CLAUSE 11.—(Provision as to supplementary pension paid in respect of person entitled to old age pension.) (Hansard, 8 March 1940)

§ Mr. Lawson (Chester-le-Street)
I beg to move to leave out the Clause.
As my hon. Friend said, our main object in doing so is to ask for an explanation of this very complicated Clause. The centrepiece of it, to my mind, may have the result of placing some old people in a very difficult position. As we see it, if one man in a house is granted a supplementary pension and afterwards a member of the same household becomes entitled to an old age pension, and that pension had not been taken into consideration in assessing the needs of the previous pension, then the amount by which the supplementary pension exceeds what it would have been, if the old age pension had been taken into account, is to be deducted from the first payments of pension. Some old age pensioners would, therefore, find themselves in debt, and this is a very awkward situation for old people who live upon limited means. Members on both sides of the Committee have had experience of this kind of thing: of an old person in poor circumstances drawing an amount of pension in some form or other and suddenly being told 736 that he was not entitled to what he was getting. We think that the Minister should give some explanation, not only of what the Clause means, but some reasons before we can agree to the penalisation of these old people. I think it will have been discovered by Ministers in the past that whatever the law has said, it could not be carried out because aged people, as in this case, could not live upon what they were getting after deductions had taken place. These old people would be thrown back on the Poor Law if these amounts were deducted.

§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health (Miss Horsbrugh)
I agree with the hon. Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) that on reading this Clause it seems exceedingly difficult to understand. But I have had the good fortune to have it explained to me, and have questioned experts in order to get it perfectly clear, and I think I can now put it clearly to him. As he knows, this is not something new, but if I might give a concrete example of what we want to do in order to prevent anybody being put into a difficult position, I will take the case of a man of 65 who is drawing an old age pension of 10s. Under this Bill his wife will be able to get 10s. when she is 60. Supposing an old age pensioner's wife is due to get her pension at 60, and she applies for that pension. In ordinary times people sometimes did not apply in time to get their pension, and, therefore, there comes the day when the husband, who is drawing 10s., says, "My wife ought to have a pension; she has applied for it but has not received it. My income would then be £1 a week. At present my income is only 10s. per week."
The man applies for supplementation. Pension arrears could be paid a few weeks later, but under this Bill it will be possible for the Board to advance an amount of 10s. or more from a certain date. The man will then be drawing £1 a week for himself and his wife, and in due course there will be arrears of pension. From those arrears it will be possible for the Board to be paid back the amounts they paid for supplementation before the pension came. They may not have paid the full 10s. in supplementation, but the 737 actual amount will be able to be paid back. Afterwards the full pension will be paid; there is no idea that that person should be reduced to poverty. Once the pension is awarded, the amount of money he will receive will be exactly the same as if the pension had been paid on the date it was due. I hope I have made that matter clear. The couple will receive just as much as they would have received if the pension had been paid from the date it was due. The Clause merely makes it possible for the Board to supplement pending payment of the pension, and then to get that sum of money back. There is no idea of pensioners receiving any less. In some cases it is difficult for people to know when their pension is due, but we have arranged with the Board that in every case a statement will be sent so that the pensioner on receiving the money will be told on what date the pension is due and that a certain amount has been advanced by the Board as from that date. We want there to be no misunderstanding in the matter. It is done simply to prevent difficult situations arising.

§ Mr. Dingle Foot (Dundee)
Are we to understand that the Clause is merely intended to cover the case of the wife of a pensioner, and does not extend any further? The Parliamentary Secretary has envisaged the case of a pensioner's wife who is going to receive a pension. The Board pay out money. Some part would represent her supplementary pension and some part would represent the pension she is going to get. Is the Clause merely intended to cover the case of a pensioner's wife?

§ Miss Horsbrugh
I have given the case of the wife of a pensioner—

§ Mr. A. Jenkins (Pontypool)
But there may be two brothers living in the same house, one a pensioner and the other not. Later, the second brother gets a pension with arrears. Will the Clause affect the first brother's pension?

§ Miss Horsbrugh
Where a pension is held up the amount is given on loan. If the pension is not paid on the date when it is due, the Board can advance money, and then from the arrears can take back the amount they have advanced.

§ Mr. Gordon Macdonald (Ince)
In the case of any member of the house?

§ Mr. T. Smith (Normanton)
I think this Clause introduces a new principle. The Unemployment Assistance Board does not grant anything on loan. This Clause means that pending the payment of a pension the Assistance Board can grant an allowance, which will be granted as relief, and can be deducted when the pension with arrears is paid. Does this not give the Assistance Board power to relieve on loan?

§ Miss Horsbrugh
What we want to do is to get the old age pensioner his pension, and the Assistance Board has power to advance money in order that there should be no difficulty. In this case the Assistance Board has power to advance money in lieu of the pension and then get back the sum which has been advanced when the pension is paid.

