§ 4.4 p.m.
§ The Minister of State, Department of Education and Science (Baroness Young)My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat a Statement which is being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Social Services. The Statement reads as follows:
"I will, with permission, Mr. Speaker, make a Statement about the increases in social security benefits. The necessary up-rating order will come into operation on 23rd November next. This and the other up-rating instruments will be laid after the Social Security Bill becomes law.
"The standard rate of basic retirement pension for a single person will go up by £2.45 a week from £27.15 to £29.60. The rate for a married couple will go up by £3.90 from £43.45 to £47.35. Other long-term benefits which will be similarly increased include widows' pensions, industrial disablement 299 pensions, non-contributory invalidity pension, and attendance allowance.
"The standard rate of sickness benefit and unemployment benefit will go up by £1.85 for a single person from £20.65 to £22.50, and by £3.00 from £33.40 to £36.40 for a married couple. The increases in invalidity pension will be somewhat higher—for a single person the increase will be £2.35 taking the pension from £26.00 to £28.35, and for a married couple the increase will be £3.75 a week, increasing the invalidity pension from £41.60 to £45.35 a week.
"In calculating the new rates of benefit, account has been taken both of the 1 per cent. adjustment provided for by the Social Security Bill, to which the House gave a Second Reading on 24th February, and of the forecast, given by my right honourable and learned friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer yesterday, of a 10 per cent. increase in the retail price index between November 1980 and November 1981. As I said on the Second Reading of the Bill, I would have wished that we did not have to make this adjustment, but, given the very tight constraints on public spending, which the Chancellor emphasised yesterday, we simply cannot afford the extra £225 million in a full year which the uprating of benefits would otherwise have cost.
"Supplementary benefits will all be increased next November on the same basis as national insurance benefits. War pensions will go up similarly and a Christmas bonus of £10 will be paid on the same basis as last year.
"For public service pensions, earnings-related components in national insurance pensions, and the pensions payable under the old graduated scheme, where there are no standard rates, the same principle of the 1 per cent. adjustment will apply. This will increase existing rates by 9.06 per cent. The same increase will apply to those who receive guaranteed minimum pensions from contracted-out occupational pension schemes.
"Last July I told the House that subject to economic and other circumstances we would maintain the value of child benefit in line with prices. As announced yesterday by the Chancellor, child benefit will be increased by 50p to £5.25 a week for each child—a 10½ per cent. rise—a little more than the expected rise in prices. One-parent benefit—the premium paid to lone parents—will go up from £3.00 to £3.30 a week. Thus, a one-parent family with two children will get £13.80 a week, compared with £12.50 at present.
"The prescribed levels of income for family income supplement will go up by £7.00 to £74.00 weekly for one-child families and the additional amount for each further child will be raised to £8.00 a week.
"I am glad to be able to announce, in the international Year of Disabled People, a substantial increase in mobility allowance from £14.50 a week to £16.50. This is an increase of nearly 14 per cent. and marks the importance which we attach to this allowance. We are particularly anxious to continue to make it possible for as many disabled people as can to lease or buy cars from Motability, and this 300 increase will help to ensure the continuing success of that scheme. The VAT relief on adaptations to cars for the disabled and the other VAT concessions announced yesterday will also be welcomed by disabled people.
"Turning to invalidity benefit, the Chancellor made it clear yesterday that it will not be possible to bring this benefit into tax next year, but I am anxious to make a start towards the restoration of the value of this benefit in advance of taxation. I therefore propose to restore the value of the invalidity allowances this November. These are the sums paid on top of the invalidity pension and depend on the claimant's age when incapacity begins. The cost of restoring these allowances and of the increase in real terms of the mobility allowance, will be met from the contingency reserve. Our pledge to restore the value of the invalidity pension itself when it comes into taxation now stands unqualified.
"Rising fuel costs are causing increasing anxiety among needy people, and the Government have every sympathy with the difficulties which they face. Last November we introduced the most generous fuel assistance package ever. We raised annual spending on fuel aid to over £200 million, concentrated on giving substantial help to those in the greatest need. This year, we aim to protect the value of that advance. Supplementary benefit heating additions, therefore, including the special boost we gave them last year, will be increased in line with the expected rise in fuel prices between November 1980 and November 1981.
