HC Deb 16 June 1953 vol 516 cc53-4W
Mr. Orbach

asked the Minister of National Insurance whether he is aware of the discrimination in the payment of added increments to the standard rate of retirement pensions; that men of over 65 years of age who decided to remain working prior to 16th July, 1951, and hope to continue to do so for five years are in a disadvantageous position to those who decided to take this step after that date; and whether he will take steps to give equal rewards to all these pensioners.

Mr. Turton

The increased rate of increment provided by the Act of 1951, though it applied to everyone who was still working irrespective of when they attained minimum pension age, was deliberately not made retrospective. The whole matter was gone into very fully by the previous Government and my right hon. Friend sees no reason to reopen it.

Mr. Hartley

asked the Minister of National Insurance the number of persons receiving retirement pensions in Chester-le-Street, Birtley and Washington local office areas; and, of these persons, the number who are receiving supplementary allowances from the National Assistance Board, showing the average weekly allowance paid to each person.

Mr. Turton

Information about the number of persons receiving retirement pensions in particular localities, or the average weekly allowance paid by the National Assistance Board to those of them who are receiving supplementary allowances is not available.

I am informed by the Board that on 31st March, 1,800 regular weekly payments of National Assistance were being made to retirement pensioners in the area comprising the urban and rural districts of Chester-le-Street, including Birtley; there is no separate figure available for Washington.

Lieut.-Commander Baldock

asked the Minister of National Insurance what additional cost would be incurred if those in receipt of retirement pensions were able to earn £3 per week, £4 per week or an unlimited amount, without deduction from their pensions.

Mr. Turton

I cannot give an estimate owing to the impossibility of forecasting how many additional persons might qualify for retirement pensions in such circumstances.