§ 33. Mr. Mappasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will seek to amend the law so that capital resources of less than £325 are not taken into account when reasonable household removal expenses are incurred by an aged widow who is rehoused because of infirmity by a local authority.
§ Mr. EnnalsNo, Sir. Under the Ministry of Social Security Act it is specifically left to the Supplementary Benefits Commission to decide what account should be taken of resources disregarded for purposes of weekly benefit when calculating exceptional lump sum payments—such as removal expenses. Their normal practice is to ensure that the claimant is left with £100 capital intact but they consider it reasonable to expect people with more capital than this to meet non-recurring needs out of it.
§ Mr. MappIs the Minister aware that the old-age pensioner of 74, who lives by herself, who has been rehoused because of her infirmity and who has capital of only £247, is now having to pay removal expenses of £15? Is this the sort of generosity we in this age can offer? Can we not do something to assist her?
§ Mr. EnnalsI am aware that my hon. Friend has written about this particular case. It raises problems and we are looking at the matter. The Chairman of the Supplementary Benefits Commission will reply to my hon. Friend. But I must point out that this is a matter which is at the discretion of the Commission and cannot simply be decided by reference to Acts of Parliament.