Pensions and Benefits (Hansard, 25 February 1957)

§ 16. Mr. Shurmer
asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he is aware that, with rising prices, old-age pensioners are finding it difficult to buy even the basic necessities of life, and that there is an urgent need for an increase in old-age pensions; and what proposals he has for increasing them.

§ 23. Miss Burton
asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he is aware that the gap between the rate of average weekly earnings and the rate of unemployment benefit is greater today than before the war; and if, in view of the increasingly serious unemployment position, he will now consider as a matter of urgency the raising of the rates of unemployment benefit.

§ 24. Mr. Lewis
asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance (1) if he is aware that during the past few months tea, bread, sugar, milk, flour, cheese, confectionery and petrol have risen in price, that fares, transport costs, local authority rates, and rents have risen and further increases have been foreshadowed; and, as all of these increases adversely affect the already hard-pressed unemployed, if he will increase unemployment insurance benefit;
(2) if he is aware that during the past few months tea, bread, sugar, milk, flour, cheese, confectionery and petrol have rise in prices, that fares, transport costs, local authority rates, and rents, have risen and further increases have been foreshadowed; and, as all of these increases adversely affect the already hard-pressed old-age pensioner, if he will now increase old-age pensions;
(3) if he is aware that during the past few months tea, bread, sugar, milk, flour, cheese, confectionery and petrol have risen in price that fares, transport costs, 839 local authority rates, and rents, have risen and further increases have been foreshadowed; and, as all of these increases adversely affect the already hard-pressed persons in receipt of National Health sickness and accident benefits, if he will increase these allowances.

§ The Minister of Pensions and National Insurance (Mr. John Boyd-Carpenter)
I will, with permission, answer together Questions Nos. 16, 23, 24, 25 and 26.

§ Mr. Lewis
On a point of order. Did I understand the Minister to include Question Number 24? If that is the case, I object, because that Question deals with unemployment insurance, whereas the other Questions deal with old-age pensions.

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Member had better await the answer and then he will see if it fits his Question or not.

§ Mr. Lewis
With respect, Mr. Speaker—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Member cannot criticise the answer until he has heard it.

§ Mr. Lewis
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. With respect to you, I am not for the moment interested in the answer. The point is that the Minister asked permission to answer this Question with other Questions and, with respect to you, Mr. Speaker, I am pointing out that Question No. 24 deals with unemployment insurance and that all the other Questions deal with old-age pensions.

§ Mr. Speaker
The answer may cover unemployment insurance.

§ Mr. Lewis
Mr. Speaker, is a Member not entitled to say that he objects to his Question being answered with different Questions?

§ Mr. Speaker
Not until he has heard the answer.

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
The hon. Lady the Member for Coventry, South (Miss Burton) may be right in suggesting that the present rates of unemployment benefit represent a smaller proportion of average earnings now than before the war, but this is not true of all the other benefits and pensions, and even in the case of unemployment benefit the present real value is 840 greater than it was either before the war or during most of the period since it became payable as a National Insurance benefit. It would be contrary to the accepted basis of National Insurance to raise any one benefit above the others and I have no present proposals for a general increase. As regards retirement pensions, and the movement of prices, I understand that there may be some discussion later today.

§ Miss Burton
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I do not know why I was mentioned. Perhaps it is my hearing that was at fault; but did the Minister include Question No. 23 in the Questions to which he replied? I thought he said Question No. 24.

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
On that point of order. I was answering together the original Question No. 16 and Questions Nos. 23, 24, 25 and 26.

§ Miss Burton
Is the Minister aware that what I have said is perfectly true? Is he aware also that the more children a man has the worse off he is today on the present scales of relief? Could the right hon. Gentleman look at this matter, for if a man has two children he is 14 per cent. worse off than he was in the 1930s? Cannot the Minister do something about that?

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
I do not think the hon. Lady is as accurate in her supplementary as she was in her original Question. In the original Question she contrasted the rate of unemployment benefit with the rate of earnings, and I said that there might be something in what she said. In her supplementary, she dealt with the real value of the benefit, and there I differ from her.

§ Mr. Shurmer
As the Minister has said, this matter will be discussed later this afternoon, and no doubt there will be some startling evidence of some of the sufferings of old-age pensioners. May I ask him how long the Ministry intends to base its cost-of-living calculations on the cost of such articles as second-hand cars, television sets, and many other things which old-age pensioners cannot afford to buy? Is he aware that all they can afford is some of the bare necessities of life? Why was this matter not discussed at Chequers rather than some of the other things?

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
I shall endeavour to answer some of these supplementary questions, if I catch your eye, Mr. Speaker, later today.
On the point relating to the correct index used, that is clearly not a subject that is easy to deal with by way of question and answer. I shall endeavour to deal with it later today.

§ Mr. Lewis
Is it not a fact that everybody in the country, including every hon. Member in this House, knows and accepts the fact that the old-age pensioners are more than deserving of some increase? In view of that fact and that there is no opposition, except apparently from the Minister, will he not give an assurance that he intends to do something about it?

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
The only assurance I will give is that I shall do a great deal better than right hon. and hon. Members opposite did.

§ Mr. Marquand
Owing to the points of order which were raised, I did not follow the rapidly read answer which the Minister gave to a number of Questions. Am I to understand that he confirms the accuracy of the suggestions contained in Questions Nos. 24, 25 and 26 about the rise in the prices of tea, bread, sugar, milk, flour, cheese and so on?

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
The answer to that question is, "No, Sir."

§ Mr. Lewis
On a point of order. I did raise this matter previously with you, Mr. Speaker, and I am not now sure whether the Minister did or did not include Question No. 26 in answering Question No. 16. If he did, may I ask you whether I am now in order in protesting against the fact that the Minister includes different questions to be dealt with in this way which precludes a Member's right of asking supplementary questions?

§ Mr. Speaker
I understand that Question No. 26 was included.