HC Deb 05 December 1994 vol 251 cc10-1
9. Ms Glenda Jackson

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many British citizens have been denied access to benefits under the habitual residence rule; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Roger Evans

One thousand and fifty-three British citizens have not satisfied the habitual residence test when claiming income support in the three months from 1 August. Figures for housing benefit refusals are not yet available.

Ms Jackson

Is it not time to scrap this singularly ugly little piece of legislation when the reality for only one of my constituents, who is six months pregnant, is to find herself without any money or home at all, as the Euston Benefits Agency office which serves my constituents takes anything up to a month to see an initial applicant and more than two months to process an appeal? If the Government will not scrap this legislation, will they at least allow British citizens to claim under the extreme hardship arrangements so that more women and children are not put on our streets without homes or food?

Mr. Evans

The answer to the hon. Lady's first question is no. Without knowing the details, I cannot comment on the particular circumstances of her constituent. However, if she gives me the details of the case, I shall look into it. British citizens in extreme circumstances would be entitled to apply to the social fund for a crisis loan.

Dr. Spink

Is my hon. Friend aware that my constituents are singularly sick of people from abroad coming here and scrounging off our social benefits system? If we had more support from Opposition parties for our immigration and asylum legislation, we could resist that phenomenon.

Mr. Evans

My hon. Friend undoubtedly speaks for the country.

Mr. Donohoe

Is the Minister aware that a large percentage of the people who are refused are British citizens, not people from abroad? Can he explain why every DSS office in the country has to send every refusal file to DSS headquarters?

Mr. Evans

It is implicit in the answer that I gave that the 1,053 people to whom I referred are British citizens. There is no disputing that. However, whether they are British citizens in the sense— [HON. MEMBERS: "They are."] No, that is not so because in many cases they have no immediate connection with this country and are not in any real sense habitually resident. My right hon. Friend saw fit to introduce that salutary measure to curb what would otherwise become a public scandal.

Mr. Harry Greenway

Would it not be true to say that a number of such people would be economic immigrants, and it is that to which people object?

Mr. Evans

No doubt that is one example. Another involves Canadian or Australian teenagers on backpacking holidays to Europe, who happen to be patrials within the meaning of British citizenship and who previously were entitled to obtain income support.