§ 8. Mr. Norman Atkinsonasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will reconsider the practice whereby a pensioner pays a hotel charge after a certain period in a National Health Service hospital whereas a person of working age does not.
§ The Minister for Social Security (Mr. Reg Prentice)There are long-standing provisions under which certain social security benefits are reduced after certain periods of free in-patient treatment. My right hon. Friend has no plans to terminate these provisions which apply to most income replacement benefits regardless of the age of the beneficiary.
§ Mr. AtkinsonHas not the right hon. Gentleman once again demonstrated his absolute ignorance of benefits paid? I am not talking about supplementary benefits. May I remind him of the shock that people suffer when they realise that their pensions, their sickness benefits or their industrial injury benefits are not paid as of right when they enter hospital? Is he aware that they realise then that, if they have no dependants, their benefit is reduced by £9.30 a week? Is he further aware that a person who is working and is being paid a non-contributory pension benefit, particularly in the public sector, has his deduction made up by his employer? Is this not discrimination against a person who is receiving benefit?
§ Mr. PrenticeThe hon. Gentleman referred to a reduction of £9.30 after eight weeks. That applies in the case of someone with no dependants. For a person with dependants the reduction would be £4.65. This principle has been operated since 1948 and has continued under all Governments because it has been generally recognised that public funds should not be used twice for a person's maintenance.
§ Mr. Kenneth LewisSince millions of people get their pay made up when in hospital, and thereby make a profit out of being in hospital, why can there not be a charge in respect of those persons while they are in hospital?
§ Mr. PrenticeThat idea has been studied and rejected. There would be considerable administrative costs in operating a scheme of that kind. There would be problems of assessing people's incomes, including those incomes which were reduced because of the sickness. There would be a problem of collecting the money and of chasing up bad debts. Therefore, the net saving to public funds would be very small in relation to the problems that would be created.