§ Q4. Mr. Ashleyasked the Prime Minister if he will list the official broadcasts he has made on television since the beginning of August.
§ The Prime MinisterI was interviewed on the B.B.C. programme "Panorama" on 11th October. A transcript of this interview was placed in the Library of the House on 12th October.
§ Mr. AshleyWhen the Prime Minister next broadcasts about the Government's achievements, will he confirm that there are now over 3,000 different means tests in operation in this country and that when the Government's new housing policy is implemented over one-third of all men and women in Britain can be subject to a means test? Is this something that the Government intend to boast about or apologise for?
§ The Prime MinisterI would not accept the last figure given by the hon. Gentleman without investigation. His first figure of 3,000 is about right, if one treats each local authority form of means test as a single means test. If one takes the generality of local authority means tests on rents as being one, the last Administration were operating 43 different types of means test, and we have added one to that number.
§ Mr. TaverneWill not the extent of means testing involved in the Government's fair rent proposals mean an enormous increase in the area where a kind of poverty surtax operates, and is not this totally inconsistent with the Government's statements about tax incentives for the higher-paid?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir, it is not in the least inconsistent, because we said that we would endeavour to make help available from Government funds to those who most need it, and in housing what is being done is to extend help to people instead of houses; if people are living in privately-rented accommodation they will be eligible for help when they need it. This seems to us to be the most practical and sensible way of going about it. If the hon. and learned Gentleman wants us to stop giving any form of assistance to those living in rented accommodations 1475 which is not local authority accommodation, he is entitled to his view, but he had better state it clearly so that we may know precisely what is his position on this matter.
§ Mr. Roy JenkinsDoes the right hon. Gentleman not understand that on matters of this sort and on a range of other means-tested benefits he is producing a position when, at a certain level of low income—taking into account social security and other effects—in effect the marginal rate of tax on any income earned is very high indeed?
§ The Prime MinisterI fully understand that, but it was not this Government who got into this position. It was, with great regret, the Government of which the right hon. Gentleman was a Member. This was the position which we found when it came to a question of helping the lower paid workers and their families through family allowances or some other deliberately created means; and because the Labour Government reached that position, which we are still in, it was necessary to adopt a new form of help and not do it through family allowances.