§ Mr. Ashleyasked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) if he will list all the circumstances in which a disabled married woman who does not satisfy the condition for sickness benefit, and therefore subsequently for contributory invalidity benefit, is awarded housewives' non-contributory invalidity pension and remains on that pension until the age of 60 years but then will qualify for a full retirement pension in her own right;
(2) if he will list all the circumstances in which a married woman may qualify for sickness benefit, proceed to invalidity benefit and remain on invalidity benefit until she reaches the age of 60 years, but then have her benefit reduced because she has not satisfied the conditions for receipt of full retirement pension in her own right;
(3) if he will list all the circumstances in which a man or a single woman can qualify for sickness benefit, proceed to invalidity benefit and remain on invalidity benefit until he or she reaches the age of 65 years or 60 years, respectively, but then have their benefit reduced because 892W they have not satisfied the conditions for receipt of full retirement pension;
(4) if he will list all the circumstances in which a man or a single woman who has not satisfied the contribution conditions for sickness benefit and therefore subsequently for contributory invalidity benefit, is awarded non-contributory invalidity pension and remains on that pension until he or she reaches the age of 65 years or 60 years, respectively, but then becomes entitled to the full rate of retirement pension.
§ Mr. Alfred MorrisThe normal contribution conditions for sickness benefit do not apply to a person over pensionable age. Instead, there is a condition that a person would have been entitled to a retirement pension had he or she retired. There is a similar condition for contributory invalidity benefit.
The rate of sickness or contributory invalidity benefit paid over pensionable age is limited to the rate of the basic retirement pension that would otherwise be payable. For those under pensionable age both the title to and the rate of sickness benefit depend mainly on the number of contributions paid as an employed or self-employed earner in a recent single tax year. There arc no further contribution conditions for the contributory invalidity pension which replaces it, at a standard rate, after 168 days.
Title to and the rate of retirement pension, on the other hand, depend on the record of contributions, of any class, paid or credited over working life. The provisions for crediting contributions, however, are such that, apart from married women who have chosen reduced contribution liability, no persons who at some time in their life have met the minimum condition for paid contributions need suffer a loss 3f retirement pension on account of periods of incapacity for work.
The difference in the conditions for sickness benefit and retirement pension means that some incapacitated persons who have a contribution deficiency in the single tax year relevant for sickness benefit and do not qualify, or qualify at a reduced rate, may nevertheless have a sufficiently good record over working life to qualify for retirement pension at a rate higher than the contributory or non-contributory benefit they have been 893W receiving. Conversely, some persons, usually late entrants into the contributory scheme, may meet the sickness benefit conditions but be unable to satisfy the longer-term conditions for retirement pension.
A full list of the contribution conditions, and the effect of deficiencies on benefit rates, would be lengthy, and there are, of course, various reasons for failure to meet the conditions. I will be glad to write to my hon. Friend if he requires further information about these provisions.
§ Mr. Ashleyasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will give a detailed explanation of the increase in expenditure on invalidity benefit in 1977–78 from £514 million at 1976 survey prices for 470,000 beneficiaries in Command Paper No. 6721 to £683 million at average 1977–78 prices for 452,000 beneficiaries in replies to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South on 4th and 7th November.
§ Mr. Alfred MorrisThe estimate of expenditure on invalidity benefit for 1977–78 in Cmnd. 6721 revalued to 1977 survey prices is £586 million.
The number of beneficiaries given in Cmnd. 6721 was an estimate for 1977–78 whereas the number in my reply to my hon. Friend on 4th November—[Vol. 938, c. 9–10]—was, as stated, the actual number at 31st May 1975.
The latest estimate of the average numbers receiving the benefit at any one time in 1977–78, based on the pattern of expenditure to date, is 545,000. It is this estimated increase in the number of beneficiaries which largely accounts for the expected increase in expenditure for 1977–78 of £97 million.