National Insurance Fund (Hansard, 16 April 1962)

§ 23. Mr. Wainwright
asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what he estimates is the average weekly disbursement from the National Insurance Fund in respect of all National Insurance benefits, allowances, grants, &c.; and by how much in aggregate this would need to be increased to give each £ sterling the value the £ sterling had in November. 1960.

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
About £21 million and, on the basis of the Retail Prices Index, just over £1 million.

§ Mr. Wainwright
Would the right hon. Gentleman give a little more sympathy to all recipients in the grades which have been mentioned? Does he not think that the Government, especially as they are supposed to be a good Government, ought to apply their sympathy and make certain that every person who draws benefits under this scheme receives a far better rate of pay than he gets at present?

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
As the hon. Gentleman knows, there have been progressive improvements in the real value of the benefits, and that in practical terms is far more valuable than the verbal sympathy which the hon. Gentleman has expressed.

§ Mr. Wainwright
Does the right hon. Gentleman still think that in this affluent society these people are getting sufficient benefit under this scheme? Why do the Government keep saying that they are looking after these people, when they are neglecting this section of the population while giving great benefits to those who already have too much?

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
It is untrue to say that the Government are neglecting this section, whose position has steadily improved over the years.

§ 24. Mr. Lawson
asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will state, in respect of the contributions of employees, employers and the Exchequer, the increase of their payments into the National Insurance Fund in 1962–63 compared with 1961–62.

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
On the latest available estimates, the figures are £15 million. £16 million and £2½ million.

§ Mr. Lawson
Does this not continue the process whereby the cost of paying mainly for the retirement pension is being put on to the contributor? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware, for example, that in the previous year something like £152 million went on to the contributor, employer and employee? This process would seem to be continuing, and the Exchequer is getting away more and more from meeting this large liability.

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
This is not so. The greater part of the increase in the payments by employers and employees is merely due to the fact that there is a certain time lag in the payment of graduated contributions, which means that in the first year a less amount than a full year's due is paid. In subsequent years, of course, that does not follow. I think it is that which misled the hon. Gentleman.

§ Mr. Lawson
As was well brought out when we discussed the graduated pension scheme in Standing Committee, the contributors to the graduated pension scheme would never get back anything like the amount of graduated contributions which they paid. In fact, the graduated pension scheme was introduced specifically for the purpose of meeting the flat rate contributions of a large number of old-age pensioners.

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
I do not think that has much to do with this Question. The fact remains that on the contributions as a whole the contributors get an extremely good bargain.