Strikers: Mortgage Payments (Hansard, 4 December 1984)

Lord Boyd-Capenter
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Security (Lord Glenarthur)
My Lords. a striker is not entitled to supplementary benefit for his own needs, but he may receive benefit for his dependants and this will include, where appropriate, an amount for mortgate interest, but not capital repayments. The authority for this is Schedule 1 to the Supplementary Benefits Act 1976 and Regulations 14(2), 15 and 17 of the Supplementary Benefit (Requirements) Regulations 1983.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. Is he aware that many people will resent being taxed in order to enable a person who is deliberately abstaining from work to continue to purchase a house? Is he also aware that that stands in sharp contrast with the fact that the man who is working does not get such assistance?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, I am certainly aware that there has been some publicity about some strikers not paying their mortgages and using the money intended for mortgages for other purposes—which, I believe, is what lies behind my noble friend's Question. We are considering carefully whether steps should be taken to prevent it.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, has the noble Lord any evidence that funds allowed for mortgage repayments are being used for other purposes; or is he merely relying upon hearsay evidence?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, there certainly is evidence of various kinds that this sort of thing is going on. A rough estimate suggests that about 9,000 striking miners are getting such payments, with average amounts of the order of £15, and that some of those are going the wrong way.

§ Lord Campbell of Alloway
My Lords, is my noble friend aware of any study being conducted on the broad question of financing strikes out of taxation?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, I think, with respect, that that is a question that goes rather wider than that on the Order Paper.

§ Lord Dean of Beswick
My Lords, can the noble Lord the Minister tell the Members of this House what it would cost to take one child into care if these payments were not made?

§ Lord Glenarthur
No, my Lords; I think that that also is another question.

§ Lord Harmar-Nicholls
My Lords, with regard to being asked to produce evidence, is my noble friend aware that the people who do this have admitted it on television, in full view of millions of viewers, and that there is no question about it? Whether it is right or wrong is another matter. But the evidence is there, from their own mouths.

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, my noble friend is absolutely right: if people say openly that this is what is going on, there can be no better evidence than that, and that is why we have to consider very carefully what should be done.

§ Lord Wells-Pestell
My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he is speaking for the Government and not from what people see or hear on television? What evidence has he got from his department's own investigation that there is this misuse of money?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, I think the important thing is that we must assess all the evidence, whether it be hearsay or more accurate, and the sort of evidence 1216 to which my noble friend referred just now is part of it. If people speak on television and say what my noble friend says they said—and I ought to say to the noble Lord opposite that I have not in fact seen it myself—those are matters which ought to be considered in the way that I referred to just now in answer to my noble friend Lord Boyd-Carpenter when I said that we were considering whether action ought to be taken.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, as this Question refers to the taxpayer, can the noble Lord tell the House whether it is still the case that tax rebates for strikers are being withheld—which means, if that is so, that miners' families who are dependent on the soup kitchen are being deprived of money to which they are entitled, accumulating from before the strike started?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, the question of tax rebates is one which, again, goes wide of the Question on the Order Paper.

§ Lord Parry
My Lords, would the noble Lord agree that germane to this Question is the fact that it is the greater responsibility of the Government to settle the basic issues underlying and causing this vicious and divisive strike. rather than to be looking for vindictive legislation further to aggravate it?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, the Government are certainly not looking for vindictive legislation. The legislation which is used in all these instances is legislation which is looked at by the separate adjudicating authorities. Those authorities are required to look into the use of legislation in that way. I entirely agree that the sooner the strike comes to an end, the better.

Lord Morris
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that to suggest that this assistance is given to some strikers to purchase a house is quite misleading? The mortgagee has already purchased his house, and the only relief that is being sought is for interest on a debt.

§ Lord Glenarthur
Yes, my Lords; and I am grateful to my noble friend. The fact is that there is an additional regulation, Regulation 16 of the Supplementary Benefits (Claims and Payments) Regulations, which makes provision for mortgage interest to be paid direct to a building society or other mortgagor when a claimant falls into arrears, if that is in the interests of the claimant and his family. That is very much a matter for the mortgagee himself to take up.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, would the noble Lord reconsider his earlier statement that all evidence, including hearsay evidence, will be taken into account? Would he agree that there is no substitute in matters of this sort for a full and proper investigation into all the circumstances of each individual case?

§ Lord Glenarthur
Yes, my Lords; I think the noble Lord may be right. If I used the word "hearsay", perhaps that was the wrong word to use, but my noble 1217 friend behind me gave an example of information which had appeared on television. I did not actually see it, but if somebody stands up and says he has done something, one cannot get more factual than that.

§ Lord Blyton
My Lords, do the Government not think that they ought now to stop their viciousness against the striking miners and try conciliation in an attempt to get this horrible dispute settled?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, as I said earlier, I am the first to support the idea that the strike should be brought to an end as soon as possible. The noble Lord has asked a question which, again, is wide of the Question on the Order Paper.

§ Baroness Robson of Kiddington
My Lords, would the noble Lord agree that in view of his answer concerning, I think, Regulation No. 16, where the mortgage interest can be paid either direct to the building society or to the person taking out the mortgage, the Government have the power to make certain that the payment goes to the right source? I should just like to know why that is not being done, because all of us in this House would like the miners to keep their houses. We do not want them to lose them. We are on their side in this way. Why cannot the Government change the payments?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, Regulation No. 16 relates to arrears of mortgages. I think that if over two months' arrears are involved that particular regulation can be invoked. If the question of paying mortgage payments direct to building societies needed to be invoked, then it would require a change in the regulations.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, arising out of a previous question from the Benches opposite, is this not a case, not of a miner being threatened with the loss of his house but of his being enabled by the taxpayer to be relieved of what would otherwise be a debt which he would have to pay to the building society at the end of the strike?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, yes. Of course, I think the building societies may be able to catch up with it after the strike is over. That is very much a matter for them; but my noble friend makes some very valid comments which I am sure my right honourable friend will note.

§ Lord Denham
My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Hatch, has been on his feet already and has been trying to ask another question. We have been eight minutes on this particular Question. I would suggest that if the noble Lord, Lord Hatch, asks his question and my noble friend answers it, then perhaps the House might think it time to move on to the next Question.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lord the Chief Whip. May I ask the noble Lord the Minister to answer the question which I asked? Is it not relevant, considering that this Question refers to taxpayers, that the Inland Revenue apparently still owes money to strikers and strikers' families? Is that not the case? Have these rebates not been withheld since before the miners' strike started?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, I do not think it is relevant; and, anyway, it is outside the scope of the Question.