"The basic rates of heating addition and the central heating addition will go up from £1.40 a week to £1.65 (that is, to £85.80 a year). Around 1½ million people will benefit from this increase, including all supplementary pensioner householders over the age of 70, and supplementary benefit householders with children under five. The higher rate heating addition will rise from £3.40 to £4.05, or £210.60 a year. Over 400,000 people are getting this increase, and they include the most severely disabled, who get it automatically. These increases in heating additions will cost an extra £40 million in a full year, which means that our total spending on fuel assistance will rise to over £250 million and will benefit over 2¼ million people.
"The cost of this up-rating will be about £2 billion in a full year. About £1½ billion will fall on the National Insurance Fund, and the balance comes out of the Consolidated Fund. I shall be reviewing contribution rates as usual in the autumn and any necessary changes will take effect from April 1982. For the convenience of the House, I am circulating details of the new rates of benefits in the Official Report, and copies are available in the Vote Office.
"This package of measures will bring help to the least privileged members of the community. The increase in pensions maintains our commitment to protect the real value of the pension over the lifetime of this Parliament. The increases in child benefit and the premium for one-parent families fulfil the undertaking to maintain the value of child benefit which I gave to the House in July last year. These increases and that in family income supplement are an indication of the importance we attach to 301 family support. The increase in mobility allowance and invalidity allowances for the disabled and the heating additions for the needy demonstrate our concern for these hard-pressed groups. Of course all of us, on both sides of the House, wish we could do more. But we have to take account of what we can afford. I hope the House will agree that the measures proposed are evidence of our determination to protect the most vulnerable in these very difficult times."
My Lords, that concludes the Statement.
§ Following are the details of new rates referred to above:
§
INCREASED BENEFIT RATES
(The Social Security Act 1975, as amended, is referred to as "the Act"; the Social Security Pensions Act 1975, as amended, is referred to as "the Pensions Act")
| PART 1 BENEFITS PAYABLE FROM NATIONAL INSURANCE FUND (see also Parts 3 and 4) | ||||
| Existing weekly rate £ | Proposed weekly rate £ | |||
| Basic component of Category A retirement pension* (section 6(1)(a) of the Pensions Act), Category B retirement pension* (section 7 of the Pensions Act), widowed mother's allowance and widow's pension | 27.15 | 29.60 | ||
| Category B retirement pension* (section 29(7)(a)(i) of the Act | … | … | 16.30 | 17.75 |
| Basic component of invalidity pension | … | 26.00 | 28.35 | |
| Standard rate of unemployment and sickness benefit: | ||||
| Beneficiary under pension age | … | … | 20.65 | 22.50 |
| Beneficiary over pension age | … | … | 26.00 | 28.35 |
| Invalidity allowance: | ||||
| Higher rate | … | … | 5.70 | 6.20 |
| 5.45 | ||||
| Middle rate | … | … | 3.60 | 4.00 |
| 3.45 | ||||
| Lower rate | … | … | 1.80 | 2.00 |
| 1.75 | ||||
| Maternity allowance | … | … | 20.65 | 22.50 |
| Widow's allowance | … | … | 38.00 | 41.40 |
| Child's special allowance | … | … | 7.50 | 7.70 |
| Guardian's allowance | … | … | 7.50 | 7.70 |
§ The weekly rate of graduated retirement benefit payable for each unit of graduated contributions will be increased by 9.06 per cent. from 3.54 pence to 3.86 pence.
§ * An age addition of 25p is payable to retirement pensions who are aged 80 or over.
§ The following sums will be increased by 9.06 per cent.:
- (a) additional components in the rates of long-term benefits calculated by reference to any final relevant year earlier than the tax year 1981–1982.
- (b) increases of retirement pensions for deferred retirement under Schedule 1 to the Pensions Act.
- (c) increases of graduated retirement benefit for deferred retirement under Schedule 2 to the Social Security (Graduated Retirement Benefit) (No. 2) Regulations 1978.
