European Union Migration: National Insurance Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Lord Rooker

Main Page: Lord Rooker (Labour - Life peer)

European Union Migration: National Insurance

Lord Rooker Excerpts
Thursday 12th May 2016

(8 years ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Ashton of Hyde Portrait Lord Ashton of Hyde
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I agree with the noble Baroness about the use of national insurance numbers. I do not know whether people are using that information to scaremonger or not. She is absolutely right that national insurance numbers are not there to monitor migration. We want people to register for national insurance numbers so that when they come here to work, even on a short-term basis, they contribute to this country.

Lord Rooker Portrait Lord Rooker (Lab)
- Hansard - -

What most people do not really appreciate—of course, the media never explain it; they exploit it—is that millions of female pensioners in this country carry two national insurance numbers because their pension is based on their late husband’s contributions. That number has to remain active in the system. That is why the numbers are always greater than the population, and always will be. There is no connection whatsoever between the number of active or inactive national insurance numbers and the number of people present in the country.

Lord Ashton of Hyde Portrait Lord Ashton of Hyde
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I agree with the noble Lord. We want national insurance numbers to remain and to be the same so that when people come back and start working, as they increasingly do nowadays, we have a consistent record of what they are doing in terms of national insurance. The noble Lord is absolutely right that some people may have two numbers. Short-term migration and long-term residency are different things, and the International Passenger Survey is the best measure of long-term residency, which is what has an impact on housing and services such as the NHS.