§ 9. Mr. Frank Allaunasked the Minister of Social Security how many families had their incomes reduced by the wage stop last winter, and by what average weekly amount; how many families she estimates will be affected this winter; and if, in view of the higher unemployment figures and other factors, she will suspend the wage stop this autumn.
§ Mrs. HartThis Question falls into four parts and I apologise, Mr. Speaker, for the length of my reply.
The peak figure last winter was 27,000. It is not known by what average amount the normal supplementary benefit entitlement was reduced, nor just how many families will be affected this winter, although the present figure is 26,000. The wage-stop rule reflects the problem of low earnings. It is these which account for seven-eighths of family poverty. The Supplementary Benefits Commission and I are at present examining possible ways of softening the impact of the wage stop.
§ Mr. AllaunI thank the Minister for that long Answer. Does she accept the expert opinion of the Child Poverty Action Group that the number of children affected this winter may reach 200,000? Secondly, since the wage stop is aimed at malingering, should she not exclude the sick and disabled who cannot be accused of malingering?
§ Mrs. HartThe figure quoted by my hon. Friend does not, I think—and I do not think the Child Poverty Action Group does—take into account the fact that seven-eighths of those concerned in the 1322 survey are included because of the low earnings of men in work and one-eighth is due to the wage stop. I can assure my hon. Friend that I am looking deeply into the question of trying to break up the causation of family poverty into component parts. My hon. Friend mentioned the question of disability, but there are difficulties about definitions. I take his point.