§ 20. Mr. Deanasked the Minister of Social Security how many pensioners are financially worse off under the earnings rule regulations recently introduced.
§ Miss HerbisonI would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Test (Mr. R. C. Mitchell) on 23rd June.—[Vol. 748, col. 350.]
§ Mr. DeanIs the right hon. Lady aware that I have information, as no doubt she has, of many pensioners who are suffering a loss as a result of these regulations, in one case a loss of nearly £2 1s.? Will she at least ensure that where it works out that pensioners are worse off because of the new regulations she will find some way whereby that can be put right?
§ Miss HerbisonI am sorry, but I could not give that assurance. This matter was very carefully examined by the National Insurance Advisory Committee. It made very strong representations that the change which is worrying the hon. Member should take place. It recommended the higher figure of £6 10s., instead of £5, and the higher taper band of £2 instead of £1, in order to try to make the number who will not benefit smaller. The number is very small.
§ Mr. RidsdaleJust because a number is very small surely that does not make this right? Will the right hon. Lady look at it again? Is it fair to introduce earnings rule regulations which make some pensioners worse off than they were before?
§ Miss HerbisonNo, I shall certainly not look at it again—
§ Mr. RidsdaleWhy not?
§ Miss HerbisonBecause the National Insurance Advisory Committee examined this matter and felt strongly that the anomalies should be cleared away. The fact is that those for whom the hon. Member is concerned had a very great advantage previously over the vast majority of retirement pensioners.
§ Mr. DeanWould not the right hon. Lady agree that it is most unusual when 67 changes are introduced in National Insurance that anybody should be worse off under the new arrangements?
§ Miss HerbisonIt may be unusual; but the people who are worse off—again I stress that the number is very small—are worse off than they were because they have a great deal more extra income. The advantage they previously had was something which disturbed the National Insurance Advisory Committee.