CATEGORY A RETIREMENT PENSION (Hansard, 9 May 1973)

§ Mr. Meacher

I beg to move Amendment No. 147, in page 35, line 14, leave out subsection (2).

This amendment concerns the half test which was introduced in 1948 when a married woman in employment could rely on her husband's insurance. The aim of the test was to ensure that a woman intended to rely after marriage or remarriage on her own rather than her husband's insurance.

Section 33(2) of the National Insurance Act 1965 states that the number of contribution paid between the date of marriage or remarriage and the attaining of pensionable age must be at least half the number of contribution weeks in that period. A case which illustrates the inequity which can arise under this provision concerns a woman who remarried in 1957 but through ill-health decided to work part-time and finally retired at the age of 60 in 1970. She had not paid for half the number of years between 1957 and 1970, which would be six years. She had contributed for only three years. The problem for this woman is that in the course of her first marriage she contributed for a long period. The test as it stands would disqualify her from her own pension although she had contributed for no less than 33 years.

The Minister said in Committee that he would reconsider whether this test —which is reasonable as it stands, but which is inequitable in some cases— could be adjusted in a way that was compatible with administrative requirements for the great majority of cases. One important requirement is that married women should be much better informed of their position, because the woman to whom I have referred has 551 found herself in this unfortunate situation because of her lack of knowledge.

I hope, therefore, that the hon. Gentleman has had a chance to consider the matter and will be able to put forward an amendment that will prevent the gross inequity which has occurred in this instance from being repeated in other cases.

§ Mr. Dean

As the hon. Gentleman said, this matter was discussed in Committee and I undertook to consider the position to see whether any improvement could be made in the arrangements. I think that I can be equally brief because, as the hon. Gentleman said, he is not contesting the half test as such. What he is questioning is the way in which it works for a comparatively small number of women, those whom we would clearly wish to help in every way we can, and the hon. Gentleman quoted one case.

I have considered the position since the matter was debated in Committee. Two broad suggestions were put forward. The one put forward by the hon. Gentleman was to extend the half test to cover periods of all marriages, and I have considered that. The difficulty is that if that were accepted some women would be worse off if they had maintained a full contribution record only during their last marriage. In other words, accepting the proposal would create more problems than it would solve, particularly for women in that category. I hope, therefore, that the hon. Gentleman will agree that that proposal is ruled out on the ground that it would mean that some women would be worse off than they are under the existing arrangements.

The other possibility was that of giving women a choice, and it is potentially quite attractive to give women the opportunity to choose the best of the options from their point of view. I have considered the matter, but the difficulty is that it would literally tie the scheme in knots and have a similar effect on the women concerned. In a sense the hon. Gentleman answered his own case when he said that married women should be better informed about the half test so that they could make a judgment on whether to contribute.

552 One of the difficulties under the existing arrangements is that, with the best will in the world on the part of the Department, it is becoming increasingly difficult to advise women on the best course for them to adopt. One has to try to assess all sorts of imponderable factors, such as how long they will live in relation to the life span of their husbands and things of that sort. It is difficult for a woman to make a sensible choice about whether it is to her advantage to pay contributions.

If we were to introduce the choice mentioned by the hon. Gentleman, it would virtually be impossible to give women any meaningful advice. A particular scheme, or an option, would be open to married women, but it would be intensely difficult for them to know whether to exercise the option, with the result that the whole arrangement would be brought into disrepute.

I say that with regret, because I genuinely would have liked to have avoided the compartively few but difficult cases which arise—and the hon. Gentleman quoted one. I have had to conclude that, unfortunately, it has not been possible to find an arrangement which is likely to be more satisfactory or more beneficial than the present arrangements to the majority of women in this category.

The Bill goes a little way—I am not claiming that it does more than that— towards meeting the point. It assists women who marry more than once, in that the half test will now not apply to women whose marriage, or last marriage, took place after attaining the age of 55, instead of 57 as at present. I hope, therefore, that the House will feel that that is a modest step forward in a difficult area.