§ Provisions applying to Scotland.
§
1. A poor law authority shall not after the commencement of this Schedule afford outdoor relief—
Provided that—
(ii) nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit outdoor relief being afforded otherwise than in money to any person in a case of sudden or urgent necessity;
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREThe first Amendment to this Schedule is designed to secure that the numbering of the different items is consecutive. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 20, line 13, column 2, leave out from ("after") to ("there") in line 14 and insert (paragraph (e)").—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREThe second Amendment to this Schedule is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 20, line 16, column 2, leave out ("(a)") and insert ("(f)").—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREThe next Amendment is also drafting. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 20, line 17, column 2, after ("sixpence") insert ("a week").—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREThe next Amendment is also drafting. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 20, line 28, column 2, leave out ("(b)") and insert ("(g)").—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREThere is another drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 20, line 29, column 2, after ("sixpence") insert ("a week").—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ 4.27 p.m.
§
THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved, after paragraph (b) in the references to subsections (2), (3), (4) and (5) of Section thirty-eight, to insert:
(c) the whole of any wounds military or disability pension shall be disregarded;
(d) the whole of any weekly payment under the enactments relating to workmen's compensation or employers' liability shall be disregarded.
900
The noble Earl said: I beg to move the Amendment standing in the name of my noble friend Lord Snell and myself. The object of the Amendment is to mitigate the hardship that will be imposed when the household means test is put into practice. We registered our objection to this particular form of test on the Second Reading, and we do not intend to weary the Committee by repeating arguments. We felt that the most useful method of mitigating the unnecessary suffering and the unwarranted difficulties that this provision will cause would be a general Amendment which would have the effect of lessening the financial burden on the occupants of a house that might be occupied by an old age pensioner. The first part of this Amendment deals with the case of ex-Service men—men who served in the last war, or in the Boer War, and received injuries, such as loss of limbs or permanent impairment of health, which entitled them to receive pensions. I think it will be generally agreed that the object of a disability pension is in some measure to compensate the victim of such an injury for the loss he sustained. It is clearly impossible for any monetary compensation to atone entirely for incapacity for life, but I imagine that the object of the Government in providing disability pensions was to mitigate to some extent the hardships that inevitably have to be endured by a man who received wounds that left such a serious after-effect.
§ If that is the object of a disability pension, it is difficult to see how the Government can claim that half such a pension should be used to save Government funds—that is to say, to pay for the supplementary allowance of an old age pensioner. In the case of a son-in-law with a disability pension living in the house of a man of sixty-five, it is extremely hard that this man, however great may be his devotion to his wife's relatives, should have to sacrifice half of his pension in order to maintain the old man. I think everyone would agree that the special obligations to these men are different from the obligations to those who have sustained injury or who have fallen sick in ordinary civilian employment. That is why I venture to draw attention to this particular provision. In addition, do not let us forget that this provision will actually hit hardest the completely disabled man. He would pay a greater pro- 901 portion of his pension by way of supplement to whatever the old man would be receiving. The maximum disability pension is £2 a week, and is payable in the cases in which a man has been completely incapacitated. The ex-Service man receiving £2 a week might have to pay half of that, if there were no other means available, towards the support of his aged relative. At any rate the Board would only be obliged to ignore £1 of his pension.
§ Just a word or two on the second part of the Amendment, relating to payments made under Workmen's Compensation Acts. The object of these payments is to compensate a workman who has sustained an accident in the course of his calling for the wages that he has thereby lost. It is therefore again, I think, rather hard that as much as half of any compensation he is receiving can be taken off an old age pensioner living under the same roof. There is also a certain lack of logic between the provision in the Bill regarding disability pensions and the provision regarding payments under the Workmen's Compensation Acts. One pound a week of a disability pension must be ignored, but only half of a payment of compensation under the Act. The maximum compensation for a case of complete disablement is 30s. a week, so the maximum that can be ignored in that case is 15s. a week. Therefore the man who has suffered an industrial accident or is completely laid up with silicosis—to take a concrete example—would only have 15s. a week of his payment ignored, whereas the war pensioner would get 5s. a week. I am not complaining at all; I am merely pointing out a certain lack of logic in the Government's provisions.
§ I suggest that a more generous treatment of these two types of cases would not mean any heavy additional cost to the Exchequer. The cases in which an ex-Service man or a man receiving compensation under one of the Workmen's Compensation Acts would be living in the same house as an old age pensioner must be comparatively rare. It would therefore not involve the Government in any heavy additional expenditure—much less heavy additional expenditure, of course, than the removal of the household means test—if they were to behave with rather more generosity in these cases. I am not expecting for a moment—my hopes do not rise so high—that the Government could 902 go the whole way. I suggest, however, that, as they made a concession in another place about the recent figure being ignored in cases of superannuation payment, they might also make a concession in this place on the amount that can be ignored out of war pensions and out of workmen's compensation payments. If war pensions were raised from, say, £1 to 30s., or compensation payments were raised by 50 to 75 per cent., that would go a very long way to meet the case, and would, I am perfectly certain, meet with a great deal of favourable comment in all Parties and in all parts of the country. I beg to move, and I very much hope that the Government may give at any rate part of what we are asking for.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 20, line 32, at end insert the said new paragraphs.—(The Earl of Listowel.)
§ 4.36 p.m.
