It is not a case of either/or. We should be doing everything possible. We should be maximising families' financial stability and security through education, employment and a redistribution of income and wealth.
One misconception should be properly analysed. It is absolutely not the case that inequality rose exponentially under Labour. In fact, it more or less flatlined. It rose a bit during the last couple of years of Labour government, but according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies—admittedly not the Government's favourite think tank—without the measures taken by Labour between 1997 and 2010, given the trends experienced under the previous Conservative Government, it would have been very much worse.
The hon. Lady and other Members on the Government Benches are right to say that we are all anxious to reduce inequalities; what I do not understand is how on earth the Government think that proposals of this kind will do that. How on earth do they think that removing the saving gateway will address the gender inequality involved in the fact that women have 40% less in savings than men? How on earth do they think that removing the child trust fund and the saving gateway—benefits that provided extra money or extra access for people with disabilities—will deal with the inequality of disabled people?
Savings Accounts and Health in Pregnancy Grant Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Kate Green
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 26 October 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Savings Accounts and Health in Pregnancy Grant Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
517 c244-5 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:30:58 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_673233
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_673233
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_673233