§ Q6. Mr. William Price asked the Prime Minister how many letters he has received from retirement pensioners to the effect that their recent increase was less than expected because they were drawing social supplementary benefits.
§ The Prime MinisterNo separate figures are available, Sir.
§ Mr. PriceWhile I support the principle of giving the poorest pensioners an interim increase in social security benefits, is my right hon. Friend aware that in practice it causes great bitterness and dispute when they find that they have less of the pension increase than they expected? Could we work slowly towards a system whereby pensions and social security benefits are increased together?
§ The Prime MinisterThis problem has been with us for many years. I remember speaking about it from the benches opposite just before Christmas many years ago. I think that it has happened on six occasions, and I know the arguments and concern. People think that they 637 are being robbed. In fact, there was a 5s. increase last year and 5s. increase this year in supplementary benefit, which means that over the two years no one has lost anything, compared with the rise in the basic rate. While we could have said that we would give 10s. this year, it would have meant that they would have been robbed of the 5s. for a whole year, which I do not think anyone wants.
Mr. ForteseueIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the consternation of retirement pensioners about the present situation will be as nothing compared with their consternation when they wake up to the fact that they are almost completely excluded from the new scheme of the Secretary of State of Social Services?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman should give deep study to the White Paper and to what has been said by the Government, particularly the pledge, which has never been given by the party opposite in the past—certainly not when they were in power—about the treatment of existing pensioners. There was great fuss from hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite about having a debate on this so that my right hon. Friend could explain the position, but there were precious few of them there.
§ Mr. ManuelIs my right hon. Friend aware that there are other inequalities in connection with supplementary benefit? I had a letter this week from an old-age pensioner who, because he was on supplementary benefit, had a 10s. addition to his National Coal Board pension taken off his supplementary pension. This means that the National Coal Board is supplementing the Social Security Commission.
§ The Prime MinisterOne can understand the feeling when that happens. The same is true in connection with the national basic pension. If my hon. Friend thinks about the alternative, he will realise the great inequity of it because supplementary benefit is supposed to be provided on a basis of people having enough to live on. If we had any other policy, there would be a great deal of unfair discrimination between supplementary benefits received.
§ Mr. LawlerIs the Prime Minister aware that supplementary pensioners who 638 are already receiving top-scale supplementary benefits are particularly hard hit by, for instance, the current increases in the price of coal and Coalite, for which they have no money? Can the right hon. Gentleman hold out any hope that he will help them from the newfound wealth of the country?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman will be aware of the successive increases which have been made in the basic rate and in supplementary benefit. He will know that on the basic rate they have gone at a very much more rapid rate than in the 13 years before 1964. He will know, if he keeps a close watch on these things, that there has been an increase when necessary and that the real value of the basic pension today is 20 per cent. more than what it was in 1964.