§ Mr. Kelleyasked the Secretary of State for Social Services in how many cases his Department has withdrawn invalid vehicles from disabled people, as a consequence of the termination of their employment, during 1975.
§ Mr. Alfred MorrisI would refer my hon. Friend to my reply to the hon. Member for Exeter (Mr. Hannam) on 24th March.—[Vol. 908, c.189–90.]
§ Mr. Kelleyasked the Secretary of State for Social Services what saving there has been to public funds during 1975 by the withdrawal of invalid vehicles from disabled persons, following the termination of their employment.
§ Mr. Alfred MorrisIt is not possible to make an accurate estimate. This would call for speculation about a number of factors, including maintenance and other costs, that might have been incurred in respect of individual vehicles. These can vary widely.
§ Mr. Kelleyasked the Secretary of State for Social Services what consideration has been given to the recommendation made in the Sharp Report 1974 that when a person loses entitlement to an invalid vehicle because of the termination of employment, the vehicle should be offered for sale to that person on reasonably favourable terms; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Alfred MorrisLady Sharp proposed that cars should be issued instead of invalid tricycles, but only when needed for employment, for education or to keep a household or family going. Under her recommendations there was to be no benefit related to disablement alone. If the recommendations had been adopted many people would have lost eligibility on losing a job or when family circumstances changed, and Lady Sharp's proposal for the sale of vehicles was made 515W in that context. As my hon. Friend knows, we have taken a radically different path from the one Lady Sharp recommended. Eligibility under the new mobility allowance scheme depends on the disablement of the individual, not on employment or social usefulness, and we estimate that some 100,000 more disabled people will benefit from it.