DETERMINATION OF NEEDS BILL. (Hansard, 25 March 1941)

LORD FARINGDON
I apologise for detaining your Lordships, but there is a point in connection with this clause on which I would like to receive information from His Majesty's Government. The question is, what will be the position of the totally disabled soldiers' pensions, soldiers' widows' pensions, soldiers' orphans' pensions, workmen's compensation and health insurance. At present 7s. 6d. of health insurance and half of workmen's compensation is taken in with 872 the household income, and the totally disabled soldier is allowed £1 out of his pension, the rest being taken in with the household income. A soldier's widow and his orphans have, in fact, no part of their pension protected by law at present. I believe that in practice this is not enforced with full rigour, but I think your Lordships will agree that the position is not entirely satisfactory and no doubt those concerned would desire to have some legal assurance as to their position. Your Lordships will remember that after the last war and up to the present time great bitterness has been felt about the treatment of disabled men and of widows and orphans. This matter was, I believe, raised in another place and the spokesman there, I understand, promised to consider it. I hope that the Government may be able to tell us now what is their decision.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
I will gladly do my best to answer the noble Lord's question, but it is a little difficult to imagine that I could give the decision of the Government on a matter which has never, so far as I know, been brought to my attention until the noble Lord rose just now. If he will look at the Bill, he will see that it is described as a measure to abolish the requirement that in determining the need and assessing the needs of applicants for unemployment assistance or supplementary pensions the resources of all the members of their households must be taken into account, to make further provision for the determination of need and the assessment of needs in the case of such applicants. That is the purpose of the Bill. Whatever we might do here, I feel confident that in another place it would be ruled that what went outside that purpose was not legitimately within this Bill. The noble Lord will perhaps recall, if he was present, that on the Second Reading I explained in some detail what were the arrangements being made in respect of these two matters. One has to do with unemployment assistance; that is to say, the claim of the citizen to be helped because he is out of work after he has exhausted his unemployment benefit. The other has to do with the claim to receive a supplementary old age pension such as was provided by the Bill recently passed by Parliament. These are the only purposes of this Bill and I could not, I think, encourage the view that the Bill could go outside that.
873 As regards the point made by the noble Lord, I realise its importance, only we must have regard to what the Bill is about. He says that since the last war there has been much feeling and bitterness because of what was thought to be the inadequacy of some of these provisions. An enormous change for the better has been made in that respect, as will be seen if you consider the provisions made in respect of the present war. Whether there should be further arrangements in respect of some of the matters indicated, really is not a matter which I can treat as being concerned with this Bill with its specific purpose.

§ LORD ADDISON
Your Lordships will remember that it was at my suggestion that the Lord Chancellor announced the agreement arrived at, the agreement whereby the total household income should not be called upon to make contribution unless it exceeded £6 a week. That, I take it, would include these receipts, and unless in the aggregate they brought it above that figure, they would be automatically exempt, and to that extent it docs relieve the situation which is presented by my noble friend.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
I am much obliged to my noble friend for having given me that reminder. If the noble Lord will be good enough to look at the White Paper published with the Bill he will see very much broader and more generous provisions which would affect the sort of cases he mentioned. I did, I think, add here in the House two further concessions which it was intended to make and which would carry this subject matter still further in the right direction. I thought he was referring to some specific case for particular benefit and that I could not provide in this Bill.