible provision will not make that situation more likely. To put it another way, in framing the regulations and drawing up the operational forms, will Ministers make them as clear as possible to avoid any embarrassment to the people involved?

Anne McGuire (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Disabled People), Department for Work and Pensions; Stirling, Labour)

Mr. Hood, I add my congratulations to you on chairing the proceedings along with your colleague Mr. Amess. I have known you for many years to be a fair man, and I hope to know you for many years longer as one. I am delighted to be with my colleague the Minister for Employment and Welfare Reform. If we may reflect on a little past glory, I think it is fair to say that we had two of the sensational wins in 1997 that put us on this side of the room rather than that one.

I also offer a courtesy to the hon. Member for Daventry for an interesting question that is fair in the circumstances. I shall not waste the Committee’s time,  because the clause is fairly straightforward, but I assure him that we are very aware that information needs to be clear and accessible at various points in the process. When people are notified of their entitlement, they will be informed of any changes in circumstance that would make their benefit decrease, or perhaps increase, and need to be reported.

We are dealing with a shorter time scale than that of incapacity benefit—13 weeks, which in many respects is more manageable for changes in circumstances. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman would recognise that we try to obtain decisions quickly on changes in benefit entitlement. That is not to say that it always happens, but we always try to minimise disruption to an individual’s financial circumstances. I hope that he will be satisfied by those assurances.

Tim Boswell (Shadow Minister, Work & Pensions; Daventry, Conservative)

Now that we have had the privilege, I welcome the Under-Secretary to the Committee, as we have not had the chance to do so. She is a good friend and has collaborated with me on many disability issues. The quality of her initial contributions suggests very good things for the future. She has made some entirely sensible and helpful comments. If she requires, I can of course attack her politically if it will make things easier, but I do not intend to do so. Having had a good start, let us carry on as we began.