Income Support: Expectant Mothers (Hansard, 3 March 1993)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Social Security (Lord Henley)
My Lords, adequate diets, as recommended by the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy, can be achieved in a variety of ways and at a range of costs. The welfare food scheme continues to provide a nutritional safeguard for expectant mothers in receipt of income support.

§ Earl Russell
My Lords, I thank my noble kinsman for that Answer. But he has not told me that he has evidence that women can afford an adequate diet. Can I deduce from his silence that he does not have evidence that they can do so?

§ Lord Henley
My Lords, no. I mentioned in my Answer the report by the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy. That report concluded that the true additional requirements of pregnancy under conditions prevailing in the United Kingdom are probably modest and are limited to the last three months. Research carried out by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food shows that it is perfectly possible to afford an adequate and healthy diet at a figure roughly the same as that which people are already spending on food.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, does my noble friend accept that the term "adequate" is subjective? What is adequate for the noble Earl or for my noble friend may not be adequate for myself or for someone on income support.

§ Lord Henley
My Lords, my noble friend is correct.

§ Baroness Hollis of Heigham
My Lords, if a pregnant woman of 25 needs a minimum of £42.45 per week to live on, how can a pregnant woman of 24 manage on £9 per week less?

§ Lord Henley
My Lords, on many occasions I have explained the reasons for the difference in the rates. The first is the added cost of increasing the rates for those under 24 of some £360 million. The second is that there are lower earnings expectations for people under 24 and the fact that they have fewer financial responsibilities. The third reason is that they are likely to live as part of someone else's household. In fact, only 15 per cent. of those on income support in that class are in receipt of housing benefit. The fourth 656 reason is that I do not believe that levels of benefit should be an incentive to leave home or an attractive alternative to seeking work or training.

§ Baroness Hollis of Heigham
My Lords, we are talking about pregnant women aged 24 or 25. Is the Minister really saying that pregnant women of 24 may be in the labour market and therefore must expect a rate of benefit lower than a woman of 25? Is a pregnant woman of 24 more likely to be living at home than one of 25 and therefore less likely to need support? I suggest that as the average age for first births is 22 the Minister may like to revise his information.

§ Lord Henley
My Lords, if the woman under the age of 24 is part of a couple she will be receiving the higher rate of income support. Therefore, we are talking only about single mothers. The minute that a single mother gives birth and produces a baby further awards become available. There are grants from the Social Fund, extra premiums in income support, an extra premium for one-parent families and an extra premium for families. In addition, the woman will be receiving approximately £28.60 and at birth will move on to the higher rate of income support.

§ Lord Gisborough
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that one of the problems is not so much the amount of money but the inability of many such girls to manage their finances properly and to buy the right kind of food as opposed to expensive convenience foods? To what extent are they given help in addition to their benefits to enable them to feed themselves properly?

§ Lord Henley
My Lords, my noble friend makes a valid point. The levels are perfectly adequate. It might be that there are problems with education and that people do not know how to spend their money adequately. However, I do not believe that it should be the job of the Department of Social Security to issue guidance on how people should spend their income support.

§ Lord Stallard
My Lords, the Minister mentioned the diet recommended by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food costing £10 per week. I assume that that is the diet to which the Minister referred because it is the only one I have seen. Its only meat content is equivalent to about one wing of a chicken. Is that known as living on a wing and a prayer?

§ Lord Henley
My Lords, no. The so-called £10 per week diet was the result of an academic exercise to determine how cheaply a healthy diet could be achieved and whether it was more expensive than an unhealthy diet. However, it deliberately did not take on board issues of palatability or attractiveness. Hence the diet was never recommended, nor was it intended to be. It was used as an illustration in a discussion on healthy eating on low incomes by the MAFF consumer panel.

§ Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish
My Lords, does my noble friend realise that the neo-natal and perinatal mortality rates in this country have improved year on 657 year? Does he accept that not only is that a tribute to the health service but that it must indicate that the health of mothers has improved? Does that not, therefore, negate all the suggestions put forward from the Benches opposite?

§ Lord Henley
My Lords, my noble friend makes a valid point. Similarly, life expectancy has increased steadily during the 12 years since 1979.

§ Baroness Robson of Kiddington
My Lords, I thank the Minister for informing the House that once the mother has had the baby she will receive increased income support. However, despite the Minister's last reply, will he agree that medically speaking it is very important for the health of the future child that the mother should have an adequate diet before giving birth to the child?

§ Lord Henley
My Lords, I have tried to explain that we believe that income support levels are adequate. In addition, as I explained in my original Answer to my noble kinsman, the welfare food scheme provides free milk—a pint a day—for all pregnant women on income support as well as help with vitamin pills.

§ Earl Russell
My Lords, before my noble kinsman goes too far along the line of agreement with his noble friend Lord Skelmersdale, will he make an effort to inform himself of the work currently being done by Professor David Barker for the Medical Research Council, which indicates a considerable ongoing problem through low birth weight caused by inadequate maternal nutrition?
Before my noble kinsman goes too far also down the line of saying that people have choice, will he refresh his memory of his own Written Answer to me on 13th January which states that 177,000 women are subject to deductions from their benefits of more than 15 per cent.? Does that affect adequacy?

§ Lord Henley
My Lords, very often those deductions are to pay for essentials such as gas, electricity and other forms of heating which would otherwise have to be paid for from income support.