HL Deb 21 March 1972 vol 329 cc586-90

2.44 p.m.

LORD AVEBURY

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will seek to introduce legislation enabling the Supplementary Benefits Commission to pay the cost of abortions for women receiving supplementary benefit or family income supplement, or whose husbands are receiving supplementary benefit or family income supplement, where the criteria laid down by the Abortion Act 1967 are satisfied, but the operation is arranged privately by a charitable trust because no place is available in a hospital administered under the National Health Service.]

THE MINISTER OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SECURITY (LORD ABERDARE)

My Lords, the Government do not intend to introduce new legislation on abortion in advance of the Report of the Lane Committee.

LORD AVEBURY

My Lords, if the noble Lord will look at the Question carefully, he will see that I am not asking him to introduce new legislation on abortion; I am asking him to vary the rules laid down for operation by the Supplementary Benefits Commission. Is he aware that the Report of the Birmingham Pregnancy Advisory Service, which received a good deal of publicity when it appeared, alleged that there is a steady trickle of cases of women who are on supplementary benefit, or whose husbands are on supplementary benefit, and who have been refused an abortion in spite of the intervention of the B.P.A.S.? In these cases, if the woman goes forward to term she is entitled to free ante-natal treatment and free confinement, and in most cases the Supplementary Benefits Commission is responsible thereafter for the upkeep of the child. Is it not therefore quite stupid for the S.B.C. to refuse to pay any part of the cost falling on the woman or her family, including, in most cases, the cost of fares to take the woman to the clinic where the abortion is to be carried out?

LORD ABERDARE

My Lords, as the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, must know, the Supplementary Benefits Commission does not exist for this sort of purpose at all. But the point is that his Question relates to abortion, and the facts are that we know that there are shortcomings and difficulties in relation to the Abortion Act. These have been referred to the Committee under the chairmanship of Mrs. Justice Lane and we think it right to await the outcome of their deliberations.

LORD AVEBURY

My Lords, the noble Lord is quite wrong. The Supplementary Benefits Commission—

SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS

Order!

LORD AVEBURY

Is he aware that the Supplementary Benefits Commission exists for any purpose laid down by Parliament? What I am asking him to do is to widen the power of the Supplementary Benefits Commission. If he is not willing to do that, will he at least explain why some Supplementary Benefits Commission offices pay the cost of the fares for women to travel to the clinic for an abortion and others do not?

LORD CONESFORD

My Lords, why on earth does the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, say that he is not asking for legislation when his Question starts: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will seek to introduce legislation …"?

LORD ABERDARE

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend Lord Conesford. I answered the Question as I thought it was on the Order Paper: we do not intend to introduce new legislation. I admit that I said "on abortion", but equally we do not intend to introduce new legislation concerning the Supplementary Benefits Commission where it is related to abortion.

BARONESS SUMMERSKILL

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord, Lord Aberdare, whether he has read the Question carefully, because the women who are described in that Question cannot possibly wait for the Lane Commission to report? Is he aware that abortions have to be done within a certain limited period? Is he further aware that, far from our waiting for the Lane Commission to report, these women should be given the highest priority because their need is very great?

LORD ABERDARE

My Lords, a great many women are being given the highest priority. There were over 54,000 women who received abortions in National Health Service hospitals in 1971. But there are difficulties, and we know there are difficulties; and we know, as obviously the noble Baroness does, that there are varying reasons for those difficulties. It was because of this that we set up the Lane Committee and we think it right to await their recommendations.

BARONESS SUMMERSKILL

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the women mentioned in the Question cannot get into the National Health Service hospitals?

LORD ABERDARE

My Lords, a great many women do get into the National Health Service hospitals.

BARONESS SUMMERSKILL

Oh, really!

BARONESS SEROTA

My Lords, I wonder whether the noble Lord could clarify a point. Could he tell the House whether the Supplementary Benefits Commission at present has powers to meet the fares of the women concerned, in view of the fact that the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, says that some offices of the Commission do pay them and others do not? Secondly, could he say whether the Commission has discretion to pay the cost of abortions that are arranged by charitable trusts?

LORD ABERDARE

My Lords, there is no question of the Supplementary Benefits Commission paying the cost of an abortion. I am afraid I do not know the answer about the payment of fares; it was not in the original Question and I should like to go into it. If I may, I will write to the noble Lord and also communicate with the noble Baroness.

BARONESS WOOTTON OF AB1NGER

My Lords, can the Minister say whether it is the policy of the Government that women who are not well off and may be receiving supplementary benefit should have lower prospects of getting an abortion under the Abortion Act than those who are better off?

LORD ABERDARE

No, my Lords, certainly not. They have an equal opportunity within the National Health Service, which is what I am responsible for. I am sorry that the noble Baroness was not being as helpful as she was the last time we had this little debate when she suggested that family planning was really the answer to this problem.

LORD AVEBURY

My Lords, I agree that family planning is the answer. Will the noble Lord, Lord Aberdare, be good enough to study the Birmingham Pregnancy Service Advisory Service report carefully, and in particular look at the cases in Appendix B which shows that there is no definite rule laid down for the Supplementary Benefits Commission as to whether or not it should pay the fares? Even if he is not willing to introduce legislation, at least this matter ought to be sorted out.

LORD ABERDARE

My Lords, I will certainly go into the question of the payment of fares.

LORD SEGAL

My Lords, as the Lane Committee is not likely to report within at least nine months, is the noble Lord aware of the enormous amount of hardship which will arise in the meantime, and can nothing more be done to try to alleviate that hardship?

LORD ABERDARE

My Lords, we have an Abortion Act on the Statute Book, and we do our best within the means available in the National Health Service to meet the demand. I cannot go further than that.

BARONESS BROOKE OF YSTRADFELLTE

My Lords, would the noble Lord agree that, as a result of the enormous number of abortions that are taking place in National Health hospitals, a considerable number of women who need to go into those hospitals for other forms of surgery are being kept out?

LORD ABERDARE

My Lords, yes. I am grateful to my noble friend for pointing that out. There are many problems in connection with this Act. This, I repeat, is a reason why we set up the Committee.