- (d) increments in guaranteed minimum pensions under Section 126A of the Act.
| PART 2 BENEFITS PAYABLE FROM CONSOLIDATED FUND (BUT SEE ALSO PARTS 5 TO 8) | |||
| Existing weekly rate £ | Proposed weekly rate £ | ||
| Attendance allowance | |||
| Higher rate | 21.65 | 23.65 | |
| Lower rate | 14.45 | 15.75 | |
| Non-contributory invalidity pension | 16.30 | 17.75 | |
| Invalid care allowance | 16.30 | 17.75 |
| Existing weekly rate £ | Proposed weekly rate £ | ||
| Mobility allowance | 14.50 | 16.50 | |
| Category C or D retirement pension* | |||
| Higher rate | … | 16.30 | 17.75 |
| Lower rate | … | 9.80 | 10.65 |
| *An age addition of 25p is payable to retirement pensioners who are aged 80 or over. |
| PART 3 INCREASES FOR DEPENDANTS Increase for a wife or other adult dependant of:— | ||
| Category A or B retirement pension | 16.30 | 17.75 |
| Invalidity pension | 15.60 | 17.00 |
| Unemployment benefit and sickness benefit (where beneficiary is over pensionable age) | 15.60 | 17.00 |
| Unemployment benefit and sickness benefit (where beneficiary is under pensionable age) and maternity allowance | 12.75 | 13.90 |
| Non-contributory invalidity pension, invalid care allowance and Category C retirement pension | 9.80 | 10.65 |
| Increase for a qualifying child of: | ||
| Widow's allowance, widowed mother's allowance, invalidity, non-contributory invalidity and retirement pensions, invalid care allowance, unemployment and sickness benefit (where beneficiary is over pensionable age) and child's special allowance | 7.50 | 7.70 |
| Unemployment benefit and sickness benefit (where beneficiary is under pensionable age) and maternity allowance | 1.25 | 0.80 |
| PART 4 INDUSTRIAL INJURIES BENEFIT | ||
| Existing weekly rate £ | Proposed weekly rate £ | |
| Injury benefit: | ||
| (a) beneficiary 18 or over or entitled to increase for child or adult dependant | 23.40 | 25.25 |
| (b) beneficiary under 18 and not entitled to such an increase | 20.65 | 22.50 |
| Disablement pension: | ||
| (a) beneficiary 18 or over or entitled to increase for child or adult dependant | ||
| Degree of disablement per cent. | ||
| 100 | 44.30 | 48.30 |
| 90 | 39.90 | 43.47 |
| 80 | 35.40 | 38.64 |
| 70 | 31.00 | 33.81 |
| 60 | 26.60 | 28.98 |
| 50 | 22.20 | 24.15 |
| 40 | 17.70 | 19.32 |
| 30 | 13.30 | 14.49 |
| 20 | 8.90 | 9.66 |
| b) beneficiary under 18 and not entitled to such an increase: | ||
| Degree of disablement per cent. | ||
| 100 | 27.15 | 29.60 |
| 90 | 24.44 | 26.64 |
| 80 | 21.72 | 23.68 |
| 70 | 19.01 | 20.72 |
| 60 | 16.29 | 17.76 |
| 50 | 13.58 | 14.80 |
| 40 | 10.86 | 11.84 |
| 30 | 8.15 | 8.88 |
| 20 | 5.43 | 5.92 |
§ Maximum disablement gratuity will be increased from £2,950 to £3,210.
