HC Deb 07 July 1981 vol 8 cc247-8
3. Mr. Cryer

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what notification is being given to all those eligible persons regarding the ending of earnings-related benefit in 1982.

The Secretary of State for Social Services (Mr. Patrick Jenkin)

Earnings-related supplement will continue for people whose entitlement to short-term benefits starts before 3 January 1982, subject to a final cutoff date of 30 June 1982. People who become eligible for short-term benefits after 3 January 1982 will be affected by the change unless they have claimed benefit in the preceding eight weeks. They will be informed. I am considering how best to give advance notice of the change.

Mr. Cryer

Is it not important for the Minister to mount a clear publicity campaign to tell the sick, the unemployed, the injured, widows and those in receipt of maternity allowances that the Government will rob them in 1982, in a full year of operation, of £300 million? Will he tell them that this gang of cheats, who are denying benefits to those who have made contributions, will prevent people from having their rights and will force them on to supplementary benefit, for which he will employ a further 1,000 civil servants? Is not this a disgraceful policy? Will he make clear to the recipients the full entitlement that the Government are denying them?

Mr. Jenkin

The hon. Gentleman knows that the change in the law was fully debated in the House and was approved by Parliament. He knows that the change will take place as Parliament decided. He will be aware that the value of the earnings-related supplement under Governments of both parties was allowed to fall substantially in real terms relative to average earnings and is now a little of over half its value in real terms of 10 years ago. In these circumstances, and at a time when it is not realistic to try to maintain the extravagant programmes that we inherited from our predecessors, it seemed right to make savings in respect of this benefit. I have told the hon. Gentleman that we shall want to ensure that those who may become entitled to short-term benefits after January—who by definition are unknown—will be given advance notice of the changes that Parliament has approved.

Mr. Paul Dean

Will my right hon. Friend explain to those in receipt of the earnings-related supplement that owing to the sharp increase in social security benefits generally it is right that top priority should be given to fulfilling the Government's commitment to those on retirement pension, to the elderly, to the disabled and to other groups that are in the greatest need?

Mr. Jenkin

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for asking that supplementary question. It is right that we have maintained our commitment to retain the real value of the pension. We have maintained also the real value of the safety net. We have made other improvements in benefits for particularly needy groups, such as one-parent families and the elderly, who are in need of heating help. It was unrealistic to carry out those important social priorities and at the same time maintain in full the existing programme of social security benefits. The House has approved the changes and they will take effect from 3 January.

Mr. Rooker

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the earnings-related supplement that would have been payable to an unemployed person from next January would have been £11.10 a week? Will he confirm also that as that benefit is not being paid at present to the unemployed due to the Civil Service dispute, those who are owed payments of the earnings-related supplement to unemployment benefit will receive the back pay, even if they have returned to work before the dispute ends?

Mr. Jenkin

The amount payable will depend on the man's earnings, as I am sure the hon. Gentleman recognises. It is a sad consequence of the industrial action by civil servants in my Department that benefits are not being paid as they fall due. It is our intention—I must warn the House that this may take some time in the recovery period—to pay any benefits which were due, but which were not paid, to those who were entitled to them.

Mr. Nicholas Winterton

I do not wish to be associated with the unnecessary diatribe of the hon. Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer), but does my right hon. Friend accept that there is considerable grievance because of the phasing out of the supplement? Those who have paid contributions over many years feel that they should be entitled to the supplement when, through circumstances beyond their control, they are placed out of work.

Mr. Jenkin

I do not think that my hon. Friend is entitled to criticise in those terms a measure for which he voted.

Mr. Winterton

If my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State makes comments of that sort, he will not be able to rely on my support in future.

Mr. Speaker

Order. I do not always hear the arguments below the Gangway. In that I realise that I am fortunate. The House must allow the Minister to answer the next question.