§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Bishop.]
§ 12.18 a.m.
§ Mr. David Winnick (Croydon, South)It is often said, with a great deal of justification, that how far a society is civilised depends very much on how it treats its very young and its very old. In the last few years, there has been a good deal of progress in the way we treat our very young, but there has not been the same degree of progress in the way we treat our very old.
We are glad to recognise that there has been some progress, and I am very pleased that the Social Security Bill is to become law by the end of the year. On the Second Reading of that Bill, I said that I regarded it as a step in the right direction. I think I am right in saying that this weekend the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance loses its old title and becomes the Ministry of Social Security. I take this opportunity of wishing the new Ministry, with its new name, the very best of luck.
One of the greatest needs of the elderly is, quite simply, more money. Most of us have seen elderly retired people doing their shopping looking for the cheapest buy, knowing full well that the money in their pockets will not last the rest of the week. I have no wish to exaggerate, but there is a tremendous amount of real hard poverty surviving in our country today, and particularly among people living on small fixed incomes.
This is why the new Social Security Bill, which will guarantee a fixed income for elderly people, is a step in the right direction. The Government are to be congratulated upon bringing this legislation forward so promptly. I also hope 872 that over a period of time it will be possible to increase yet again the basic old-age pension. The last increase, a very substantial one, took place at the beginning of 1965 and I hope that it will not be long before we can consider increasing it again.
At the end of 1964 the pension increase was delayed and elderly people on National Assistance received a grant of £4. I want to suggest that, even in our present economic condition, these people in great need and now receiving National Assistance, should be given every year at Christmas time, a sum of money—£4 or £5—as a sort of Christmas box. I hope that this idea will be taken seriously. If week in and week out, our elderly people, have a tremendous struggle to make ends meet then surely at one period of the year we can consider giving them an extra amount of money?
Many of the things which we take for granted, getting our laundry, having shoe repairs carried out, going to the hairdresser, are things which elderly people living on small fixed incomes have the utmost difficulty in providing for because the limited amount of money in their possession does not stretch to such things. That is why, without wishing to exaggerate the position, I say that there is a lot of hard poverty among those people in our community who have retired with no private income and only the State pension to fall back on. Under the Bill which will be in operation by the end of the year, an extra amount will be paid to provide a guaranteed income.
I am also keenly interested in reduced fares for old people, having raised this matter on previous occasions. An Act was passed at the end of 1964, by my Government, which made it possible for local authorities which run their own transport undertakings to reduce their fares for the elderly. By and large this has been successful. Unfortunately, this Act does not apply in the London area. I hope that it will be possible in future for the Act to be extended, so that those people who are retired and not living in an area where the transport undertakings are run by local authorities will be able to get reduced fares. There is no great difficulty about this; it can be done, and many retired people would be very pleased to visit relatives and friends in 873 off-peak hours. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport is looking at this and I hope that she will be able to report progress very soon.
There are many other problems concerning the elderly and retired people. I am very keen on non-residential clubs, where retired people can go during the day and have a hot meal at a reduced price and enjoy the companionship of their fellow citizens. In my own constituency we have a Darby and Joan Club, and another club, run directly by the branch of the Old Age Pensioners' Federation, in the New Addington part of my constituency. About eight miles from the town centre of Croydon, we have a club known as the Pop Inn, where elderly people can go during the day. In the London Borough of Brent, two clubs have been provided, built by members, where elderly folk can go every day, including Sundays. There are many facilities and amenities, and cheap meals are provided. Encouragement to local authorities to provide these clubs would be an important step in arranging the companionship which many elderly people need.
Poverty is a great problem for them, but so is loneliness, not knowing what to do, and not having enough money to travel. I hope that my hon. Friend will consider encouraging such clubs as I have mentioned and encouraging local authorities to build new ones and provide for the upkeep of existing ones. I know that it is said that ratepayers would be alarmed if too much money were spent on welfare matters, but I do not believe they will be angry if local authorities spend some money on the elderly.
I believe that the vast majority of working people would be willing for such facilities to be provided. Some local authorities are reluctant to provide money for these clubs, but these are isolated cases. I think that the Ministry would be impressed by the two clubs run by the London Borough of Brent. I should perhaps declare an interest, because I am a member, although an inactive one, of Brent Council.
There are still many elderly people living on their own and isolated from the rest of the community and more effort should be made to locate them. We read of people found dead after seven or ten days, during which time no one knew 874 anything about them. This happens when people are hopelessly cut off and isolated. Some effort must be made to locate these people and see that they are not so neglected as to die on their own, unknown to their neighbours. Advertisements could be put in local papers encouraging people who know of such elderly citizens to go to their local town hall or Ministry of Social Security office.
