HC Deb 16 March 1983 vol 39 cc196-7W
Mr. John

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will list the income disregards, capital limits and other specific sums mentioned in the supplementary benefits regulations, the dates at which these sums were fixed at their present level, and the amounts to which they would have to be raised in November 1983 to make good their loss of value since they were fixed at their present level, assuming 5 per cent. inflation in the year to November 1983.

Mr. Newton

The information requested in respect of resources which are partially disregarded under the supplementary benefit resources and single payments regulations is as follows:

Resource Present level of disregard Date fixed at present level Level of disregard needed at November 1983*
£ £
Capital:
for weekly benefit 2,500 November 1982 2,625
for single payments 300 November 1978 507.26
for single payments
for voluntary
repatriation 50 November 1975 118.72
Earnings:
unemployed claimants 4 November 1980 5.00
single parents 4 plus ½ earnings from 4 to 20 November 1980 24.98
others 4 November 1975 9.50
Miscellaneous income:
(war and industrial pensions, charitable payments etc.) 4 November 1975 9.50
Occasional gifts 100 November 1982 105
Educational maintenance allowances:
children at school 7.50 September 1979 11.01
young people at college 9.50 September 1979 13.95
Student grants † 2 September 1976 4.26

* on the basis of the assumptions in the question to give same real value as at date fixed (measured by retail prices index to November 1982 and by assumed 5 per cent, increase in retail prices November 1982 to November 1983).
† where student is a single parent or is disabled or is the partner of the claimant and has a dependent child.

The upper limit on the amount of a single payment payable for repairs to a claimant's home was set at £225 in November 1978. It would need to be raised to £380.45 on the assumptions in the question.

Mr. Field

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will estimate the numbers of people who would no longer claim supplementary benefit if (a) the earnings related supplement scheme were restored at the level immediately prior to its abolition and (b) the present abatement of national insurance benefits were restored.

Mr. Newton

For the effect of the abatement of national insurance benefits alone I refer the hon. Member to my reply to the hon. Member for Stockport, North (Mr. Bennett) on 9 February 1983.—[Vol. 36, c.402–3] No information is available on the effect of the abolition of earnings-related supplement—ERS—but, so far as unemployment benefit—UB—is concerned, the first retailed statistics which show the extent of dependency on supplementary allowance following the abolition of ERS will be available soon. This should enable a broad assessment to be made of the extent to which the abatement and abolition of ERS have increased the number of UB recipients claiming supplementary benefit. I will write to the hon. Member when this has been prepared.

Forward to