§ Mr. Alfred Morrisasked the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he has received from the honorary secretary of the Association of Directors of Social Services with regard to the financial effects for local social services authorities of any decrease in discretionary payments by his Department to people in special need under the terms of the Social Security Bill now before Parliament; what reply he is sending; what action he will be taking and if he will make a statement.
§ Mrs. ChalkerI received a letter from the honorary secretary on 17 December to which I will be replying shortly.
The main points of concern to the association are the proposal to limit payments for exceptional needs (ENPs) to recipients of supplementary benefits, the proposed reductions in the discretion of supplementary benefit officers, and the fact that some recipients are not good at budgeting. The association is also concerned that new measures should not in- 272W crease the involvement of social services departments in income maintenance.
The limitation of ENPs to recipients of supplementary benefits will lead to about 10,000 fewer payments a year out of a total of well over one million. There will still be powers to help non-receipients in emergencies.
As regards discretion, the purpose of the proposals in the Bill and the White Paper "Reform of the Supplementary Benefits Scheme" is to emphasise rights to benefit by establishing in regulations a legal entitlement to additional payments that are at present made entirely at the discretion of the adjudicating authorities, while retaining sufficient discretion to prevent severe hardship. Our proposals recognise that some claimants have difficulty in budgeting, and officers with appropriate training will be available to help them. We seek in this way to avoid any increase of work for social services departments. Officials of the Department have already been discussing the implications of the Bill with the association.