HC Deb 01 November 1954 vol 532 cc12-8
6. Mr. Dodds

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the number of persons in receipt of National Assistance at the latest convenient date together with comparable figures for 1951. 1952 and 1953; and what is the increase since 1st January, 1954.

Mr. Peake

The numbers of regular weekly grants of National Assistance in payment at the end of September in the years 1951, 1952, 1953 and 1954 were, respectively, 1,409,000, 1,599,000, 1,713,000 and 1,764,000. Figures are not available to enable comparison to be made with 1st January, 1954, but during the greater part of this year, the total number of grants in payment has been falling; the figure for September last was about 18,000 less than that for the end of January.

Mr. Dodds

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that the number of persons now receiving National Assistance suggests that the pension allowance is much too small? Does he not further appreciate that his party stated, in October, 1951, that the pension of 30s. had already been left behind by the cost of living? Does not he now see that it is necessary to increase the pension by much more than 2s. 6d.?

Mr. Peake

I regard it as a very satisfactory trend that the numbers on National Assistance have at last begun to fall. During the years of the Socialist Government, they increased year by year by an enormous amount.

Mr. Popplewell

Do I understand the Minister to say that he is satisfied, when there has been an increase of nearly one-fifth on the figures for 1951? Does not he realise that the Government's policy of reintroducing Poor Law relief under the guise of National Assistance is abhorrent to everyone, and that his Government can increase pensions at once without waiting for any further legislation? When is he going to stir himself?

Mr. Peake

Ever since 1948, I have expressed concern about the growing numbers of people on National Assistance. It is a matter for general congratulation that the figures today are stabilised, and actually show a fall as compared with January last.

20. Mr. Woodburn

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he is aware that old-age pensioners who have been induced to continue working after 65 years of age on the promise of additional pension for each year worked are disappointed when they have to seek extra help from the Assistance Board to find that their advantage is wiped out by their extra pension being regarded as ordinary income; and whether, in his forthcoming announcement, he will consider restoring to the pensioners the extra they earned by including the additional pension among the other items which are disregarded by the Assistance Board in calculating income.

Mr. Peake

No, Sir. One of the advantages of the increased pensions men can earn by continuing at work after 65 is the better prospect they offer to insured persons of remaining independent of assistance.

Mr. Woodburn

Is not the Minister aware that a person will not ask for National Assistance if he is able to live without it? If he is compelled to ask for National Assistance, is it not quite wrong that he should be deprived of the inducement offered to him to give up his pension for five years in order to add to it when he retired? Will not the Minister reconsider this matter when he looks at the scheme again?

Mr. Peake

No, I cannot undertake to do that. Increments of pension were not included in the list of disregards put into the National Assistance Act, 1948, by the party opposite. Our object on this side of the House is to see as few people as possible drawing National Assistance subject to a means test.

Mr. Woodburn

Does the Minister realise that I am not trying to score any party point? I hope he is not going to introduce party points in discussing this matter. As he said, it was estimated that people could live on the pensions plus this increment, but, where circumstances force them on to public assistance, is it not quite wrong to deprive them of the promise the State made that, if they worked longer and did not draw the pension, their pension would include the extra money?

Mr. Peake

In my view, the main purpose of the great Beveridge Plan was to make insurance rather than assistance the main provision for old age.

Mr. Woodburn

I am sorry to persist, but may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he thinks the revised pension rates plus increment will be sufficient to absolve these people from the necessity of asking for National Assistance?

Mr. Peake

I think the right hon. Gentleman will be well satisfied when he sees the proposals I shall make.

Dr. Summerskill

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the statement he has just made, that the object of that side of the House is to reduce the number of people on National Assistance, is a little unfortunate, because it will have the effect of preventing those perhaps in greatest need from coming forward to ask for assistance?

Mr. Peake

No. I certainly hope that it will not have any such effect, but I do think we ought all to agree that we want to see people earning pensions as of right by virtue of payments made, rather than going to assistance subject to need.

24. Miss Burton

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what definition is used in the Regulations of the National Assistance Board to define cases of need in so far as food is concerned.

Mr. Peake

The National Assistance Regulations contain no such definition. They prescribe comprehensive rates which Parliament has approved for all subsistence requirements except rent, for which an addition is made.

Miss Burton

Would the Minister make that quite clear? Is he aware that old people truly believe that they can ask for help in regard to food only in connection with food for medicinal purposes? Will he make it clear, to take tea, for example—the price of which has increased—that the old people can call for assistance? Does he not realise that the old people cannot get through another winter without some help?

Mr. Peake

I think the position ought to be understood. Apart from the scale rates, which were so greatly improved in 1952, the National Assistance Board is paying additional discretionary allowances in one case in every three which comes before it. The Board has a discretion, which it is exercising, to pay something more than the scale rates in 600,000 cases. My belief is that the Board is doing its job with humanity, courtesy and kindness.

