30. Mr. MALONEasked the Minister of Health what were the reasons for the letter written by his Department to the Northampton Board of Guardians calling attention to 14 men (13 single and one married) then receiving out-relief; whether he is aware of the number of unemployed in Northampton; by what means these men should live if deprived of out-relief; and whether his Department has made any inquiries to ascertain whether there are any men or women in the area of the Northampton Board of Guardians who are not in receipt of relief and who should be awarded relief?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINThe letter was based upon reports of my inspector indicating that the relief administration of this union required reorganisation. As is shown by the letter, of which I will send the hon. Member a copy, the cases named were cases in regard to which the information supplied by the guardians did not suggest that there were special reasons justifying a departure from the Regulations. The reply to the second part of the question is in the affirmative. The suggestion made was that if out-relief were continued it should be made conditional on the performance of a task of work. The reply to the last part of the question is in the negative.
Mr. MALONEDoes the Minister think that the Relief Regulation Order of 1911 is applicable to the conditions of the country in 1929?
31. Mr. MALONEasked the Minister of Health if he is aware that recently an inspector of the Ministry of Health advised the Hardingstone Board of Guardians to discontinue outdoor relief to Mr. F. Goddard, of 9, Delapre Street, Northampton, and to offer institutional relief; that Mr. Goddard is married, has been working in the garden of the Poor Law institution at Hardingstone, and is a cripple; and if he will state the reasons why, taking into consideration that institutional relief will cost 31s. per week instead of 15s., which is now being paid in this case, this home should be broken up?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINAs I have already informed the hon. Member in correspondence, Mr. Goddard's name was reported to the Minister by the guardians as being that of an able-bodied man to whom outdoor relief was being given, and had been given over a long period, and it was on this basis that his name was mentioned to the guardians as one in which the continuance of unconditional outdoor relief should be reconsidered.
Mr. MALONEDoes not the right hon. Gentleman think that these inspectors, instead of going out of their way to deprive cripples of relief, might go into the depressed areas and sec if there are any cases overlooked?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINAs I pointed out, the report made to me, not by the inspector, but by the guardians, is that this man was not a cripple, but an able-bodied man. If there be a mistake about that, the letter which I wrote to them will not apply.
Mr. THDRTLEIf it has been possible to find this man work in the garden of the institution since he came into the institution, was it not possible to find him the same work while he was living in his own home?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINThe whole case appears to rest upon a misapprehension. If the man is a cripple, the letter which I wrote to the guardians does not apply.
§ 33. Mr. R. RICHARDSONasked the Minister of Health whether, in view of the fact that Poor Law guardians are bound by law to relieve all the impotent poor who need relief and to set on work all who are unable to maintain them selves, although in neither case they are destitute, he will give the reasons for his recent reminder to guardians that they have only to relieve destitution?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINI would remind the hon. Member that it is only the duty of the guardians to give such relief as is necessary, or to set to work persons who have no means to maintain themselves. In either case it seems to me that the persons are correctly described as being in a state of destitution.
§ Mr. RICHARDSONIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the guardians did arrange for some work to be done by these people, and that his own Ministry turned it down?