§ Mr. Tomlinson (Farnworth)
I should like to know whether it is intended that whatever sum is advanced no more than 10s. a week will be reclaimed. There are cases under the present Act where pensions have not been granted for some reason or other, generally because the Ministry of Health have not made full inquiry. Two or three weeks pass before application is made for a loan to cover the period until the pension is granted. If a pension is granted three weeks after, will the payment granted in the first fortnight be utilised for the purpose of making up the deficiency? The Board may not only grant the 10s. pension but supplementation as well, making it 25s. a week. What the person is entitled to is 10s. per week in his or her own right, but an amount over and above that has been granted. Will the failure of the first week to obtain the pension be utilised for the purpose of making up the deficiton that which has been granted over the 10s.? My contention is that the Board are not entitled to reclaim more than 10s. for any one week.

§ Mr. Ness Edwards (Caerphilly)
May I put a question? I am perfectly satisfied with the explanation of the Parliamentary Secretary, but she has only dealt with the position where there is one pensioner in the house. Take the case where there is some difficulty in determining a person's right to a pension and there is some delay. The person applies to the Assistance Board for an allowance 739 in respect of the pension which is outstanding and gets a supplementary allowance. Does the Clause apply to him? Is he a person with a right to a pension seeing that his right has not yet been determined? I should like to know the position of a household in which there is a pensioner whose right to a pension there has been some delay in determining.

§ Miss Horsbrugh
There is no right to a supplementary pension until it is proved that the person is a pensioner. If we gave a supplementary pension to a person whose right to a pension has not been proved, we should cut right across the whole scheme, you would be giving a supplementary pension before it had been proved the person had a right to a pension. To give a supplementary pension you must have a pension first. In reply to the Member for Farnworth (Mr. Tomlinson) the amount recovered can never be more than the old age pension or the amount which is paid as supplementation, whichever is the less. The matter is necessarily complicated but I think it is absolutely clear in the Bill.

§ Mr. Ness Edwards
In view of the fact that there may be some delay, will the Government provide in the regulations powers to the assistance officer to deal with what is called, in the Unemployment Assistance Board's practice, an accumulated need? You allow a pension or supplementation for six weeks, and at the end of six weeks he receives the award of a pension, but there is an accumulated need. Suppose he is one of those men who will not go to the public assistance committee; in those circumstances will the officers of the Board be given authority to deal with that accumulated need?

§ Miss Horsbrugh
All I can undertake to do at the moment is to look into the case and see what further we can do, but what we are anxious about is to get pensioners to make their application before they are of pensionable age. If we could only get it more clearly into the minds of the people of this country that four months before they reach pensionable age they should make application, we should have very few delays, which we all agree are difficult to deal with. We hope people will begin to understand how the thing works, and, when they understand that, we shall have no delays.

§ Mr. Lawson
This Clause, while appearing to deal with a very simple matter turns the spot-light on to the whole of this business. The Board may be brought into this matter for the purpose of making investigation. We were told they were not going to pay supplementary pensions like the public assistance committees used to do, and that the job of the Unemployment Assistance Board was just to make investigations; but now instead of making investigations they take the place of the public assistance committee as well as dealing with the old age pension, because in ordinary circumstances these people go to the public assistance committee. The Unemployment Assistance Board's officer pays the pension in advance, and at the same time acts almost as a public assistance committee's officer. Apparently the only thing the Unemployment Assistance Board's officer has had to do is to make investigation, but now he is going to take the place of the public assistance officer. I really would suggest that this way of doing things is substituting not only the pensions officer but the public assistance officer. It seems to me quite clear that bringing in the Unemployment Assistance Board's officer is in the long run going to substitute the officers controlled by the local authorities.

§ Mr. George Hall
From what the hon. Lady has said, the Unemployment Assistance Board is now going to carry out the practice of the public assistance committee where public assistance allowance has been paid in lieu of pension. I am very anxious to get a statement from the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary about this. The Minister promised that a change of determination should only take place every three or six months as long as it was possible. There might be a change in the circumstances of a household, not as a result of the wife receiving a pension, but because of some other member of the family bringing income into the household. It might be possible that for two or three months a supplementary pension is being paid, whereas if the income were re-assessed when the change of circumstances took place, there would be little or no supplementary pension payable. I would like to know in a case of that kind, where a new determina- 741 tion has been issued, whether any guarantee can be given by the Minister or his Parliamentary Secretary that the pension should not suffer a deduction by the action of the Unemployment Assistance Board on account of any over-payment that might have taken place. I think this point ought to be made quite clear.

§ Mr. Watkins (Hackney, Central)
I should be glad if the hon. Lady would explain the following complication which I think is a very real one. Let us assume there are two brothers in a household, A and B. A is an old age pensioner, while B is without income. In those circumstances A receives a supplement to his old age pension under the provisions of this Bill. Subsequently B becomes entitled to an old age pension, but there is some delay in his receiving it. If the old age pension is taken into consideration, the supplement to A's pension would be lower than the one actually given, and an adjustment has to be made afterwards. Would the adjustment take the form of reducing the amount of money that B is to receive in the way of arrears, when A has actually received the money? In those circumstances you would be penalising the wrong man. Could the hon. Lady explain that position.

