HL Deb 25 March 1976 vol 369 cc769-70

3.11 p.m.

Baroness WOOTTON of ABINGER

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government:

  1. (1) whether a couple who live together "as man and wife" without being married, are liable to be treated as a married couple under the Supplementary Benefit cohabitation rule, with the result that the woman loses her entitlement to benefit;
  2. (2) whether a man and woman, each with a substantial investment income, who cohabit without being married, continue to enjoy the financial advantage of being taxed as separate individuals, since their incomes are not aggregated for income tax purposes as in the case of a married couple.

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, the answer to the first part of the Question is, "Yes". With regard to the second part, for tax purposes the incomes of a man and woman who are not married to each other but who are living together are not aggregated; each is taxed separately.

Lord GARDINER

My Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether the Government think the time has come when supplementary benefits should be administered according to personal needs regardless of the sex life of the person concerned?

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, my noble and learned friend will have seen the recent report of the Supplementary Benefits Commission which recommends that the matter which underlies his question should remain as before.

Baroness WOOTTON of ABINGER

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his Answer and for the clarity and precision of his unqualified affirmative to both parts of my Question. May I ask him further whether this is an outrageous example of one law for the poor and another for the rich? May I also ask him whether he can give an estimate of how the amount of public money which is saved under the first rule in this Question compares with the amount of money which is lost under the second?

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, in reply to the second part of my noble friend's question, I cannot give any figures or information. If there are any available, I shall make it my business to find out and let my noble friend know. With regard to the first part of her question, it has been customary in this country to deal differently as between married couples and unmarried people who are living together.

Baroness WOOTTON of ABINGER

My Lords, that is not an answer. My question was this: was this not an outrageous example of one law for the poor and one for the rich? Would the noble Lord answer that?

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, at first glance, I would say, No.

Lord HAILSHAM of SAINT MARYLEBONE

My Lords, is it not time that a Government of some political persuasion—I recognise no Party can claim to be innocent in this respect—did long-felt justice to married couples by giving a separate assessment for man and wife, as well as those who choose, for one reason or another, to cohabit without the preliminary ritual?