HC Deb 29 May 1946 vol 423 cc1199-203
Mr. Lindgren

I beg to move, in page 42, line 30, after "as,"To insert: being a child of the family, or the wife or husband, or an adult dependant, of the first-mentioned person as having been. With your permission, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I will also include in my remarks the next two Amendments on the Order Paper. In Committee, a number of hon. Members, in particular the hon. and gallant Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Lieut.-Colonel Clifton-Brown), the hon. and gallant Member for North Dorset (Lieut.-Colonel. Byers), and the hon. Member for Huntingdon (Mr. Renton), expressed the view that the existing wording of Clause 47 was not easy to understand, and, on behalf of my right hon. Friend, I gave an undertaking that the Clause would be looked into in order to ascertain whether it could be made more easily understood. That has been done, and these three Amendments have that effect.

Mr. R. A. Butler (Saffron Walden)

I would like to thank the Parliamentary Secretary for rendering this Clause intelligible, which he has done with great skill. It corresponds exactly with the request which we put to him, and I am very much obliged.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made:

In page 42, line 31, after "regulations,"Insert "relating to overlapping benefits."

In line 33, leave out from " decision,"To " and,"In line 34, and insert: either—

  1. (i) that the said other person is himself entitled to benefit for that period; or
  2. (ii) that a third person is entitled to benefit for that period in respect of the said other person in priority to the first mentioned person;"—[Mr. Lindgren.]

Mr. Lindgren

I beg to move, in page 42, line 37, at the end, to insert: (3) Where a person has received sums on account of an allowance under the Family Allowances Act, 1945, to which by virtue of this Act he was not entitled by reason of his being entitled to a guardian's allowance subsequently awarded (whether in respect of the same or a different child), those sums shall be treated as paid on account of the guardian's allowance and the amount thereof shall be repaid to the Treasury out of the National Insurance Fund During the discussions in Committee a request was made, which will be in evidence later on the Order Paper, that family allowance payments should be excluded from account when any adjustments of other benefits were being made. During the course of the consideration of the promise I gave on behalf of my right hon. Friend in that connection, it was found advisable to make an alteration in the wording of Clause 47 because of the difference between payments likely to arise under the Family Allowances Act and the guardian's benefit under this Bill. The additional words made it possible for additional payments to be made as and when there is a variation between a child drawing an allowance under the Family Allowances Act and that child, or another child of the family, becoming entitled to a guardian's allowance under the National Insurance Bill.

Mr. R. A. Butler

As I understand this matter, it is necessary for the Minister to include words which provide for the necessary moneys to pass between the Exchequer and the Insurance Fund, because the sources of those two payments are different. I want to be satisfied that, in moving this Amendment, the point of which we fully accept, the Parliamentary Secretary is satisfied that the words make it possible for the necessary transfers of money's between the two funds to take place.

Mr. C. Williams

I understand that as far as family allowances are concerned the position has been entirely met, but it is just possible that there may be some other kind of allowance, such as a pension, for example, and can the Government give any assurance in that regard? I did not have the advantage of hearing either the Parliamentary Secretary or his right hon. Friend upstairs, and I should like to know whether any pension or other allowance paid to the family, apart from the family allowance itself, is ruled out under these conditions. I do not want to find that there is a loophole of any kind, especially in regard to war pensions. It is rather an important matter and I want to be sure about it before we allow the Government to put in the Amendment.

Mr. Lindgren

This Clause has no reference whatever to any matter other than that of the payment of a guardian's allowance and an additional allowance that might become payable under the National Insurance Bill for a guardian's allowance over and above the family allowance which is now payable. I have tried to make it clear that it only arises where there is an amalgamated family. There may be a family which has only one child in it and it may take in a child of another family, which would then become entitled under the Family Allowances Act to a payment of 5s. a week. Both parents of that child might die and the child become an orphan, and thereby be entitled to a guardian's allowance. The guardian may for the time being carry on taking the family allowance, not appreciating that the guardian's allowance was payable, or there might be inquiries to determine whether the guardian's allowance was payable. All that this Clause does is to make it possible for the additional moneys to be paid in order that the parent or the person receiving the family allowance previously can accept the guardian's allowance and become disqualified from receiving the family allowance. In fact, the family allowance would cease to be payable, the orphan's allowance being excluded from the Family Allowances Act.

Mr. C. Williams

This point, then, has nothing to do with pensions, which are not concerned in this at all?

Mr. Lindgren

No, Sir, that question does not arise.

Amendment agreed to.