HL Deb 12 March 1981 vol 418 cc383-4

3.16 p.m.

Lord Monson

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

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what checks are made, when jobless nationals of other EEC countries come to the United Kingdom and apply for supplementary benefit, to ascertain whether they possess non-property assets in their country of origin worth more than £2,000 sterling.

Baroness Young

My Lords, claims from nationals of member states of the European Community are subject to the same rules as claims from British nationals. All claimants are asked about their resources, including their capital assets. If there is reason to doubt the claimant's statement, further documentary evidence can be requested. Failure to provide relevant informa tion can lead to refusal of benefit.

Lord Monson

My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for that reply. Is she aware that shortly before Christmas reports appeared in the press which revealed that nationals of other EEC countries, notably from Italy, were coining to this country with no prospect of a job but with the specific intention of living off supplementary benefit? In view of the very stringent nature of the new regulations, would the noble Baroness not agree that it is vital to ensure that the supplementary benefits system is not abused by nationals of other countries in this way, otherwise it will be very much resented by people in this country, particularly those applying for supplementary benefit with liquid or semiliquid assets of just over £2,000?

Baroness Young

Yes, my Lords, I entirely agree with the purport of the noble Lord's supplementary question. There is action that we can and do take. It is accepted that community nationals seeking work in another country should not become dependent on public funds, and if they do they can be asked to leave. There are standard arrangements for notifying the Home Office when a national of a member state gets benefit. In the past those operated after benefit had been in payment for eight weeks. We have reviewed the arrangements and reduced the period to two weeks, and we believe that that will help to speed up action and discourage abuse.

Lord Wells-Pestell

My Lords, is it possible in those circumstances for inquiries to be made in the country of origin as to what a person's possessions and means may be?

Baroness Young

My Lords, it is clearly difficult to ascertain accurately what assets a person holds, whether he lives in this country or, indeed, anywhere else. But the experience, I am advised, is that the type of people who seek to abuse our benefits are on the whole a group of people who are unlikely to possess capital of more than £2,000.