§ 24. Mr. G. Jegerasked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he is aware of the situation which arises when a boy aged 15½ years meets with an accident, and is not eligible for sick benefit or unemployment pay, and his parent is not granted any Income Tax allowance in respect of the child; and whether he will take steps to rectify this anomaly.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterSo far as a claim under the Industrial Injuries scheme is concerned, there are no contribution conditions, and a boy of this age injured at work would be eligible for benefit under the ordinary conditions of that scheme. His position in respect of sickness or unemployment benefit would be dependent on his contribution record. Matters concerning Income Tax allowances are the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but he informs me that a boy of the age stated would entitle his parents to an allowance for Income Tax purposes provided that the boy's own income did not exceed £100 a year.
§ Mr. JegerWhilst thanking the Minister for that information, may I apologise to him for not stating clearly that the accident in question occurred at play and not at work? Consequently, industrial injuries do not enter into this case. The boy, if he were over 16, would be eligible for sickness benefit, but under 16 he is not. Therefore, there is this anomaly where the boy leaves school at 15, or soon after, and is not covered by any insurance benefit between the age of 15 and 16. That is the anomaly I should like the right hon. Gentleman to look into.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterThe hon. Gentleman is not quite right. It is not the age of 16 but the contribution record which is the determining factor—
§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter—and as what are required for this purpose are 26 contributions, which could be payable by the 16 age of 15½ if his circumstances so permitted, as I imply in my main answer—the age was selected by the hon. Gentleman for this Question—it is at any rate theoretically possible that such a young man could have made the necessary contributions.
§ Mr. ChetwyndWould the Minister consider amending the National Assistance Act so that a boy of 15 can get assistance in his own right instead of having to wait until he is 16?
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterI am really rather doubtful as to the desirability of that. A boy of such an age, from many points of view, I think, should be dealt with as a member of his family. If the breadwinner of that family is himself on National Assistance, of course an additional allowance would be paid by the Board in respect of the boy.