HC Deb 25 March 1980 vol 981 cc1164-6
18. Mr. Meacher

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he expects to be in a position to make a statement on the Government's plans to reduce supplementary benefit to families of persons on strike.

Mr. Prentice

Shortly, Sir.

Mr. Meacher

How many thousands of extra civil servants will be required to administer this proposal? How will union members and non-union members be differentiated? What is the formula proposed to cater for unofficial and official strikes?

Mr. Prentice

Each of those questions will be answered by the statement when it is made. It will be made shortly.

Mr. Dykes

Can my right hon. Friend say what would happen if the wife and children were left destitute because the striking husband did a hunk? What would the Minister do then?

Mr. Prentice

If a wife and children had been deserted by a husband, who is legally responsible for the maintenance of the family, that family would have a claim, in any event, on supplementary benefit. That has nothing to do with the question of trade disputes.

Mr. James Hamilton

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept from me that, on visiting my local office, I discovered that only a third of strikers in my constituency draw social security benefits? Will he ponder on that statement and ensure that there are no further attempts at blackmailing strikers to go back to work when there is no justifiable case for doing so?

Mr. Prentice

The proportion of strikers' families in the steel strike drawing supplementary benefit is much larger than usual because, of all the unions involved in the strike, only the two general workers unions have been paying strike pay. The cost to the taxpayer so far is about £8 million.

Mr. Budgen

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that our proposals may have the effect of encouraging people to join trade unions in order to enjoy the benefit of support during a strike? It may have the effect of encouraging the unions themselves to concentrate on their legitimate role of trying to improve working conditions and wages and to give up their improper role of attempting to be a political party.

Mr. Prentice

I think that our proposals, when they are made known, will be seen to have many healthy effects, including those enumerated by my hon. Friend.

Mr. Rooker

If a striker is arrested while on strike, for any offence, and then serves a term of imprisonment, will his family be treated in the same way as other prisoners' families?

Mr. Prentice

We shall be concerned in the imminent announcement, with the effect of a trade dispute, not the effect of a criminal act.

Mr. NIcCrindle

In how many other countries of the EEC is social security benefit, or its equivalent, paid to the families of people on strike?

Mr. Prentice

Some countries make some kind of payment on a means-tested basis, more often from local authority funds than from national funds. None subsidises strikes in the same way or to the same extent as the British taxpayer under our present arrangements.

r.. Andrew F. Bennett

Will the Minister say what is the difference between someone on strike and someone who has committed a crime? Why should their families be treated differently over the payment of supplementary benefit?

Mr. Prentice

Because the Govern-take the view as, I am sure, does the majority of the public, that if people go on strike, either they, as individuals, or their trade union, ought to make financial provision for the needs of their families.

Mr. John Evans

In view of the fact that 81 per cent. of all strikes—official and unofficial—during the lifetime of the Labour Government were settled within 12 working days and therefore no social security benefit was payable to strikers' families, and in view of the additional staff that the right hon. Gentleman will have to appoint, does he not think that the scheme will work at a loss?

Mr. Prentice

No, Sir. I think it will save public money. It will also direct the attention of the unions to the fact that they have a traditional and historic duty, which many have recognised and others have not, to help maintain the families of their members during an industrial dispute.