303| Existing weekly rate £ | Proposed weekly rate £ | |
| Unemployability supplement | 26.00 | 28.35 |
| Increase of unemployability supplement for early onset of incapacity for work: | ||
| (a) if on the qualifying date the beneficiary was under the age of 35, or if that date fell before 5th July 1948 | 5.45 | 6.20 |
| (aa) if (a) does not apply and on the qualifying date the beneficiary was under the age of 40 and he had not attained pensionable age before 6th April 1979 | 5.45 | 6.20 |
| (b) if (a) and (aa) do not apply and on the qualifying date the beneficiary was under the age of 45 | 3.45 | 4.00 |
| (bb) if (a), (aa) and (b) do not apply and on the qualifying date the beneficiary was under the age of 50 and had not attained pensionable age before 6th April 1979 | 3.45 | 4.00 |
| (c) in any other case | 1.75 | 2.00 |
| Maximum increase of disablement pension in cases of special hardship | 17.70 | 19.32* |
| Maximum increase of disablement pension where constant attendance needed: | ||
| (a) except in cases of exceptionally severe disablement | 17.70 | 19.40 |
| (b) in any case | 35.40 | 38.80 |
| Increase of weekly rate of disablement pension for exceptionally severe disablement | 17.70 | 19.40 |
| Increase of injury benefit for dependent children | 1.25 | 0.80 |
| Increase of disablement pension with unemployability supplement for dependent children | 7.50 | 7.70 |
| *or the amount (if any) by which the weekly rate of the pension, apart from any increase under sections 61, 63, 64 or 66 of the Act falls short of £48.30, whichever is the less. | ||
| Increase of injury benefit for adult dependant | 12.75 | 13.90 |
| Increase of disablement pension with unemployability supplement for adult dependant | 15.60 | 17.00 |
| Widow's pension— | ||
| (a) initial rate | 38.00 | 41.40 |
| (b) higher permanent rate | 27.70 | 30.15 |
| (c) lower permanent rate | 8.15 | 8.88 |
| Widower's pension | 27.70 | 30.15 |
| Allowance under Section 70 of the Act in respect of each qualifying child— | ||
| (a) higher rate | 7.50 | 7.70 |
| (b) lower rate | 1.25 | 0.80 |
| under Section 91(1) of the Act Maximum/aggregate of weekly benefit payable for successive accidents— | ||
| (a) beneficiary 18 or over or entitled to an increase in respect of a child or adult dependant | 44.30 | 48.30 |
| (b) beneficiary under 18 and not entitled to such an increase | 27.15 | 29.60 |
| Maximum weekly rate of lesser incapacity allowance supplementing workmen's compensation (Section 2(6)(c) of the Industrial Injuries and Diseases (Old Cases) Act 1975) | 16.30 | 17.75 |
| Weekly rate of allowance payable where disablement is not total (Section 7(2)(b) of the Industrial Injuries and Diseases (Old Cases) Act 1975) | 16.30 | 17.75 |
| PART 5 MAIN INCREASED SUPPLEMENTARY BENEFIT RATES | |||||
| Existing ordinary weekly rate £ | Existing long-term weekly rate £ | Proposed ordinary weekly rate £ | Proposed long-term weekly rate £ | ||
| Supplementary benefit: | |||||
| Husband and wife | … | 34.60 | 43.45 | 37.75 | 47.35 |
| Person living alone | … | 21.30 | 27.15 | 23.25 | 29.60 |
| Non-householder—age 18 and over | … | 17.05 | 21.70 | 18.60 | 23.65 |
| age 16–17 | … | 13.10 | 16.65 | 14.30 | 18.15 |
| Existing weekly rate £ | Proposed weekly rate £ | |
| Any other person aged: | ||
| 11–15 years | 10.90 | 11.90 |
| under 11 years | 7.30 | 7.90 |
| Non-householder housing addition | 2.15 | *to be announced |
| Heating additions to supplementary benefit | 1.40 | 1.65 |
| 3.40 | 4.05 | |
| Dietary additions to supplementary benefit | 1.20 | *to be announced |
| 2.80 | ||
| 8.00 | ||
| Blindness addition to supplementary benefit | 1.25 | 1.25 |
| Addition for claimant, or dependant over age 80 | 25p | 25p |
| * After the February index of retail prices becomes available. |
| PART 6 MAIN INCREASED WAR PENSION RATES | ||
| All ranks receive the same increases, officers' rates being expressed in pounds per annum. | ||
| Existing weekly rate £ | Proposed weekly rate £ | |
| Disablement benefits | ||
| Disablement pension for Private at 100 per cent. rate | 44.30 | 48.30 |
| Unemployability allowances | ||
| Personal allowance | 28.80 | 31.40 |
| Increase for wife or other adult dependant | 16.30 | 17.75 |
| Increase for child | 7.50 | 7.70 |