A greater effort must be made with the Meals on Wheels service for people who cannot get out of their homes. I would pay a tribute to those responsible, mainly the W.V.S., for that service. They provide a first-class service, but it needs to be expanded. Perhaps my hon. Friend would comment on that.
I am also impressed by the numbers of senior schoolchildren who do welfare work instead of playing sport. Fifth and sixth formers of 15, 16 and 17 visit elderly and retired people in their homes. In this they do find a job of work, but also, I believe, it gives the young people some sort of insight into the lives of the elderly people. One of the things I have always been troubled about is that once people retire, once they are forced to live on the State pension, there is a tendency in our society rather to look upon them as though they belong to another planet—as though they are different from the rest of us. The more we make sure that the elderly and retired people are treated and looked upon just like everyone else, the heathier will be our general attitude. We must not look upon elderly people as different from us. The one and only difference, if there is a difference, is that they have retired and are no longer in a position to earn their livings.
There are many other problems concerning elderly and retired people that I should like to speak about, but I have not the time now, and, obviously, I want to allow time to my hon. Friend to reply to this short debate, but I want to make just one or two final points. Some months ago a debate was initiated by my hon. Friend the Member for Rochester and Chatham (Mrs. Anne Kerr). She initiated a very useful debate about the needs of and facilities for elderly people. I believe—I may be wrong—that, apart from the Third Reading of the Social Security Bill, this is the first opportunity we have had of discussing 875 this subject since the debate initiated by my hon. Friend. I think it is important that we continue to discuss this subject. It is very important for as long as there is this problem in our community of retired people who live in poverty that their problems should be spotlighted in the House. Therefore, as long as there is this particular problem outstanding in our community, as long as there are retired people who so greatly need money and opportunity, it is our duty, certainly on this side of the Chamber, to raise this subject. We cannot be satisfied or complacent till we have removed the curse of poverty from our fellow citizens who have retired.
§ 12.32 a.m.
§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health (Mr. Charles Loughlin)I want if I can to meet most of the points my hon. Friend has made in his very cogent speech this evening, but it would be right for me at the very beginning to indicate to him that one or two of the points he has advanced are not the responsibility of my Department and it would be difficult for me to give answers to them.
My right hon. Friends the Minister of Health and Minister of Pensions and National Insurance occupy a central position in the study of the problems affecting aged people. I would caution my hon. Friend, because there are no simple answers. I think that to some extent he himself realises this, and he wisely limited himself to a few points. Of course, he gave me notice of some of the points he was going to raise this evening. So I was forewarned, but the points which he has brought up raise big subjects. If I do not now cover all the matters which ensue from what he has said, I will give him the assurance that I will write to him about any points I miss.
I think there are two big issues involved here. One is how, and along what lines, the practical services should develop; and secondly, how we are to identify, as my hon. Friend so rightly says, the people who need them. I do not think this is an occasion for an array of statistics, but I think I can illustrate both issues with some approximate figures. In 1965, in England and 876 Wales, there were about 5.8 million men and women aged 65 and over, and by 1976 this figure will be about 7 million. This shows the order of size of our development problems. The figure of 7 million, I know, if it truly reflected the situation, would be a rather frightening one. I think we must realise that old age does not begin at 65, and perhaps in trying to solve these problems we have to look for a closer measure of need. It is reasonable to say that whilst many of the young elderly will need practicable forms of help, it is upon the older groups that our attention ought first of all mainly to be fixed.
There are many indications that demands for services start to grow sharply at around the age of 75. In 1965 there were approximately 2 million people at or over that age. That number is expected to increase by about 25 per cent. to some 2.4 million in the next few years. It is this figure that seems likely to suggest the real order of size of the problems to be faced.
The question remains: what services shall we require, and for whom shall we require them? We must first of all have in mind that a service of some kind or a contact of some sort is available to great numbers already. A high proportion of them live at home among their families and friends, although the population census shows that around 1 million men and women of pensionable age are living alone in single-person households, and I think that this is a problem that requires close attention. However, all of them are or should be in touch with their family doctors.
Large numbers are benefiting from some local authority service. For instance, housing authorities have provided about 400,000 dwellings suitable for elderly people, and there is evident growing interest in special housing schemes with residential wardens, which are planned to increase by about 2½ times in the next five years. Some three-quarters of the work of home nurses and home helps and a growing part of the work of health visitors is concerned with the elderly. A small army of volunteers, among whom, I am glad to say, are a growing number of young people, some still at school, link up with local authority welfare services to provide 877 friendly visiting and practical help. But it is certain that all these services do not reach all who need them, and it is highly probable that many of those who are reached do not have all the services that could help them.
