SOCIAL SECURITY (CONTRIBUTIONS) (MARRIED WOMEN AND WIDOWS SPECIAL PROVISION) REGULATIONS 1973

HL Deb 26 July 1973 vol 344 cc1998-2001

2.14 p.m.

THE MINISTER or STATE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SECURITY (LORD ABERDARE) rose to move, That the Draft Social Security (Contributions) (Married Women and Widows Special Provision) Regulations 1973, laid before the House on July 19, be approved. The noble Lord said: My Lords, in the debates on the Social Security Act 1973 we had opportunity to discuss the so-called married women's option—the right of a married woman or a widow to choose not to pay the full contribution to the basic scheme and thereby forgoing some of the benefit. We expressed the view from this side of the House that this was a useful option for married women and widows and we believe that it should be retained. I know very well that the noble Baroness, Lady Phillips, and a number of your Lordships do not agree with this view. However, the option is now incorporated in Section 42 of the Act and this is not the occasion for us to debate it further. These regulations are necessary as a first step in the implementation of Section 42 of the Act. They need to be made now in order to give sufficient time to employers to plan for the changeover in April, 1975, to the new social security system.

In general the Regulations are similar to those that exist at present, and perhaps all I need do is to draw your Lordships' attention to three main points of difference in principle. First of all, the option will apply to a minimum period of a year, not a week as at present; secondly, liability as an employed earner will apply equally to liability as a self-employed earner; and, thirdly, self-employed married women were not liable under the National Insurance Act unless they opted in, but under the Social Security Act they are liable unless they opt out. I know that the noble Baroness takes particular interest in the welfare of widows, and we have tried in these Regulations to make the best possible arrangements for them. They will have six months after their husband's death during which they will have the choice whether to pay full contributions and enjoy full benefits, or to exercise their option and pay a reduced contribution which covers industrial injuries and a small amount towards the cost of the National Health Service.

My Lords, there is one other point that I should like to make finally, to put on record that there is a small misprint which has been corrected in the draft Regulations. This is the reference in Regulation 2(1)(b) to "the requirements of paragraph (4) below". This should read, "the requirements of paragraph (5) below", because it is paragraph (5) that lists the requirements for a qualifying widow. My Lords, this Amendment has been made in the draft Regulations but I should like just to draw attention to it. I beg to move.

2.18 p.m.

BARONESS PHILLIPS

My Lords, I should like to thank the Minister for his brief and clear explanation. As he rightly said, this is not the moment to debate the merits and demerits of this matter, as we did so very thoroughly earlier. He referred to a misprint which I had not noticed—it could have been worse. I had a misprint this morning in a statement of a very high-ranking personage which was intended to read, "We must safeguard our rights" and this came out in my typed copy as, "We must safeguard our tights"—so I feel that some misprints can be much worse than this one. In the principal Act we had a list of definitions in the interpretation section but I notice that we did not have "regulations" defined. We now have it here: 'regulation, means a regulation of these regulations… I think I award that one the prize of the week.

There is just one small point that I should like to raise. Will these Regulations have to be prepared every year? As I read the Act it does not seem to me to be necessary. There is a second point, on Regulation 10. Article (2) refers to women whose marriages have ended other than by the death of the husband—which I assume to refer to divorced women, who therefore would not have the option. I am wondering how long they will be given, because a divorce goes through two periods. I hope that the option of six months will also apply to them as I can imagine that it would be very difficult for a woman if she was divorced and was then immediately confronted with the possibility, if she was working, of having to pay the full contribution. If the Minister cannot reply immediately I shall naturally be happy to have a reply in writing.

LORD ABERDARE

My Lords, I am most grateful to the noble Baroness. As always, I enjoyed her speech, especially the misprint to which she drew attention. The little curiosity in Regulation 1: 'regulation' means a regulation of these regulations", is in fact an attempt to simplify the rest of the regulations. For example Regulation 3 reads: Subject to the provisions of paragraph (2) below, every election made in accordance with regulation 2 shall continue as an election…". If we did not have that little piece in the front, every time we mentioned a regulation we should have to say "regulation 2 of these regulations". It is merely a method of trying to shorten the main body of the Regulations.

In answer to the noble Baroness's inquiry about annual regulations, the answer is: No; these regulations will stand. But we are, as I said in my opening speech, moving them now so that employers may get on with the necessary work. The Regulations are very complex. I shall be bringing forward further Regulations about married women and widows in the autumn, particularly on the transitional aspects of the matter, and we can then make any modifications that are necessary. On the noble Baroness's third point, regarding divorced women, it is my understanding that this six-month waiting period does not apply. But I should be grateful if I might look into that in more detail and write to the noble Baroness. I wish her a happy holiday.

On Question, Motion agreed to.