§ Mr. MeacherTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was the average value, in the last 12-month period for which records are available, of passport benefits for income support recipients(a) including housing benefit and community charge benefit and (b) excluding these two benefits.
§ Miss WiddecombeComprehensive information is not available on the basis requested; and, in particular, relevant information about community charge benefit is not yet available.
In any event, it would not be meaningful to try to average the value of all the passport benefits across all income support recipients. Some of the passport benefits are not relevant to everyone who is receiving income support. For example, free welfare milk and free school meals are available only where there are children in the 231W family; and for some other passport benefits the value depends on the extent to which people need to make use of them, such as, exemption from NHS charges and payments from the social fund.
§ Mr. MeacherTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will give a breakdown of the deductions of income support for other purposes at 31 August as stated in his answer of 4 December.
§ Miss WiddecombeFurther to my answer of 4 December, the deductions from income support for other purposes at 31 August cover the following direct payments:
£ Rent arrears and service charges for fuel or water paid with, or as part of, rent 78,917 Mortgage interest 7,420 Water charges 45,155 Residential care homes, nursing homes or hostels 3,179
§ Mr. MeacherTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, further to his answers of 27 November,Official Report, columns 365–6, regarding income support, what further specifics concerning circumstances he requires for these comparisons to be made, assuming there had been no change in the previous supplementary benefit scheme.
§ Miss WiddecombeEven if the value of benefit in respect of housing costs were excluded, information would still be required to enable an assessment to be made of the additional requirements each beneficiary may have received under the supplementary benefit scheme—for example, the exact age of the claimants and any partner or children, their state of health and whether this meant they had to follow any special diet, needed extra baths or wore out their clothing unusually quickly, what laundry facilities were available and the size and condition of the accommodation. This list is by no means exhaustive but serves to illustrate the complexities of the old scheme and the intrusive questioning necessary to determine entitlement.
Further information would also be required to determine whether each individual satisfied the conditions for receipt of a range of other social security benefits, and, if so, at what level.
Furthermore, it is increasingly unrealistic to attempt to make such comparisons on the assumption that, if it were still operating, there would have been no changes whatsoever to the supplementary benefit scheme over the period since 1988. Such an approach would produce results which would be misleading at best and, at worst, almost meaningless.