| Comforts allowance | ||
| Higher rate | 7.70 | 8.40 |
| Lower rate | 3.85 | 4.20 |
| Allowance for lower standard of occupation (maximum) | 17.70 | 19.32 |
| Constant attendance allowance | ||
| Special maximum | 35.40 | 38.80 |
| Special intermediate | 26.55 | 29.10 |
| Normal maximum | 17.70 | 19.40 |
| Half and quarter day | 8.85 | 9.70 |
| Age allowance with assessments of: | ||
| 40 and 50 per cent. | 3.10 | 3.35 |
| Over 50 and not exceeding 70 per cent. | 4.80 | 5.25 |
| Over 70 and not exceeding 90 per cent. | 6.85 | 7.50 |
| Over 90 per cent. | 9.60 | 10.50 |
| Exceptionally severe disablement allowance | 17.70 | 19.40 |
| Severe disablement occupational allowance | 8.85 | 9.70 |
| Existing annual rate £ | Proposed annual rate £ | |||
| Clothing allowance | ||||
| Higher rate | … | … | 59.00 | 65.00 |
| Lower rate | … | … | 37.00 | 41.00 |
| PART 7 FAMILY INCOME SUPPLEMENT | ||||||
| Existing weekly level £ | Proposed weekly level £ | |||||
| Family Income Supplement: | ||||||
| Prescribed amount for family with one child (gross income below which FIS is payable) | … | … | … | … | 67.00 | 74.00 |
| Increase in prescribed amount for each additional child | … | … | … | … | 7.00 | 8.00 |
| Maximum weekly amount for a one-child family | … | … | … | … | 17.00 | 18.50 |
| Increase in maximum amount for each additional child | … | … | … | … | 1.50 | 1.50 |
| PART 8 CHILD BENEFIT | ||
| Existing weekly rate £ | Proposed weekly rate £ | |
| Child benefit: | ||
| each child | 4.75 | 5.25 |
| Child benefit increase (one parent benefit): | ||
| first or only child of certain lone persons | 3.00 | 3.30 |
§ 4.12 p.m.
§ Lord Wells-PestellMy Lords, I am sure the whole House would wish me to express its gratitude to the noble Baroness the Minister for allowing us to hear the Statement made by her right honourable friend in another place. The Statement makes it difficult, by the way it is worded, to ask the Minister any questions, but it lends itself to a great deal of comment. I will bear in mind what is required of a speaker in this situation and will try to rely, if I can, upon questions, and not too many statements.
Perhaps I may be permitted to say that on this side of the House we are glad that the pension is to be paid this year after 52 weeks and not, as last year, after 54 weeks, when the Government did the pensioners out of two weeks' pension. What we hoped was that the Government would have a change of conscience in this matter and would have brought in the increase in pensions on the 16th November next rather than on the 23rd, but I know that whatever question I put to the noble Baroness the answer will be (and I understand her position) that of course we cannot afford it.
I want to draw attention to what was said by the noble Baroness the Minister in the third paragraph, when she said that the standard rate of unemployment benefit for a married couple will go up from £33.40 to £36.40 per week. I ask noble Lords opposite whether they feel that unemployment benefit for a married couple is at all realistic at £36.40 per week. I know I shall be told the couple can apply for supplementary benefit, but unemployment benefit by virtue of national insurance should meet the needs of a 306 couple where the breadwinner is unemployed rather than that they should have to go (I was going to say cap in hand) for supplementary benefit. We feel that this is a very regrettable situation.
I want to refer, if I may, to the increase in child benefit of 50p a week. I think it ought to be remembered by noble Lords on all sides that we need to be realistic about this, and that we must relate what we say to the realistic situation. The Government were in office from May 1979 until November 1980—a period of 18 months—without increasing child benefit, although one of their election promises was that they would in fact do so much earlier. The increase which is to be given in November next of 50p a week will barely compensate for the increase due to inflation over the past year. I do not think anybody will deny that; and if child benefit is to be realistic it should have been a 95p increase in order to cover the 50p which was needed because of inflation last year and the extra 45p needed to cover inflation at the present moment.
