HC Deb 29 June 1976 vol 914 cc173-6
3. Mr. Madden

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations have been made to his Department over the postponement of the introduction of the child benefit scheme; and what replies he has sent.

17. Mr. Arnold

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many representations he has received following his announcement not to proceed with the child benefit scheme.

Mr. Ennals

Up to yesterday, 64 letters had been received in my Department following my statement about child benefit on 25th May, the great majority expressing concern over the Government's decision. In reply I have explained that we are in fact proceeding with the scheme but in a modified form, because of the serious implications of the full scheme for pay policy.

Mr. Madden

Does my right hon. Friend agree that although those who have written to him are naturally angry about the Government's current policies, those same people also see the antics and the attitudes displayed by the official Opposition, particularly last night, as having more to do with peripheral parliamentary battles than with an attack on family poverty? When does he expect

ditions in the National Health Service; many of them are concerned with the organisation within their own profession. Over the last few months a great deal of work has been done on the conditions of service of junior hospital doctors. The interests of doctors in general are being considered carefully as we work out current pay policy.

Following is the information:—

the tripartite committee that has been set up to consider these matters to report? Will he give an assurance that the Government will place no obstacles in the way of that committee's report being published—notwithstanding its likely leaking? Lastly, will he give an assurance that his Department will issue a prompt statement on the committee's recommendations, to enable the House to have a full discussion of those recommendations?

Mr. Speaker

Before the Minister replies, may I say that it will be very unfair to those hon. Members with Questions on the Order Paper if everyone asks a long supplementary question?

Mr. Ennals

Of course I agree with my hon. Friend about the behaviour of the Opposition yesterday. I said in the debate that they were simply playing party politics with the problems of poor families. But I do not want to spend any more time on that; we had that yesterday.

As for the committee, not only will the Government give serious consideration to the work which comes from it; we shall of course be involved in its work. It has not yet started. I am certain that it will start soon, and no doubt its recommendations will be made to the Government. It is for the Government to decide what proposals to bring before Parliament, but I have little doubt that, by one means or another, the recommendations of the committee will become known.

Mr. Arnold

Does the setting up of the proposed working party mean that the Government have received representations from the TUC protesting at the way in which they were tricked into believing that the blocking of the child benefit scheme was the view of a unanimous Cabinet?

Mr. Ennals

No, there have been no representations from the TUC on those lines at all. As I said yesterday, the views of the Government and the TUC are in harmony. It was the Government and the TUC and the Parliamentary Labour Party who jointly decided—this followed discussions that I had myself had with officials of the TUC—that we should keep in close touch so as to work out together how we can eventually evolve and introduce into the House the full child benefit scheme. I warmly welcome the fact that this working party has been established.

Mr. Hooley

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, not withstanding the jolly little procedural tango that we had last night, there is a powerful school of thought on the Government side of the House which is determined to see that this child benefit scheme is brought in in 1977? Perhaps he and his Cabinet colleagues will bear that in mind.

Mr. Ennals

I have noted what my hon. Friend said.

Mr. Peter Walker

Since hon. Members on both sides of the House are very much in favour of the introduction of the child benefit scheme as early as possible, will the right hon. Gentleman carefully consider, irrespective of party differences, the arguments produced yesterday by my right hon. Friend the Member for Wan-stead and Woodford (Mr. Jenkin) to show that there may be a way of spending the £95 million that the Government have made available so as to give much more help to the most poverty stricken families than the scheme which the Government at present envisage?

Mr. Ennals

I am afraid that whatever scheme we brought in, whether for £95 million or for marginally less or more, the take-home pay problem would be precisely the same. Although it has always been the case that there was going to be a transfer from the husband's purse to the wife's handbag— [Interruption.] I am trying to deal seriously with the question —given that we have a new pay policy, and in the second stage of the battle against inflation—when, uniquely, the pay policy is based on a modest increase in pay and significant tax concessions—this would have been the most difficult year of all in which to have introduced the full transfer. But we have made a start.