Two questions arise. Have the local authorities, who must be the focus of welfare, all the powers they need to provide for welfare comprehensively, and can they find those who do not come forward so that they can be given the services? I believe there is scope for much wider use of the power to provide recreation, which all authorities have, as a basis for finding old people and giving them, for example, friendly visiting services. A number of authorities are already getting down to finding the facts, some with the aid of private Act powers.
One prominent county borough in the North West takes pride in being in regular touch with all its older people. One of our largest authorities is now engaged on contacting and discovering the primary demands made by people in its area aged 75 and over. A number of other authorities are doing similar work. Some local authorities have taken advantage of the assistance and arrangements made by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance for circulating local information in connection with welfare services with initial pension order books in order to draw people to the services.
I have little doubt that my hon. Friend is right in pin-pointing the prevention of loneliness and isolation—not simply from neighbours but from contemporaries—and the development of meals services as important elements of such a policy, which call for fact-finding and action. I recognise, as most of us who are concerned with these problems do, that not enough is being done, but certainly a great deal is being done. Voluntary services already provide, often with local authority help, about 7,000 social clubs. There are already 1,500 old people's welfare committees serving as a nucleus of voluntary visiting services, linked with the authorities. Local authorities now run more than 100 day centres and plan to quadruple them in about ten years.
Interest is growing in preventive health clinics, bringing all the health and welfare services together. If there is caution in many areas before jumping too quickly 878 into the fray, it is often justifiable. Old people need individual, not mass, solutions, and services tailored to their needs, and, of course, the resources of the area. Most certainly authorities should stimulate the growth of recreational and visiting services, but they need to examine with care what they expect to, and can, achieve.
From the point of view of resources, I want to encourage authorities to experiment with forms of clubs and centres. However, I am sure that careful thought and experience of the functions of such centres is needed before large expenditures are embarked upon.
My hon. Friend referred to the Meals on Wheels service. There has been rapid growth and there is need for considered expansion. It has been the W.R.V.S. which has borne the brunt of this development and, incidentally, has attracted some very unfair criticism in the process. Since 1962, when the W.R.V.S. delivered nearly 3½ million meals, its Meals on Wheels deliveries have nearly doubled, to 6.3 million. Meals provided in clubs last year totalled over 1 million. These figures do not include services provided by the British Red Cross Society, old people's welfare committees and local authorities. Probably upwards of 70,000 elderly people are now receiving meals on at least one, and usually two or three, days a week at a modest charge. I am not suggesting that they should receive only one or two such meals a week. We should aim to extend this service as far as we can, including weekend cover. Estimates vary about the need for expansion, but considered expansion is very desirable.
There will always be the problem of identifying those who can most benefit. But the organisation of the expansion of a dispersed service of adequate meals to a changing clientele will present difficulties to authorities in arranging supply and delivery without undue expense. My Department is about to undertake a preliminary survey to examine the different methods of service and to identify the problems involved. A more scientific approach to nutritional needs is necessary, and the Department's Chief Medical Officer's Committee on the Medical Aspects of Food Policy has set up a panel to examine the existing evidence. These together will give us full knowledge 879 about the contribution that the meals service can aim to make to the wellbeing of elderly people in difficult circumstances. The service of the future is likely to be very different from the past, through sheer changes of scale, and there will be many difficulties in the process of growth.
My hon. Friend has stressed the importance of the rôle of the new Ministry of Social Security and of the Supplementary Benefits Commission in welfare. The whole House has shown its appreciation of the step forward which the new Act marks. Many in doing so would share with us appreciation of the rôle the National Assistance Board has already played and will continue to play until the Commission is set up. I do not think that it is widely enough recognised that the Board is itself concerned with the welfare of those whom it serves. Its officers have regularly visited all elderly people receiving assistance—nearly 1½ million in 1965—and most of them have been visited at least twice a year. In these visits, the Board's officers have looked out for welfare needs, advised on how to get help or actually called in the appropriate agency.
The new Commission, like the Board, will have no specific welfare function of 880 its own but will have a duty to look out for welfare needs which statutory or voluntary services are able to meet. The Commission's officers will not need to visit elderly people as often as do those of the Board in order to deal with the need for small extra allowances and the staff time freed can be used for such purposes as finding those who have not claimed or have not claimed enough. It will naturally be the Commission's task to look for welfare problems in these cases also.
A start is to be made with pensioners on first retirement and with the widows of pensioners. My right hon. Friend has stressed the need for positive action to assist in identifying people who are in need of welfare services. What I want the House to recognise is that we appreciate the difficulty with which we are faced but we are attempting to deal with the major problem of identification and the second problem of organising the services.
§ The Question having been proposed after Ten o'clock on Thursday evening and the debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
§ Adjourned at thirteen minutes to One o'clock.