HC Deb 06 February 1989 vol 146 cc634-5
7. Mr. Michael

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will make it his policy to introduce amendments into the regulations governing social security payments in order to restore transitional protection to those who now lose it due to such changes in their circumstances as a stay in hospital.

Mr. Scott

No, Sir. I would point out to the hon. Member that the new income support rules for single people who go into hospital are far more generous than the old. Income support for these people now remains unchanged for the first six weeks after admission, by which time about 94 per cent. of people are discharged from hospital. Supplementary benefit used to be reduced from the first week of admission.

Mr. Michael

Does not the Minister's reply amount to a confession that the Government's promise of transitional protection was not worth the paper on which it was written? Does the Minister realise that many people are losing out through having to go into hospital and through many other changes in their lives that are irrelevant to their circumstances? What does he have to say to the lady who discovered that her husband's death triggered a cut in the payments that were meant to assist with her own health? Will he confess that the Government have tried to con the poor?

Mr. Scott

I do not believe that the hon. Gentleman listened to my main answer. Perhaps he was too busy preparing his supplementary question when I was delivering it. Transitional protection will cost about £200 million in its first year. It has been of significant help to many people.

Mr. Robin Cook

Is the Minister aware that the appalling examples of those who have lost transitional protection over the past few months would all have been included in the figure which he used repeatedly last April? He told us then that 88 per cent. would be no worse off at the point of change. Does not that which has happened since then expose how bogus that figure always was? Will the hon. Gentleman turn his mind to the parallel provision for housing benefit, which effectively ceases after six weeks in hospital? There are many frail and elderly patients who find after a spell in hospital that they have arrears amounting to hundreds of pounds? That cannot be justified, and I am even prepared to believe that it cannot have been intended. Is the hon. Gentleman prepared to change this vindictive rule before it causes any more distress?

Mr. Scott

I do not agree for one moment with the hon. Gentleman's description of the system. The essence of transitional protection is that it is eroded after time. It is right that we introduced the protection in April 1988 to ensure that no one faced a cliff-edge drop in cash terms. As I said earlier, over 94 per cent. of patients are discharged from hospital within six weeks. We are monitoring the effect on the balance.

Mr. Kennedy

Will the Minister note that many come off transitional protection for short-term employment reasons? My constituency is an example of an area where much of the employment is seasonal and short-term by definition, and those who are engaged in it lose transitional protection. I cannot believe that that was intended as in many instances the effect of the loss of transitional protection is severe. I ask the Minister to review the scheme because the issue goes much wider than the strict definition of the question. There are many who are losing a great deal.

Mr. Scott

We have made concessions for some who are in vulnerable groups. We are monitoring the effect of the present scheme.