§ 1. Mr. Harperasked the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he has received from the National Union of Mineworkers about the present level of disregards, as they affect their retired pensioners who are in receipt of supplementary benefits, following the recent increase in the mineworkers' pension.
§ 46. Mr. Masonasked the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he has received from the National Union of Mineworkers regarding the loss of supplementary benefit by unemployed coalminers as a result of their recent increase in mineworkers' pension; and if he will make a statement.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Security (Mr. Paul Dean)None directly, but this matter was referred to in a letter the union sent to the Chairman of the Supplementary Benefits Commission on 30th May. I understand that the increases in mineworkers' pensions, together with the recent increases in the needs allowance in the rent rebate and allowance scheme, will mean that many of the miners concerned will be better off financially by ceasing to receive supplementary benefit and paying rebated housing costs instead.
§ Mr. HarperI fail to see that, because hundreds of miners living on retirement pensions, after the recent increase of £1.50 in their basic pension—making it £3—have lost all or part of their supplementary benefit. Therefore, they are, in effect, worse off.
Will the Under-Secretary give serious consideration—we have asked for this many times before—to increasing the disregard from the present £l? Surely he must agree that it is scandalous to submit men who have worked for 51 or 52 years in the pits to this kind of treatment.
§ Mr. DeanI do not accept what the hon. Gentleman says about a scandalous situation. It existed in 1969, when mineworkers' pensions were last increased, but 345 on this occasion the miners will benefit from the increase in both the basic and the supplementary pension. In many cases they will also benefit from the new rent rebate arrangements. The main thing is to ensure that the miners know of this. Discussions are going on at the moment between the Supplementary Benefits Commission, the NUM, and the NCB with the intention of ensuring that all miners know of the best arrangement from their own points of view.
§ Mr. Norman LamontIs it not the case that the disregards on supplementary benefit have not been increased for some years, during which the value of money has declined considerably? If it is the policy of the Government to make adjustments to benefits to cope with inflation, ought not adjustments also to be made in the amount that can be taken by a person from other sources? If no adjustments are to be made, will not this situation undermine the incentive of employers to make adjustments in pensions and of individuals to save?
§ Mr. DeanI accept my hon. Friend's point. My right hon. Friend has on a number of occasions said that there is a case for improving the disregards, which have not been changed since 1966. This, as in other matters, is a question of priorities. My right hon. Friend has thought it appropriate up to now to concentrate the resources available on improving the basic rates of benefit which help everybody, and in particular those who have no other resources to call upon.
§ Mr. O'MalleyWhy does not the hon. Gentleman find out what he is talking about before making the statement that miners are benefiting from the present increase in pensions? Thousands of miners and miners' widows are getting not a penny benefit as a result of the increase negotiated between the National Coal Board and the National Union of Mineworkers. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this is bitterly resented by mining communities throughout the country? Bearing in mind that on the Report stage of the National Insurance Bill on Friday the Opposition propose to move an amendment that would benefit these miners and their families along the lines mentioned by the hon. Member for Kingston-upon-Thames (Mr. Norman Lamont), will the Minister at this stage 346 reconsider his attitude and give miners and their families some benefit from the increase in these pensions?
§ Mr. DeanI do not accept the hon. Gentleman's criticism. The last time that the miners' pension was increased was in 1969, when the Labour Government were in office. On that occasion pensions and supplementary benefit were not increased at the same time, and the present rent rebate and allowance arrangement was not operating at that time.
The National Union of Mineworkers, which is being extremely helpful and co-operative in this matter, is not adopting the attitude that the hon. Gentleman is adopting. The NUM is saying to us—and we are taking the point—that what matters is that miners should benefit as a result of these improvements. We are all now actively working to ensure that that happens.