Perhaps I may turn now to the family income supplement. I do so because I understand it is the Government's intention not to increase the tax threshold by the inflation rate, which they are obliged to do, if I have understood the position correctly, under the Finance Act 1977. It is obligatory on any Government to increase the threshold of taxation in line with the inflation every year, and this Government are refusing to carry out what is in the Finance Act 1977.
I realise that a Government are entitled to come to Parliament and, by order, if they can get the order through, be relieved of that responsibility. But it seems to me quite disgraceful that, having put this into the Finance Act after very careful discussion, the Government have decided that for this year, at least—these precedents are always bad—it will not be done. I raise the matter because at the present moment there are 80,000 families in receipt of family income supplement. Three-quarters of them pay income tax, and if the income tax threshold had gone up those people would in fact have been perfectly all right. I want to ask the Minister: now that the Government are not going to implement that particular provision of the Finance Act 1977, how many of the 80,000 will have to apply for supplementary benefit?
We on this side of the House are naturally glad, as I think all noble Lords will be, that there is going to be an increase in the mobility allowance, but, if I may quote from the Statement, it says:
We are particularly anxious to continue to make it possible for as many disabled people as can to lease or buy cars from Motability, and this increase will help to ensure the continuing success of that scheme".When your Lordships consider that the mobility allowance is going up by £2 a week and that petrol is going up by 20p per gallon, it cannot possibly be any incentive to people to buy cars; and those who have them will find it extremely difficult, in our submission, to go on running those cars.I want to refer to fuel prices and to ask the Minister whether what has been done is at all realistic. The noble Baroness the Minister talked about the increase in gas and electricity prices. We realise that these are going up very substantially. But does the Minister know how many people on retirement pension—there are over 10 million of them—rely almost exclusively 307 on coal? Many of them are living alone in one room where they cannot store coal and they have to buy it in bags. If they live in a smokeless zone, they have to pay £1.35 for a 22lb. bag of smokeless fuel which means that they are paying something like £135 a ton. If they are not in a smokeless zone, they can buy 44lb. of ordinary coal at £1.83 per bag which means that they are paying something like £90 a ton for coal. I realise that there has to be a limit, but we in this House ought to try to see the background of so many of these people, and the Government's clawback of 1 per cent. for the so-called over-payment of last year is to be deplored.
The right honourable friend of the noble Baroness the Minister said in the Statement:
This package of measures will bring help to the least privileged members of the community".I do not deny that it will bring some help, but it is quite inadequate to meet the situation of a large number of people. It is the old story of the Government making the worst-off people in the community pay for their political mistakes and their policy failures. While we are glad to see these increases, we have very grave reservations as to whether more ought to have been given.
§ 4.22 p.m.
§ Lord BanksMy Lords, I should like to join in thanking the noble Baroness, Lady Young, for repeating the Statement made in another place. I should like to welcome the increase in the mobility allowance to which she referred. It is entirely appropriate that there should be a real increase in that in the International Year of Disabled People. But I have three brief points of criticism of the general statement which has been made.
The first is a criticism of the 1 per cent. reduction in the 10 per cent. which is necessary in the current year to offset inflation. In the Statement, the Government say that we simply cannot afford this 1 per cent. But I would ask the noble Baroness whether it is a fact that, so far as national insurance benefits are concerned, the provision of the 1 per cent. would not have caused a deficit in the National Insurance Fund. Secondly, so far as child benefit is concerned, we join in welcoming the increase of 50p, but regret that it is not the 95p which would have been required to restore the position to what is was in April 1979.
