§ 10. Mr. Haleasked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he is now prepared to amend the rule which involves diminution or loss of pension to those earning more than £2 10s. 0d. a week.
§ The Minister of Pensions and National Insurance (Mr. John Boyd-Carpenter)I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, West (Sir I Clark Hutchison) on 11th November, 1957, to which I have nothing to add.
§ Mr. HaleIs the right hon. Gentleman now saying that the passing of six months has made no impression upon him, nor any events which have transpired in that period? Is it not wholly nonsensical today that this form of contributory pension should have these conditions applied to it, when persons retiring from the Army or the police force are under no limitation at all as to the amount of their earnings? If the Government have turned from their Thorneycroft policy to an expansionist policy, surely the really sensible thing to do is to encourage people to work?
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterThe only thing which has happened since that Answer has been an increase for a single person of 10s. a week, with the consequence that the amount which can be earned before the pension is wholly extinguished is 10s. more than it was on that date.
§ 11. Mr. Haleasked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he is aware that William Whybrow, aged 69 years, who was drawing a retirement pension of £2 13s. 0d. a week, took a temporary post for three days a week at £4 a week as a property repairer and committed suicide when he heard the matter was being investigated with a view to prosecution; and what steps he will take to avoid unnecessary threats of prosecution for breach of complex regulations not well understood.
§ 15. Mr. Frank Allaunasked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if his attention has been drawn to the recent suicide of a married Lancashire pensioner, aged 69 years, after it had been discovered he was earning £4 a week to supplement his £2 13s. pension without informing his Department; and if, in the light of the hardship and anxiety it is causing, he will amend the earnings rule both for old-age pensioners and for widowed mothers.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterI was very sorry to hear of this gentleman's death, and have made inquiries about the case. It is clear that his earnings, which were, in fact, somewhat larger than is stated in the Questions, were not disclosed, as a result of which he had for 10 weeks drawn pension to which he was not entitled. He was seen in this connection by an officer of my Department, who, after very properly cautioning him, took from him a written statement in which he offered to return the pension overpaid. No threat of prosecution was made, but he was told the matter would be reported.
On the last part of the Question of the hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun), I would refer him to the Answer I gave earlier to the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Hale).
§ Mr. HaleWhy does the right hon. Gentleman say no threat of prosecution was made when he says that the man was cautioned, because the whole object of a caution is to protect oneself in view of a prosecution? Here is a case where, if this man, whose integrity is beyond doubt, because no man takes his life because of a threat of prosecution unless he is a man who attaches very great importance to honour and to honesty, had worked two days a week only, he would have committed no offence, but by his working on a third on urgent repair work we get the whole process of investigation, the whole process of interview, and of mortification of a man and his subsequent suicide. Will not the right hon. Gentleman realise that this is something which has happened in the last six months and apply his mind to this problem again?
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterThe hon. Gentleman ought to know that the fact that a caution is administered does not mean that a prosecution will take place, and 8 that this is a very proper step; there would indeed be criticism if this step were not taken when a case was to be reported. As for the rest of what the hon. Gentleman said in the course of a very long supplementary question, I would only say that my officers would not be doing their duty if they did not administer the Regulations and, in this case, the statutory provisions laid down by Parliament.
§ Mr. AllaunSince there must be thousands of such cases of evasion of the earnings rule, detected or otherwise, could not the Minister stop turning the natural desire to earn a living and earn a wage into a crime? Is it not a fact that to penalise men and women for earning more than £2 10s. is deliberately to discourage them from working?
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterThe hon. Gentleman knows very well that this arises from the wider question which has frequently been discussed in this House since this provision was originally incorporated in the Act of 1946. I can only say on the general principle of the retirement condition that to abandon it, as the hon. Gentleman appears to suggest, would cost either the contributor or the taxpayer very nearly £100 million a year. I am bound to say that if such an additional sum were available I really do not think it should be expended solely on supplementing the earnings of people who, because they have earnings, are therefore in a better position than the great majority of pensioners who have not.
§ Mr. SimmonsWould the Minister say how the officers who undertake this duty of dealing with the old people are chosen and how they are trained? Is their work not akin to that of the welfare officers of the old Department dealing with war pensioners, and ought they not to be trained welfare officers who are entrusted with this kind of job of dealing with these old people and the details of their cases? Would not trained sympathetic handling of these cases have a great deal of effect?
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterI agree with a great deal of what the hon. Gentleman has said, and it is certainly a standing instruction, which was, I am convinced, carried out in this case, that this inevitably difficult matter should be handled carefully. I must say, having been into 9 this case, and on behalf of my officer concerned, who, quite naturally, is very much distressed by the subsequent happenings, that I have every reason to believe he carried out his duties in this case not only in accordance with the rules but in accordance with tact and humanity.
§ Mr. MarquandCould the right hon. Gentleman tell us what form of words is used in the caution?
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterIt is the normal form of caution, based, I think, very much upon the words used by the police when investigating an offence:
Do you wish to say anything regarding this matter? You are not obliged to say anything unless you wish to do so, but whatever you may say will be taken down in writing and may be given in evidence.