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREI very greatly regret that I cannot accept the Amendment that the noble Earl opposite has put with such persuasiveness and moderation. I would put two considerations to your Lordships. The first is that this Bill is not designed to enable a harsh and overbearing bureaucracy to depress still further the standard of living of the aged poor. It is designed expressly to enable the Board to take a rather more generous line than the law has made possible in the past, and to relieve those grievances and that sense of hardship which have been felt by a certain section of the old age pensioners. The other consideration is that the operative word in this proposal is not "may" but "shall." I think that we should all take the view that we should like to see the man who is suffering from disablement as a result of service in the war, or of some industrial disaster which has overtaken him, rather better off than the general run of pensioners. He has his hardships to bear, he has in many cases special expenses, and I think we should all agree in wanting to see him receive rather special treatment. To that end it is provided that in assessing the need for a supplementary pension of people in these categories—wounded or disabled men—the Board not "may" but "shall" have it laid upon them as an absolute duty to ignore the first 20s. of a military pension and the first 15s. of a workmen's compensation grant.
903 The Amendment on the Paper—the noble Earl suggested a modification, but I am afraid I am not able to accept even that—would lay on the Assistance Board the duty of ignoring a very much larger sum, and might in some cases lead to almost absurd results. The maximum military pension is 40s. for a private and up to 60s. for certain non-commissioned officers. The Board are also bound by law to ignore the 10s. of the ordinary old age pension. That is the man's pension as of right; he has earned that by his contribution, and that again, in assessing his needs, the Board may not take into account. So, if this Amendment were to be accepted, you might have a position in which the Board would not be given discretion in certain cases of need but would be compelled to ignore altogether the fact that a man was in possession of an income of 70s. a week, and be compelled to grant him a supplementary pension on exactly the same scale as his neighbour next door who might have no means of any kind whatever. Your Lordships would agree that that is not a sensible proposition nor a proper use of public money.
The case of workmen's compensation payment is not quite so strong. For one thing, the maximum pension is less, but it also affects a very much more limited number of cases, because the very large majority of these workmen's compensation payments are commuted within a year or two of the injury. The number of old age pensioners in receipt of workmen's compensation payment is therefore relatively small. Even if the payment is at the maximum rate of 30s. a week the reduction of this to one half, or 15s. a week, leaves a margin of at the most 4s. over the additional amount allowed by the regulations, and I am advised that the lot of these people would not be materially improved by the Amendment. If real need exists, the Board have the power now. The same kind of consideration arises in the case of the charitable grants to which my noble friend Lord Balfour of Burleigh referred on the Second Reading, and into which I promised to go. I am advised that in practice the first few shillings of these charitable grants would in effect be ignored by the Board, but my right honourable friend is very unwilling to impose a statutory injunction on the Board to ignore these 904 various grants, because the cumulative effect might produce the kind of result to which I referred in the case of the disable non-commissioned officer who was already drawing an income of 70s. a week which the Board would be compelled to treat as though it did not exist at all.
There is one other consideration which I should put before your Lordships—namely, that this matter was discussed at length when the Unemployment Assistance Act, 1934, was under discussion. At that time the only amount of the ex-Service-men's disablement pension which was ignored was 4s. and this was, I think very reasonably, felt to be a grievance by the ex-Service-men. Representations were made, and their organisations asked that 16s. of the pension might be ignored. The Government decided to go rather further and to lay on the Board the statutory duty of ignoring the first 20s. and that has been, I think, very satisfactory to the ex-Service-men's organisations. It is noteworthy that no request of any kind and no movement has been made by the ex-Service-men's organisations for any increase of this figure of 20s. For those reasons, I feel bound to reject the Amendment and I hope that your Lordships will agree that to accept it as it stands would in many ways place the Board in a position which would not be a tolerable one.
§ THE EARL OF LISTOWELI draw some comfort from the refusal of the noble Duke to accept this Amendment, because of the evident concern for the welfare of the war pensioner and the victim of an industrial accident. I hope that his words will be very seriously considered by all those who have the task of administering this Bill when it passes into law. As the noble Duke pointed out, the Assistance Board can, if it wishes to do so, ignore a larger figure than the figure mentioned in the Bill. I think that the moving of this Amendment, if it makes the administration of the Bill a little more kindly, will not have been without some effect. I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ 4.44 p.m.
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREThe next Amendment in my name is purely a matter of drafting.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 21, line 34, column 2, leave out from ("as if") to ("for") in line 38.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREThe next Amendment is consequential.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 25, line 18, leave out from the beginning to the end of line 21.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREThe next Amendment is also consequential.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 25, line 31, leave out from ("person") to ("after") in line 34.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREThe next Amendment is also consequential.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 26, line 26, leave out from the beginning to the end of line 29.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE moved, in sub-paragraph (ii) of the proviso in paragraph (1), to leave out "otherwise than in money." The noble Duke said: This Amendment is the result of representations which have been made on behalf of certain local authorities in Scotland, where it is customary to give outdoor relief in cash. The effect will be to enable local authorities in Scotland to 906 give relief in cash in urgent cases and to obtain repayment of the expenditure so incurred. This Amendment is the result of the representations to which I have referred and also of a pledge which my right honourable friend gave in the Committee stage in another place. He has now been able to meet the views of honourable members who put the case on behalf of the Scottish authorities.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 26, line 31, leave out ("otherwise than in money").—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREThe next Amendment is consequential.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 26, line 39, leave out from ("person") to ("after") in line 42.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIREThe last Amendment is also consequential.
§ Amendment moved—
§ Page 27, line 7, leave out ("otherwise than in money").—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Second Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
§ House adjourned at thirteen minutes before five o'clock.