My third point of criticism is of the failure, to which the noble Lord, Lord Wells-Pestell, has already referred, to index income tax allowances. That surely must lead to a greater intermingling of tax and benefit, and would the noble Baroness not agree that that must considerably accentuate the poverty trap? So far as invalidity benefit is concerned, I am glad to know that the pledge to restore the value of that is now unqualified. What is the position with regard to the other benefits which suffered the 5 per cent. reduction? Do the Government now feel that they can make a qualified pledge in respect of them?
I have two brief final questions. What is the position about the earnings rule, which the Government are pledged to remove in the lifetime of this Parliament? Are any steps to be taken in that direction?—a direction which the noble Baroness has herself 308 very eloquently advocated in the past. Finally, with regard to heating, while one must welcome the increase in the amount, is it not a fact that the scope of the heating arrangement will not be extended, and what does the noble Baroness feel about the position of people who are just above the supplementary benefit level and who are very much affected by high fuel prices?
§ 4.25 p.m.
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I was very glad to hear the welcome which the noble Lord, Lord Wells-Pestell, gave to the fact that the pension increase is to be paid after exactly 52 weeks. But I really cannot accept that we are not helping the poorest members of the community. Indeed, we have laid particular emphasis on helping those who are least well-off. If the noble Lord studies the Statement, I think he will see that the selective use of the money that we have available has been used to this effect.
He asked me, first, about unemployment benefit and the difficulties which an unemployed married couple would face with £36.40 a week. We all accept that it is very difficult when one is unemployed. But the noble Lord will, I think, accept that it is possible for unemployed people to have supplementary benefit and a number of other benefits which are given for people with low incomes, such as rent rebates and rate rebates. Although people may not like to apply for them they are, after all, part and parcel of what is available to poor people and I hope that those who are entitled to them will take them up.
Both the noble Lord, Lord Wells-Pestell, and the noble Lord, Lord Banks, raised points about child benefit and it is very valuable that we have been able to increase this by 10½ per cent. from next November and have in this Budget helped families with children. I have heard both the noble Lord, Lord Banks, and the noble Lord, Lord Wells-Pestell, make the point which I have made myself; that over a long period of time taxation generally has tended to help single people and couples without children more than families with children. In this Budget, at any rate, families with children are being helped and it would be churlish to complain now that the help is not as great as we should wish. Of course, we should all like more but they are being singled out for help and it is right that they should be.
The noble Lord, Lord Wells-Pestell, said it was quite wrong that what is known in common parlance as the Rooker-Wise amendment should not be agreed to, but I understand that the Act under which this amendment has been used in the past makes it quite clear that it comes into effect only when Parliament so determines. So, of course, it is right that Parliament should have an opportunity to consider this again.
Both noble Lords raised the question of Motability and, again, we have used what money is available to assist those who require help in the International Year of Disabled People. I am sure that the £2 a week increase in the allowance will be very valuable. Both noble Lords also raised the question of fuel prices. My understanding is that it is anticipated that fuel prices will rise by about 18 per cent. between November 1980 and November 1981. Again, we have used the money that is available to help those 309 who are most in need. I am afraid that I do not have the answer to the question which the noble Lord, Lord Wells-Pestell, put to me, about those who use only coal. But if I can get the figures for him, I shall write to him on that point.
The noble Lord, Lord Banks, raised the question of the 1 per cent. reduction in pensions. As he knows, we have kept to our commitment that retirement pensions will keep up with prices over the lifetime of this Parliament, and the Social Security Bill, which is currently in another place, takes account of the 1 per cent. reduction which is necessary to put right the fact that last November the 16½ per cent. increase was 1 per cent. over the rate of inflation. I think he is raising a completely different issue when he asks whether payment of the 1 per cent. would have caused a deficit in the National Insurance Fund. The point about increases in pensions is that they should keep up with prices. The effect on the National Insurance Fund is a separate matter.
Turning to the 5 per cent. de-indexing of certain benefits which was the subject of a Bill in this House last year, as the Statement makes clear we are already taking steps to increase the invalidity allowances which are paid to invalidity pensioners, who are the worst off. This is supplementary help. By increasing those invalidity allowances and making an unqualified statement that we shall restore the value of invalidity pensions and bring them back into tax, we believe that this will help invalidity pensioners.