25. Mr. Warbey

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will introduce legislation to amend the Second Schedule to the National Assistance Act, 1948, in order to bring the amounts of resources to be disregarded into line with the decline in the value of the £ since the passing of the Act.

Mr. Peake

No, Sir: I do not think we want to encourage more people to rely on assistance.

Mr. Warbey

Does the right hon. Gentleman not accept, then, the principle of disregards? If he accepts it, surely he must accept the principle that the amount of the disregard should vary with the change in the value of money? Is he aware that miners, whose pension has just been increased from 10s. to 15s. a week, are having 4s. 6d. a week deducted from their National Assistance because they are now above the basis level?

Mr. Peake

To increase the disregards is no help at all to the most needy persons, and it would obviously widen the scope and increase the numbers of people able to draw assistance. That is not our policy. We believe that the existing disregards, which cover the ownership of a house, £375 of war savings, £50 of other capital, up to £1 a week disability pension and £1 a week casual earnings, on top of the full scale of National Assistance, are adequate at the present time.

35. Mr. Blenkinsop

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the present average discretionary addition being paid by the National Assistance Board to augment existing scale rates.

Mr. Peake

The latest date for which such information is available is November, 1953, when the average addition was 5s. a week.

Mr. Blenkinsop

In view of the relatively small sum that has been paid, is not this a further reason why the Board should be given an immediate opportunity at least to increase the general rate to help relieve that category of case?

Mr. Peake

I think that the Board is using its discretion very freely and that the existing position is reasonably satisfactory.

38. Mr. Collins

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance detail of the improved scales of National Assistance which have been in operation since 1952.

Mr. Peake

The principal rates provided in the current National Assistance Regulations (a copy of which I am sending the hon. Member) are, for needs other than rent, 35s. for a single householder and 59s. for a married couple. The scales for blind and certain tuberculous persons are substantially higher.

Mr. Collins

Is the Minister aware that his statement does not bear out his claim this afternoon that the National Assistance scales are better than ever or, indeed, are even adequate? Will he pay regard to the fact that the former rationed foods have increased by something like 40 per cent. in price since 1951 and that, on the present scales, old people are barely able to manage to buy them? If pensions cannot be raised this year, will the Minister approach the National Assistance Board so that pensioners can be given an increased or supplementary allowance to provide for these increases in price?

Mr. Peake

The assistance rates speak for themselves. In any event, they are a matter primarily for the National Assistance Board. The married rate today is 59s. From 1948 to 1950, it was 40s., and from 1950 to 1951, 43s. 6d. There has been a very big increase since then.

48. Mr. de Freitas

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many persons were receiving National Assistance on the first day of September of each of the four years 1951, 1952, 1953 and 1954.

Mr. Peake

As the answer contains a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. de Freitas

As these figures show that there is a considerable increase in the number, will the Minister regard this as further evidence of the position of the old-age pensioner? Will he do something about it before Christmas?

Mr. Peake

The increase from August, 1953, to August, 1954, was only 60,000, which compares with an annual average of nearly 200,000 in the years following 1948.

Mr. de Freitas

Is the Minister aware that by selecting those figures he is being unfair? My Question refers to 1951 to 1954.

Mr. Peake

I am sorry. I thought I was helping the hon. Member with the one figure which he required. Perhaps he will study in the OFFICIAL REPORT the table which I have given.

Mr. de Freitas

It would have been better had the Minister studied my Question.

Following is the answer:

The numbers of regular weekly grants of National Assistance in payment on dates, nearest to those mentioned, for which statistics are available are:

28th August, 1951 … 1,396,000
26th August, 1952 … 1,582,000
25th August, 1953 … 1,701,000
31st August, 1954 … 1,762,000

Some of the grants cover the need of more than one person.

PNEUMOCONIOSIS: COAL-MINING CASES DIAGNOSED UNDER THE NATIONAL INSURANCE (INDUSTRIAL INJURIES) ACTS
Pneumoconiosis Medical Panel 1951* 1952* 1953 January to June, 1954
Cardiff … … … … 975 769 904 325
Swansea … … … … 133 124 121 57
Stoke-on-Trent … … … … 347 371 686 254
Sheffield … … … … 351 435 450 254
Edinburgh … … … … 442 404 799 554
Manchester … … … … 589 209 398 212
Newcastle (separated from Manchester in October, 1951) … … … … 83 405 531 319
London … … … … 115 231 82 17
Bristol (separated from London in October, 1953) … … … … — — 32 30
Total … … … … 3,035 2,948 4,003 2,022
* These figures do not include cases diagnosed on second or subsequent examination, of which there were 119 in 1951 and 195 in 1952.