§ 2.40 p.m.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the total of payments made under the Social Security Acts to alleged "dependants abroad" for the last convenient period.
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, records are not kept which would enable the figure which the noble Lord requests to be calculated. The general rules permit payment for a child who is abroad where it has already been in this country and is abroad only temporarily, and for a wife only where she can be regarded as residing with the claimant, which naturally involves evidence that she will rejoin her husband in the foreseeable future.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, is the Minister aware of the grave concern that there is in the country about the possible abuses of the distribution of these social security benefits, and is it not regrettable that there is no record kept of the amount that is paid, along right or wrong lines, to the overseas dependants of immigrants into this country? Because it must add to the large amount which is being continually remitted abroad out of earnings and other receipts of the non-white residents in this country.
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, I hope the noble Lord will not think I am unkind, but I think he has not taken into account the full implications of my Answer. Furthermore, there is a lot of talk about abuse. The Department has frequently asked for evidence of abuse. It is a very easy allegation to make, but we have no evidence of abuse whatsoever. I have made it perfectly clear that before a claimant can get benefit in respect of a child, that child must be in this country. If it has gone abroad for a temporary period, then the dependant's benefit is paid, but only on the basis that the child is away for a short period. The claim for a wife can be sustained only if the wife is living with the claimant, although if she goes abroad for a period and it is expected that she will return, then benefit is payable; but if she does not return, the benefit is not continued. If the noble Lord asks me how long it is before that happens, it is usually about six months, and if she does not return then the benefit is discontinued. There is really little abuse.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, would the Minister not agree that while the regulations may be interpreted with flexibility it is possible, within that area, for abuses to occur? Coming to the particular point that I have raised, from what the Minister has said, is it to be understood that amounts paid to dependants of immigrants here who are still abroad do not occur at all? If not, how does it come about? So many of the Asians have several wives and a great number of dependants and it must be difficult for the authorities correctly to interpret the applications for payments against the regulations that the noble Lord has said exist.
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, what I am saying is that if the wife is not resident in this country then the claimant cannot get benefit for her unless she is going to return to this country in the foreseeable future. I am not going to say that there are not instances here of a man claiming for his wife and she has not been in this country. What I am saying is that in that case he has to satisfy the authorities that she will be coming to this country within a comparatively short space of time. We have an 293 overseas department and I can give noble Lords the assurance that they check on this matter.
§ Lord MURRAY of GRAVESENDMy Lords, could my noble friend say whether the present witch hunt about abuses is out of proportion to the abuses that actually take place? Could he say whether in this specific case mentioned it would cost more for his Department to investigate any abuses than the amount that the abuse costs?
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, I made the point that there have been complaints from a number of places about abuses. We have asked for evidence of abuses and we have had no evidence at all. I am not going to say that there is no abuse at all; obviously, there is. But in respect of the Question put by the noble Lord, Lord Barnby, I am saying that the abuse is very little for the simple reason that we have a system of checking in relation to this particular matter.
§ Baroness SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, is it not a fact that we pay benefit for only one dependant wife in the case of a polygamous marriage?
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, this is perfectly true; but, even then, she must either be in this country or we have to be satisfied that she will be coming to this country or returning to it within a comparatively short space of time.
§ Baroness ELLESMy Lords, will the noble Lord confirm that any wife, even of a polygamous marriage, would be entitled to supplementary benefit—she would get the benefit of the doubt—and that she would not be allowed to go without any benefit at all?
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, the noble Baroness has now passed out of the sphere of contributory benefits into the general field of social security benefits, but supplementary benefit is not paid to anyone other than those within the family at that particular time. It cannot be paid to absent wives or children.
Lord HAWKEMy Lords, does the noble Lord's reply apply to the wives of dependants in the Republic of Ireland?
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLYes, my Lords, it does—to Ireland and Italy, in particular. But, again, it applies only if the dependant is away for a short period.