Invalidity Benefit (Hansard, 19 April 1983)

§ 7. Mr. Alfred Morris
asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he now expects the Government's cut in the real value of invalidity benefit to be restored; and if he will make a statement.

§ The Minister for Social Security (Mr. Hugh Rossi)
As has been stated consistently, the abatement will be restored when invalidity benefit comes into tax. As an earnest of this intention we restored the abatement of the invalidity allowances in November 1981.

§ Mr. Morris
Surely the Minister must accept that this is the unkindest cut of all by the Government. Is he aware that because of the cut—at the latest date for which figures are available — a married man on invalidity benefit, with three children, lost no less than £286 a year from a Government who promised to single them out for special help? Is that not utterly disgraceful treatment of long-term sick and disabled people?

§ Mr. Rossi
As usual, the right hon. Gentleman has grossly exaggerated the position and so distorted the truth. Virtually all the recipients of this benefit would have been worse off in the past financial year if the unabated benefit had been brought into taxation. The cost of restoring the abatement would have been £60 million, whereas the tax forgone was £90 million.

§ Mr. Ashley
How long must disabled housewives wait before the end of the discriminatory household duties test? If the Government are able to give a response within one hour to the proposal to abolish lead in petrol, why are housewives still waiting for action on the report by the advisory committee in 1980 saying that the test should be abolished?

§ Mr. Rossi
We are not yet in a position to make a statement, but we shall do so as soon as possible.

§ Mr. John
When will the taxation scheme come into being? The Minister knows full well that many of those who suffer from the 5 per cent. abatement in invalidity benefit would not have been eligible for taxation.

§ Mr. Rossi
I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's statement. If the benefit had been unabated, virtually all of the recipients would have been above the tax threshold last year. That is the position. However, the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.