HC Deb 02 December 1963 vol 685 cc756-8
10. Mr. Gourlay

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance by how much the retirement pension of a married pensioner would require to be increased to raise its present purchasing value to that which obtained on the date when the present rates of pensions were announced.

Mr. Wood

Is. 1d. would have to be added to the combined retirement pensions of a married couple.

Mr. Gourlay

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that pensioners consider that they have been very shabbily treated by the present Government? Will he, therefore, review the present position of pensioners, especially at this time of year when many of them are unable to purchase sufficient coal to keep themselves warm? Will he consider announcing an early increase in pensions, although a General Election is not very far off?

Mr. Wood

I find it hard to believe that pensioners believe this, because in May—

Mr. A. Lewis

Ask them at Luton.

Mr. Wood

Luton was concerned with a number of issues—National Insurance benefits were given the highest value that they had ever had, and they still retain this highest value.

Mr. Gourlay

Notwithstanding that, is it not a fact that pensioners in Scotland in particular are still very dissatisfied with the present rate of pension, which is not sufficient to ensure that they can keep themselves warm at this time of year?

Mr. Wood

We could continue this argument for a very long time, but the steps which the Government took in the spring of this year had the effect of giving the pensioner a pension of greater value than he had ever had before.

30. Mr. Small

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will express in terms of 1946 prices the present value of the basic retirement pension for a single adult male.

Mr. Wood

36s. 2d., on the basis of the Retail Prices Index from June, 1947, and the Cost of Living Index for the earlier period.

Mr. Small

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that, in relation to the 26s. pension of 1946, the present level in monetary terms is quite derisory, particularly in what is regarded as our present affluent society?

Mr. Wood

The hon. Gentleman is not comparing two like things. The pension has not only increased in monetary terms, but has risen by more than half in real value since 1951. I point out also that the 26s. pension he is talking about had already decreased in value by 1951 to 23s. 3d. In fact, this Government are spending a very much larger proportion of the national income for this purpose than was being spent in 1951.

Mr. Mitchison

Why does one in five have to go for National Assistance?

Mr. Wood

For the reason which I gave earlier, that we have increased National Assistance as well as National Insurance benefits. If we had done one without the other, we should certainly have reduced the proportion, butwe should not have helped those who were poorest.

Mrs. Slater

The Minister uses the argument that more of the national income is being spent for this purpose. Does he take into account that there are very many more old-age pensioners? Further, will he look at the problem from the point of view of the old-age pensioner for a change, recognising that what they suffer from is the constant increase in the cost of bare essentials which they, as old-age pensioners, must have? For instance, the price of bread will go up next week, and this will be an important increase for them. Finally, will the Minister tell us clearly and definitely what is the Government's policy: is it to extend National Assistance rather than the basic pension, as he seemed to imply in an earlier answer to one of his hon. Friends?

Mr. Wood

I shall do my best to give as informative answers as possible to any hon. Member who puts Questions down. I am glad that the hon. Lady has drawn my attention to the increase in the number of retirement pensioners. The difference in the cost of pensions between 1951 and 1962 is striking—£270 million in 1951 and £820 million today.