Disabled People (Hansard, 9 November 1989)

§ Q5. Mr. Hannam
To ask the Prime Minister if she will make a statement on recently announced measures to assist the disabled.

§ The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security has recently announced a number of measures to give extra help to some 500,000 disabled people and carers. These will add a further £100 million on top of the £8.3 billion a year being spent on benefits for long-term sick and disabled people in real terms. That is nearly double what was being spent in 1979.

§ Mr. Hannam
I thank my right hon. Friend for the recent improvements, especially the carers' allowance and the mobility allowance for deaf-blind people. Does she recall her 1979 commitment to introduce a system of cash benefits to meet the costs of disablement? Will she therefore take a personal interest in the current review of disability benefits to ensure that that promise is implemented to help the 6 million disabled people in Britain to live a life of dignity?

§ The Prime Minister
I hope that my hon. Friend will consider that we have honoured our pledge by increasing the amount spent on the disabled by 90 per cent. in real terms—that is, over and above inflation—since 1979. The number of people receiving help with their extra costs through mobility allowance has increased sixfold and through attendance allowance threefold over the past decade. That is a record of which the Government can be proud. I certainly assure my hon. Friend that we shall be seeking to do more to help many disabled people who at present do not receive mobility allowance or attendance allowance.

§ Mr. Ashley
Is the Prime Minister aware that although her figures are correct, the impression that she seeks to create is false? In the past 10 years the real value of the average male take-home pay has risen by 20 per cent. while 1160 the average real value of disablement benefit has risen by less than 1 per cent. That is why her boast about helping disabled people has a hollow ring.

§ The Prime Minister
I do not think that the many people who now receive disablement benefits but did not receive them before will find that that comes with a hollow ring. There are many people in receipt of disablement benefits who never received them before. Spending on the disabled has increased from £1.8 billion in 1978–79 to £8.3 billion in cash terms. That is an increase of £4 billion in real terms. Of that real increase, £3.5 billion is attributable to the increased number of beneficiaries—those who otherwise would not have received benefit—and £500 million to the increase in the average amounts paid.

§ Mr. Thurnham
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the best way to help the disabled is to target help to those who are most in need? Does she particularly welcome the new benefits of up to £65 per week for families with severely disabled babies?

§ The Prime Minister
Yes. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for mentioning the sum of £65 per week which is intended to help those people. I know my hon. Friend's personal record in this matter and the tremendous interest that he has taken in that aspect of disablement and we all honour him for the lead that he has given.

§ Q6. Mr. Nellist
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 9 November.

§ The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

§ Mr. Nellist
Is the Prime Minister aware that the hon. Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Dame J. Knight) this morning again put the Government's view that there is no compatibility between the dangers faced by firefighters and those faced by ambulance workers? Where does the Prime Minister think that ambulance workers were at King's Cross or the Brighton hotel, when she was particularly pleased to see them—waiting outside like glorified taxi drivers? When will she stop treating the women and men of the ambulance service as though they were members of her Cabinet? Why does she not pull out the Army, pay ambulance workers the money and stop risking lives?

§ The Prime Minister
First, the point about comparability with other emergency services was considered by the Clegg commission, which was set up by a Labour Government but whose recommendations were honoured by a Conservative Government because the Labour Government did not have the money—they just made promises. The Clegg commission did not uphold the demand for comparability between the services. The London ambulance service has been offered 9.3 per cent., backdated to April. The way to conduct the negotiations was through the Whitley council.

§ Q7. Mr. John Browne
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 9 November.

§ The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

§ Mr. Browne
Does my right hon. Friend accept that, whatever the route selected for the M3 around Winchester, 1161 it will inevitably cause serious environmental damage? As it was the Government of the day who diverted the route from the open country to the north of Winchester to the sensitive area to the south-east of Winchester, will she reassure the House that the Secretary of State for Transport will speedily be given sufficient funds to ensure that whatever route is finally selected it will be friendly to the special and historic environment around Winchester, which is a national asset?

§ The Prime Minister
I know of my hon. Friend's interest in this as he has been in correspondence and has been to see me about it. He knows that at the moment my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for the Environment and for Transport are considering the reports of two independent inspectors, who held public inquiries into proposals for that road scheme. I cannot anticipate what their decisions will be, but I know that they fully understand the importance of environmental issues in cases such as this.