HC Deb 09 February 1956 vol 548 cc1788-90
21. Dame Irene Ward

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, having introduced the Pensions (Increase) Bill, he will proceed to formulate proposals for assisting those living on small fixed incomes who do not benefit under this Bill.

Mr. H. Brooke

It is impossible to frame proposals on the lines of those in the Pensions (Increase) Bill which would meet the varying circumstances of all those whom the hon. Lady has in mind. In the Adjournment debate on 5th December I explained the measures already taken by the Government, and we shall be ready to consider any concrete suggestions which the hon. Lady wishes to make.

Dame Irene Ward

Whilst thanking my right hon. Friend for a small step forward in the case of people covered by the Pensions (Increase) Bill, may I ask whether he will bear in mind that the Prime Minister is committed up to the hilt to help these people as a result of his speech in Bradford? Is my right hon. Friend aware that I think nothing at all of his Answer, which I consider to be a breach of trust?

Mr. Brooke

I am grateful, at any rate, to my hon. Friend for the appreciation she has expressed of the Pensions (Increase) Bill.

Dame Irene Ward

Just a little.

Mr. Brooke

The problem of helping those who are not pensioners and who have been freed by this Government from liability to Income Tax is a very difficult one indeed. I am sure that the best thing that we can do for them is to stabilise the £.

Mr. H. Wilson

Since it is obvious that the right hon. Gentleman did not show anything like as much sympathy and warmth of feeling in relation to those who are living on small fixed incomes as he did to the higher Surtax payers a few minutes ago, may I ask whether he will inform the House whether the statement of the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer at the Tory Party Conference in Bournemouth last year—that the first priority will be given to those living on small fixed incomes—represents the policy of the Government today? Will the present Chancellor take action where his predecessor did not?

Mr. Brooke

The right hon. Gentleman will recall that a few minutes ago I expressed the greatest sympathy with one class living on small fixed incomes, that is, the clergy. That sympathy extends to all those who live on small fixed incomes. The care of them is a very high priority in the Government's programme. I pointed out the difficulties, and I also indicated what is the greatest hope for them

26. Dame Irene Ward

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in view of the fact that the Central Electricity Authority has given a further option to ex-employees to join the pension scheme even though they had previously exercised a choice for the pre-nationalisation scheme, if he will, in order to help the small fixed income groups, make inquiries among all Government pension schemes, including the Health Service, with a view to introducing improved pensions over the widest field.

Mr. H. Brooke

In reply to the first part of the Question, I understand that the option has been offered to serving employees, but not to pensioners. In reply to the second part, no revision of the Superannuation Acts or the other public service schemes is contemplated. My hon. Friend will be aware of the Government's proposals under the Pensions (Increase) Bill to pay increases to many existing pensioners, including those of the National Health Service.

Dame Irene Ward

Is my right hon. Friend aware that he is wrong? Here is a concrete proposal, for which he has asked. Therefore, will he please tell us in specific terms what was meant by the Prime Minister's speech about the small fixed income groups who have no one to argue for them in the same kind of way as have the big battalions?

Mr. Brooke

I admire immensely the sustained vigour of my hon. Friend's advocacy of further help for those who are living on small fixed incomes. I regret to say that in answer to this Question, which is of a narrow character, I cannot make a statement about the Prime Minister's intentions. As my hon. Friend will recognise, I dealt with most of this Question during a debate on the Motion for the Adjournment just before Christmas.