Lords defeat government twice

Thousands of pensioners will be affected

The government has been defeated twice in the Lords over its social security legislation.

First, peers voted to widen plans to compensate pensioners who were misled over changes to the State Earnings-Related Pension.

Once more, the Lords have spoken up for common sense

David Willetts

Then they voted for extra safeguards before benefits are cut for people failing to observe a community sentence for a second time.

The first vote won a majority of 31, the second a majority of 54.

The votes bring the number of government defeats in the Lords to 17 in the seven months since most hereditary peers lost their seats.

Pensioners' rights

The right of widows and widowers to inherit their late spouse's pension entitlement was due to be taken away this year, under a decision taken in 1986.

But this year, the cut was put back for two years after it was revealed that many pensioners were never told of the change or were given incorrect information by the Department of Social Security.

The government promised to compensate those who could prove they were misled - at an estimated cost of £2.5bn.

But during the report stage of the Child Support, Pensions and Social Security Bill, peers backed a Conservative amendment insisting that the government assume all those affected by the change to Serps were given incorrect advice, not just those with proof.

Conservatives blamed

Opposition frontbench spokesman Lord Higgins argued that in the 1980s when the changes were made, pensioners thought their spouses would be provided for in the event of their death.

He said: "If they didn't know there had been a change, then they may well not have made provision for their wife which they otherwise would have done."

Social Security Minister Baroness Hollis of Heigham said people were misled as a result of the then Conservative government's misinformation.

Ministers had dubbed as "deplorable" the mistake, which meant thousands of people received incorrect information about their state pensions.

Age Concern and Mencap president Lord Rix, who had campaigned for a compensation scheme, welcomed an assurance from Baroness Hollis that an extra two groups of people will now be protected.

'Wholly misguided'

On the issue of community sentence offenders, Lords voted that benefit cuts should be delayed until a court had confirmed the cuts.

Former Parole Board chairman Lord Windlesham condemned as "wholly misguided" the withdrawal or reduction of social security benefits from offenders for up to 26 weeks until the case came back to court.

Liberal Democrat Earl Russell warned that sanctions could be applied if an offender was just 20 minutes late for a second meeting with a probation officer.

"I wonder how many of your Lordships, now in this House, have never been 20 minutes late for an appointment through no fault of their own," he said.

But Labour's Lord Sheppard of Liverpool saw the proposal as in line with attempts to end the "no-work culture" by helping people on benefit into work.

Shadow Social security Secretary David Willetts said the two defeats showed the bill was "ill-thought-out and confused".

"Once more, the Lords have spoken up for common sense. The government should accept these defeats with as much grace as they can muster," he said.

A Department of Social Security spokesman said after the latest defeats: "We always consider what the Lords have to say. We will make an announcement in due course about our conclusions."