Prescriptions: Men over Sixty (Hansard, 4 March 1996)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Cumberlege)
My Lords, we estimate that the cost of giving free prescriptions to men between the ages of 60 and 65 is about £40 million a year.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply, but does it not amend considerably the Answer that she gave to an earlier Question when she suggested that the cost was only £2 million? Secondly, does my noble friend agree that for £40 million of expenditure to be incurred without parliamentary assent in either House is an alarming precedent?

§ Baroness Cumberlege
My Lords, my noble friend asked an identical Question on 15th January this year. My reply was: My Lords, we estimate that the cost of giving free prescriptions to men between the ages of 60 and 65 is about £40 million a year".—[Official Report, 15/1/96; col. 357.] With regard to the second part of my noble friend's question, it is not a matter of the European Court deciding that we should tax our citizens in order to find 2 this money. The European Court decided that the principle of equality between men and women in matters of social security applies in the age of exemption from prescription charges.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that the confusion over whether the sum is £2 million a year or £40 million a year arises from the fact that the judgment about prescription charges was made by the European Court of Justice, which is the court which decides matters relating to the European Union, and not the European Court of Human Rights as suggested by the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter? However, does the noble Baroness agree that the noble Lord is absolutely right to complain that that foreign court can impose charges on Parliament for which the Government then have to raise taxation? Would it not be in the interests of this country to amend Section 2 of the European Communities Act to give us back control over all taxation?

§ Baroness Cumberlege
My Lords, the noble Lord is correct in saying that it was the European Court of Justice which made the ruling and not the European Court of Human Rights. In this case the European Court of Justice left the United Kingdom free to decide how to implement the principle it had established. We decided to equalise the age of exemption at 60 for both men and women. That was our decision. We took that decision to protect the rights of those women currently receiving free prescriptions.

§ Baroness Gardner of Parkes
My Lords, in view of the Minister's remark that we decided that the age should be 60 for everyone, whereas I gather that we could have made women wait until 65, and it was only a question of equality, does she agree that it is time we reviewed the blanket entitlement to free prescriptions at either age? There are many people over 60 who could well afford to pay for their prescriptions. The figure of more than 80 per cent. of people receiving free prescriptions seems very high.

§ Baroness Cumberlege
My Lords, a revíew was carried out in 1993 into the very areas that my noble 3 friend mentioned. At that time it was decided to stick with the present policy and, after the European Court of Justice decision, that the exemption should apply at 60.

§ Lord Lester of Herne Hill
My Lords, is the Minister aware that many men and women in this country will greatly welcome the judgment of the European Court of Justice that men and women are equally entitled to social security benefits—in this case free prescriptions—at the same age without discrimination? Does she agree that they will welcome the Government's decision not to equalise upwards by requiring everyone to wait until 65 but allowing simple justice at the age of 60 for both sexes?

§ Baroness Cumberlege
My Lords, many men will rejoice and welcome the European Court's ruling. Many women will be delighted that the exemption was equalised at 60.

§ Baroness Jay of Paddington
My Lords, can the Minister confirm that the Government have accepted that men over 60 can claim back prescription charges for three months? How will it be possible to prove whether those prescriptions have been paid for and used in the previous period?

§ Baroness Cumberlege
My Lords, we use the prescription claims processing unit. Indeed, it has already authorised payments totalling £2.6 million to 83,000 men.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, will my noble friend deal with the question as to whether expenditure of this sort should be incurred without the assent of either House of Parliament?

§ Baroness Cumberlege
My Lords, I believe that I made it plain to my noble friend and to your Lordships that it was our decision to incur this additional cost.

§ The Countess of Mar
My Lords, following on from the question by the noble Baroness, Lady Gardner, do the Government have any intention of further reviewing the distribution of free prescriptions? It seems to me to be eminently sensible that people who can afford to pay for their prescriptions should do so, but that those who cannot need not do so.

§ Baroness Cumberlege
My Lords, we do not have any intentions at this moment to undertake another formal review.