HC Deb 29 May 1946 vol 423 cc1203-5
Mr. Nigel Birch (Flint)

I beg to move, in page 42, line 42, to leave out from the first " under,"To the second "The ".

In moving this Amendment I propose to deal also with the following consequential Amendment. It seems from what the Parliamentary Secretary said a moment ago that he has gone some way to meet us in this matter, but not, I think, the whole way. The last Clause we discussed lays down that in certain circumstances certain benefits are recoverable from the recipient. Clause 48 provides that such benefits can be recovered from family allowances. The object of these two Amendments is to cut out family allowances so that in no circumstances can overpayments be recoverable from them. When discussing this matter upstairs the Parliamentary Secretary gave a fairly sympathetic answer and we had a good deal of support in all parts of the House, particularly from the hon. Member for Westhoughton (Mr. Rhys Davies) and the hon. Lady the Member for North Hendon (Mrs. Ayrton Gould). The first point is that family allowances are no part of this insurance scheme and no insurance. qualification is required to draw them. Therefore, as far as I can see, there is no more reason why it should be possible to distrain on them in order to get moneys back under this Bill than there is to distrain upon a war pension. The second, and I think stronger, argument is that family allowances are paid to the mother in trust— that is the point—for the child, and something which is given in trust for one purpose should not be distrained upon for other purposes. I very much hope that the Minister will see his way to accept this Amendment, in which an important moral principle is involved.

Mr. Sutcliffe (Royton)

I beg to second the Amendment.

This seems to be a most unfair provision and I am very surprised that it ever came to be included. I do not quite know how those who compiled the Bill ever let it get in, for great emphasis was laid during the Debates on the Family Allowances Act on the fact that the money was for the use of the child and not for the parents. Under the provision which is now in the Bill one is going to take away what belongs not really to the parents but to the children, which will make it extremely difficult for any mother to allocate her weekly resources. In the expectation of receiving 5s. a week for each child she will already have thought out ways of spending that money week by week, and suddenly she may hear that the next week, or during the following few weeks, the money will not be paid because of some overpayment which may have been made to her. I cannot conceive anything more dreadful and I hope the Minister will be able to see his way to accept the Amendment.

Mr. Lindgren

As was outlined by the hon. Member for Flint (Mr. Birch) this subject was discussed in Committee when, in response to many requests from all sides, I undertook on behalf of my right hon. Friend to look at the matter again before the Report stage. We did so, and we put down an Amendment to comply with the promise I made, but an Amendment having been put down by hon. Gentlemen opposite, we thought we would like to make some concession and we refrained from again putting down our own Amendment. I have therefore great pleasure in accepting the Amendment which is now moved, and, as an indication of blessings to come, the subsequent Amendment, if it is moved.

Mr. R. A. Butler

I should like to thank the Parliamentary Secretary for accepting the Amendment moved from this side of the House, supported, as he says, from various other quarters. I think it improves the Bill. It was an unfair provision that the family allowances should be taken into account. I feel sure that mothers, and parents generally, will be grateful to the Government for meeting us on this point and making their Bill a better one.

Mr. C. Williams

When a Bill is improved by an Amendment such as this, and when the Conservative Party manages to prevail over the overwhelming weakness which the Government have shown throughout this Bill, should not we rise and thank the hon. Member for having accepted our Amendment? I am glad this Amendment has been accepted, and I think even some hon. Members opposite will be glad that those hon. Members who had the courage to fight this point in the Committee have now prevailed on the Government to give way, because apparently the original Bill was too weak even for hon. and right hon. Gentlemen on the Front Bench.

Mr. J. Griffiths

In these days, when the Conservative Party does not get any major victories, I have no objection to their getting a minor victory like this.

Mr. C. Williams

The Party opposite will be out soon.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 43, line 10, leave out from " Act,"To " and,"In line 11.—[Mr. Birch.]