§ Miss Horsbrugh
I think the hon. Member for Central Hackney (Mr. Watkins) has set me a rather difficult question, because he is dealing with two people, A and B, in different circumstances. I think the case of the man and wife is clear. I was then given the case of two brothers. I think the question the hon. Member is putting to me now is this: If there is an old age pensioner in the house and a second person reaches pensionable age, and his pension is not paid, is the supplementation that is paid to pensioner A not really due to B? The real point is that the supplementation would only be paid on the pension of pensioner A if B were his dependant. Therefore, if B is a dependant of A, who has received supplementation, when the arrears of B's pension have accrued, it will have to be remembered that supplementation has been paid to A on B's account. A would only have received supplementation because B was a dependant.
742 With regard to the case which was put by the hon. Member for Aberdare (Mr. George Hall) the Clause has no bearing on the case where there has been a change in circumstances other than a pension becoming due during the time that the supplementary pension is being given. We all agree that with definite changes in income, changes in the supplementary pension would take place. That is quite definite. I can allay the fears of the hon. Member. There is no suggestion that the Board would look back over the time during which the supplementary pension had been given and say that as, on a certain day, the person had done a day's work, for instance, that would be taken into account in the next period.

§ Mr. Watkins
This is a complicated matter, but may we take it that no sum of money will be deducted from any old age pensioner on account of money which has been overpaid to some other person and not to the recipient of the pension?

§ Mr. Ness Edwards
The hon. Lady has suggested that no dependent person in the household is to be excluded for the purpose of assessing the needs. Let us consider the position in a household such as that referred to by my hon. Friend. There is an old age pensioner and a younger brother. I take it that the needs of the household will be taken into account in assessing the amount of the supplementary pension and that those needs will be not only the needs of the pensioner, but the needs of the brother, so that any supplementary pension that may be paid in respect of the brother's need will be paid to the pensioner. When the brother becomes 65 and gets a pension, all that will be recovered will be in respect of the 10s. pension paid to the brother and not in respect of the supplementary pension. That portion of the supplementary pension which is over and above 10s. in respect of the needs of the brother will not be touched.

§ Miss Horsbrugh
I think I can make the position clear. All that would be done would be that they would be put in exactly the same position as if the brother had received the pension on the day on which it was due.

§ Mr. Woodburn (Stirling and Clackmannan, Eastern)
What will be the position in cases which are doubtful? For 743 instance, it may at first be assumed that a person is entitled to a pension, and then it may be found that he is not entitled to it. In such a case, if the Assistance Board have advanced the money to such a person, how will they recover it? In cases where there is very strong doubt, will the person be entitled to go to the public assistance committee and draw relief in the meantime, and if the person later becomes entitled to a pension, will the public assistance committee be entitled to recover it from the Board when the pension becomes due?

§ Miss Horsbrugh
A supplementary pension will be paid to a pensioner if he is in need. The hon. Member asked about the position if there is somebody in the household in whose case there is doubt as to whether there should be a pension. I do not think it makes any difference. The supplementation will be paid to the pensioner, but it really comes to this, that if somebody draws a pension the supplementation naturally will be reduced if a further 10s. is going into the household. If under this Clause supplementation has been paid over a period, when the pension is drawn the arrears will go against the supplementation.

§ Mr. Woodburn
I do not think I have made the point clear. Suppose that there are a man and wife coming to the age of 65. Suppose that at first the man seems to be entitled to a pension, and the Assistance Board advances supplementation in the meantime—

§ Miss Horsbrugh
The Assistance Board have nothing to do with advancing money to anyone who is not a pensioner. In the case to which the hon. Member refers, the man must be drawing a pension before he can apply for supplementation. Before it is proved that a person is a pensioner, the Board cannot give supplementation.

§ Mr. Woodburn
If a person becomes 65 and is not yet decided to be a pensioner, is he entitled to go to the public assistance committee for relief, and has the public assistance committee the right to recover the money from the Board if the person eventually becomes a pensioner and entitled to supplementation?

§ Miss Horsbrugh
That brings us to the position as it is to-day. A man reaches the age of 65 and applies for a pension. 744 This Bill makes no difference, and while the person is waiting to receive the pension he can go to the public assistance committee. The change which the Bill is making is only with regard to people who are pensioners. The public assistance committee can recover the money in exactly the same way as it does to-day.

§ Mr. R. J. Taylor (Morpeth)
When supplementation has been paid and later deductions have to be made in the cases to which the hon. Lady has referred, would the Board be prepared to spread the payment of the excess over a period or would they get it immediately from the accumulated 10s.?

§ Miss Horsbrugh
The amount recovered in respect of any week can never be more than the old age pension or the amount paid in supplementary pension in respect of a dependant for that week, whichever is the less.

§ Mr. Lawson
I think we need take no more time on this matter. The hon. Lady has made the position clear tous, but I hope that nobody will try to explain the position to the old age pensioners, because if that is done, it will leave the old age pensioners with the impression that they will be in debt for the rest of their life. However, the position is clear to us, and therefore, I beg to ask leave to withdraw my Amendment.