HC Deb 12 November 1985 vol 86 cc410-1
1. Mr. McCrindle

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many of the representations he has received on the Green Paper on social security dealt with housing benefit.

The Minister for Social Security (Mr. Tony Newton)

About 2,300, Sir.

Mr. McCrindle

Does my hon. Friend accept that the Green Paper proposals on housing benefit could lead to the withdrawal of housing benefit not only from many people who are on very small occupational pensions but from their widows? Does he agree that that would be a disincentive to thrift and that that is hardly the best background against which to sponsor the expansion of occupational pension schemes?

Mr. Newton

I hope my hon. Friend recognises that the effect of the structural proposals in the Green Paper depends upon the final decisions that are taken and the rates that are set within whatever structure may be proposed, including income support rates. We shall endeavour to ensure that we produce a fair position, but we have to take account of the fact that the purpose of encouraging the development of occupational pensions is to reduce, in the long run, people's dependence on means-tested benefits.

Mr. Carter-Jones

Will the Minister take any account at all of the representations that he receives?

Mr. Newton

I hope the hon. Gentleman will accept that the only real answer I can give to him is wait and see. However, we are studying very carefully what he has said. If he has any representations that he would like to make to me beyond those that he has already made, I shall look at them with unusual care.

Mr. Andrew Bowden

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that many pensioners who now receive housing benefit would not need to do so if the value of their savings had not been destroyed by inflation because of the policies of profligate Socialist Governments in the late 1970s?

Mr. Newton

I endorse my hon. Friend's every word.

Mr. Kirkwood

Does the Minister accept that suffering over housing benefit is being experienced by those in receipt of small occupational pensions and by widows? Does he also accept that the proposal to make a contribution towards rates is deeply worrying and distressing to many people who come within these income groups? Has he received many such representations, and will he consider them very carefully in the context of the White Paper?

Mr. Newton

We shall consider all the representations that are made to us, but part of the rates problem is due to the irresponsibility of local authorities, which are conscious that very large numbers of their electorate do not pay rates.

Mr. Pawsey

Can my hon. Friend say what is the current cost of housing benefit and what was its equivalent in 1979? Does he believe that this is a cost-effective way of delivering benefit to those in need?

Mr. Newton

The housing benefit scheme can be a more cost-effective and fairer way of helping those in need. We took an important step towards that by bringing together the two systems of help with housing costs in 1982 and 1983, but that is a system upon which we can improve, and we are seeking to do so.

Mr. Meacher

Will the Minister confirm that, under his housing benefit cuts, there will be 7 million losers, 4 million of whom will be pensioners, mostly owner-occupiers with small occupational pensions? Will the hon. Gentleman now answer the question that he has signally failed to answer: how do the Government justify their view that pensioners who are widows should now be deprived of housing benefit simply because their husbands were thrifty enough in their lifetime to save for a small private pension?

Mr. Newton

The outcome of the review obviously depends on the rates that are set and the final decision on the structure. We must bear in mind that one of the main burdens of the people to whom the hon. Gentleman has referred is, apart from the catastrophic rate of inflation over which the Labour Government presided, the extent to which this group is paying taxation. One of our objectives is to reduce the tax burden. I believe that it would be far better to leave widows and others with their own money in their own pockets than to take it from them and return it in the form of means-tested benefits.