§ 2. Mr. McKayasked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he is aware that earnings have risen by 85 per cent. from October, 1946, to October, 1955; and by how much he estimates that pensions would have to rise above the present level to correspond with the earnings increase over the same period.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterThe percentage quoted by the hon. Member relates to men only, and is based on figures which include bonus and overtime payments. A corresponding rise in the pension rate of 40s. would involve an increase of 8s.
§ Mr. McKayI quite agree that the 85 per cent. is for men only, but I take it that a rise of 12s. 8d. would be needed to provide the same percentage of 85 to married pensioners. I think it is also true that all this time—
§ Mr. McKayThe point is, ought there not to be a relationship between pensions rise and a general rise of income within the nation?
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterI thought that that was the point the hon. Member was coming to. I would say with respect that there are many other matters besides the rise in male gross earnings, which is the figure with which the hon. Member is concerned. There are many other factors, such as the appropriate rate of contribution, which affect this question, and I do not think that the particular factor to which the hon. Member has referred necessarily has very much weight.
§ 3. Mr. McKayasked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he is aware that salaries rose by 90 per cent. from 1946 to 1954 and increased by approximately 105 per cent. from 1946 to 1955; and how much less was the rise in the benefits paid to National Insurance married retired pensioners over the same periods.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterThe figures quoted by the hon. Member relate to total amounts paid in salaries, and so must exaggerate the percentage increase in salary rates. But the total amounts paid to National Insurance retirement pensioners rose proportionately more over the same periods, with the result that the last part of the hon. Member's Question does not arise.
§ Mr. McKayIs it not true that when total salaries are rising from one year to another one gets no idea what the individual salaries are in value, and therefore the figures are useless for comparisons?
| The expenditure of the National Insurance Fund on retirement pensions in the years stated, and its relationship to total personal income in the United Kingdom (separate figures are not available for Great Britain), were as follows: | ||||||
| — | 1949–50 | 1950–51 | 1951–52 | 1952–53 | 1953–54 | 1954–55 |
| £'000 | £'000 | £'000 | £'000 | £'000 | £'000 | |
| Expenditure on retirement pensions (Great Britain) | 248,944 | 248,638 | 275,200 | 315,512 | 334,083 | 348,112 |
| Percentage of personal income (U.K.) | Per cent. 2.33 | Per cent. 2.20 | Per cent. 2.24 | Per cent. 2.40 | Per cent. 2.39 | Per cent. 2.34 |
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterThe figures which the hon. Member put in his Question are the figures which I understand he is indicating are useless for this purpose, and with that I quite agree.
§ Captain PilkingtonDo not the figures show a substantial increase in the standard of living in recent years?
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterYes, Sir.
§ 6. Mr. McKayasked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what was the amount paid to retired National Insurance pensioners for the years 1950 to 1955 separately; and what percentage of the national domestic income was the amount each year.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterAs the Answer contains a table of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
§ Mr. McKayIs it correct that the actual figure for 1950 was 2.08 and in 1955 it was 2.08 also, and that it has been going down for the last two or three years? Is it not true that the pensioners could be given about 10 per cent. extra and it would not change the ultimate percentage compared with the national income?
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterThe answer to the first two parts of the supplementary question is, "No sir." It may reassure the hon. Member if I tell him that when he sees the table published in HANSARD he will see that for 1954–55—the last figure for which he asked—both the percentage and the absolute amount are substantially above those of 1950–51.
§ Following is the Answer: