§ Mr. Meacherasked the Secretary of State for Social Services according to the latest available data, how many claims for supplementary benefit have taken more than 14 days to process before initial payment in each Department of Health and Social Security office (a) in London and (b) in each region outside London in the latest period for which figures are available; and what proportion of first claims for supplementary benefit at that time each of these figures represents.
§ Mr. LyellI refer the hon. Member to my reply to him on 2 February at column553. The information which was subsequently placed in the Library is the closest available information to that which he has now requested.
§ Mr. Thurnhamasked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will review the limits on supplementary benefit payments for boarders and people in residential care and nursing homes; and whether he will make a statement.
§ Mr. MajorWe have recently completed a full review of the supplementary benefit limits for ordinary board and lodging accommodation and residential care and nursing homes. The review took into account information about charges and costs from DHSS local offices and other362W sources. We intend to publish in due course a report from management consultants Ernst and Whinney on the movement of costs specific to residential and nursing homes, as well as research reports by Kent and York universities on charges in these homes as they relate to our limits. Our review has also paid particular attention to representations from hon. Members and interested organisations and individuals.
The evidence showed that there is no case for a general increase in the limits. However, our review did point to four specific areas where additional help for people in residential care and nursing homes would be particularly welcome. We propose to increase the limits selectively, in accordance with those findings, to take effect at the same time as the general uprating of benefits in the week beginning 6 April 1987.
First, we propose to increase the limit for people in residential care homes for elderly people from £125 to £130. This compares with a level of £110 in April 1985—an increase of approaching one fifth over two years.
Secondly, the new higher limit for very dependent elderly people or blind people in residential care homes which we introduced last July will be increased from £140 to £145. This limit permits significant allowance to be made for real variations in the needs of people in residential care homes not just for the elderly but also for the mentally ill and drug and alcohol abusers.
Thirdly, strong representations have been made to us on behalf of younger physically handicapped people in residential care homes, many of whom have very high needs for care. We propose to increase the limit which applies to them by £10 to £190.
Finally, we are increasing the limit for people in nursing homes for the elderly from £170 to £175. This means that the limits for these homes will have increased by more than one quarter in two years.
Taken together, the changes that we propose will continue to enable reasonable charges to be met in homes during the coming year, in which we expect to receive the proposals of the joint working party between central and local government which is due to report by Easter on the harmonisation of funding arrangements for residential care in the longer term.