HL Deb 20 July 1999 vol 604 cc836-9

(" .—(1) The Secretary of State shall take such steps as appears to him appropriate for the purpose of securing that persons who may be entitled to attendance allowance or disability living allowance (as the case may be) become aware that they may be entitled to that benefit.

(2) If it appears to the Secretary of State that, on the basis of information in his possession, a person who has not made a claim for attendance allowance or disability living allowance (as the case may be) may be entitled to that benefit, he shall forthwith inform him of that fact and invite him to make a claim for it.

(3) Where the Secretary of State is in possession of information which should have alerted him to the fact that a person might be entitled to claim attendance allowance or disability living allowance (as the case may be) but he failed to discharge his duty under subsection (2) above and that person subsequently makes a claim for the benefit concerned which is determined in his favour, he shall be entitled to payment of the benefit from the time when the information came into the possession of the Secretary of State, provided that he would have been entitled from that time but for the requirement of paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of section 1 of the Social Security Administration Act 1992 (claim necessary for entitlement).")

The noble Lord said: I normally try to make my amendments as brief as possible, but Amendment No. 124C is longer than some. Therefore, it is virtually self-explanatory. The amendment concerns the take-up of the disabled living allowance. It seeks to suggest that the Secretary of State shall take the necessary steps to ensure that people entitled to disability living allowance or attendance allowance become aware that they are entitled to that benefit.

I believe that the noble Baroness will confirm that the take-up of such benefits is much lower than one would like. No doubt she has the figures. It is suggested that the Secretary of State shall take steps to ensure that those concerned receive such benefit, if they are entitled to do so, on the basis of other information that the department is likely to have. The final part of the amendment suggests that if there is a determination in favour of such a person, but they were not aware of the fact at the time, the benefit should be back-dated.

As I say, the amendment is self-explanatory. I look forward to the reply from the Minister. I beg to move.

Lord Addington

Any amendment accompanied by a guidance note to ensure that people know about their entitlements always attracts my attention. Many problems within the system concern a lack of knowledge. People do not know what they should do, so they struggle. I suggest that that is something that should be stressed to every single agency that deals with the general public.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham

This new clause is intended to improve the take-up of disability living allowance and attendance allowance by making the DSS responsible for making people aware that they may be entitled to claim.

I fully share the concern of the noble Lord. We know that there is a problem of low take-up with DLA and AA. That is confirmed by research. Of course, it is right that things are done to promote benefits when those entitled to them are not claiming them.

The analysis suggests that a range of factors is involved, including, for example, lack of knowledge about the benefits and reluctance to claim. It is also the case that the rules of entitlement for these benefits are more difficult to understand than those for benefits like child benefit and retirement pension where take-up is nearly universal.

Thus, we have a double problem. On the one hand, many prospective claimants misunderstand DLA and AA, resulting in as many as 40 per cent of claims being rejected. At the same time, the research available to us suggests that 40 per cent, or perhaps even more, of those potentially eligible for the benefits may not, for one reason or another, claim them. So it is important that we try to obtain a better balance.

There is much that we do already to achieve this. In many cases the Benefits Agency staff already help people to find out about their benefits such as DLA. We particularly take steps to provide information in various formats to ensure that it is available and accessible. It is provided in a dozen languages with audio tapes, large print and Braille publications. We also provide advice for disabled people by telephone, including textphone services for people with speech or hearing problems, on several well-publicised numbers.

We have also co-operated with other organisations whether within or outside Government, that provide benefit information and we shall continue to do so, including working closely with local authorities. Given that most local authorities have welfare rights offices, I have recently started discussions with local authority organisations to see how best we can help people to take up the benefits that they should take up as well as to encourage people to come forward and move on to the New Deal where they can. We believe it is right to seek to ensure that people know what they are entitled to claim. We believe that the "one" service, particularly for younger people, may also be a help. We are working on that.

None the less, the noble Lord asks us to shift responsibility on to the department to use the information that it holds to invite claims for benefit. That seems an attractive and obvious approach. That is more easily done, but even there we have had real difficulties in getting people on retirement pension to claim the income support to which they are entitled. We at least have a much better idea of whether they are entitled and eligible even though they are not claiming.

The difficulty with DLA and AA, as I am sure the Committee knows, is that it is an extremely complex benefit. The DSS cannot determine in advance who may be eligible for it. Perhaps I may explain. The DLA and AA are based on a disabled person's diary and the day-to-day problems that they face in living. It is effectively self-reporting and not departmental. That is translated into the proxy of care need. Neither is there any automatic read-across from severity of disability to care need and therefore to the level of DLA. For example, a person's housing situation may mean that they cannot cope with night-time care needs. They may be living in a Victorian converted house with a downstairs toilet with the need to go up and downstairs. Someone living in a bungalow might not have such night care needs and therefore would not be entitled to the higher rate DLA but only to the middle rate.

That is the kind of complexity with which we are dealing. We need to know a person's diary for the purposes of assessment and need. We have to turn that into a proxy for care. Only then can we assess their eligibility for entitlement. Although people may be encouraged by their GP, their local welfare rights service, or the "one" service to apply for DLA and AA, ultimately, because of the complexity of the benefit, there cannot be any automatic trawl by the Benefits Agency. It has to be initiated, so to speak, from the bottom up with our help and information.

In the light of that explanation I hope that the noble Lord will accept that his target regarding the two benefits, DLA and AA, which have to be initiated by the disabled person, while doing our best to provide information to them, cannot be any automatic provision. They are complex benefits based on the individual's care need and therefore can only be dealt with in conjunction with the individual claimant. With that rather complicated explanation, I hope that the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw his amendment.

Lord Higgins

We are grateful to the noble Baroness for that explanation. It is a Catch-22 situation. The fact that it is so complicated makes it all the more difficult to ensure that people take up the benefit. We recognise that. But it seemed worthwhile raising that particular point in the course of debates on the Bill simply because the take-up rate, compared with other benefits, seems to be extremely low. We realise the reasons for that. We hope that the department will do everything possible to ensure that there is adequate publicity by way of advertisements and so forth.

As the noble Baroness rightly pointed out, in other contexts local authorities manage to get around the problem. One hopes that that will be so in the future as regards this matter. In the light of the remarks of the noble Baroness I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 61 agreed to.

[Amendment No. 125 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

Lord Addington moved Amendment No. 125A: After Clause 61, insert the following new clause—