New Clause 9
Welfare Reform Bill
12:45 pm
John Robertson (Glasgow North West, Labour)
Perhaps the noise was being made by Committee members discussing their grandchildren—I am being a little disingenuous.
The new clause is important. Although I am not in the early throes of my working life, I, like many grandparents, am far from retirement age. I hope to have plenty of years in which to work and contribute to society. However, my family comes first, and many grandparents sacrifice their working lives for their grandchildren. The new clause would amend the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 to create a credit for those of working age who provide 20 hours or more per week of unpaid care for a grandchild under the age of 12 or for an
“ill, frail or disabled family member, friend or partner”.
In the Pensions Act 2007, the Government introduced a weekly credit for parents, foster parents and carers to be specified by regulation that would go towards their pension to make up for the contributions that they would be making through national insurance. That measure did not include grandparents. When that issue was debated in the other place, Ministers promised to look into it further. I understand that the relevant regulations will be laid before Parliament in the coming weeks. I urge Ministers to use the new clause or the regulations to ensure that someone caring for a grandchild or a person in need to whom they are close will be entitled to the weekly credit.
I am sure that all hon. Members agree that anybody of working age who cares for a young grandchild, family member, friend or partner who is ill, frail or disabled for more than 20 hours a week is sacrificing time in which they could be working or engaging by doing something that is as socially beneficial as being in employment and making national insurance contributions. That is surely recognised by the 2007 Act through the introduction of the credit for parents, foster parents and other carers.
There is an obvious question of fairness and equality. When a person—whether they are a parent or a grandparent—is caring for a child in the family instead of working, why should there be discrimination on their state pension? How can we say that someone caring for a family member, partner or friend is less deserving of a full state pension than someone who has spent time caring for their child?
The new clause is emphatically not about paying someone for care. There is no gain for somebody who is receiving a full state pension. It would give parity for state pension contributions. I wish to consider the specific case of grandparents who are close to retirement age, for whom the issue is more pressing. The current situation means that if a mother stays at home to care for her child, she gets a weekly credit towards her pension.