§ Mr. Austin Mitchellasked the Secretary of State for Social Services, further to his reply dated 22 March, Official Report, c. 400, concerning earnings-related benefit, whether he will provide an estimate of the cost if entitlement were limited to six months, the average number of persons who would benefit and the net benefit cost in each case.
§ Mr. RossiThe restoration of the earnings-related supplement on the basis which applied before the Social Security (No. 2) Act 1980, but for unemployed people only, would have cost the national insurance fund about £190 million in 1982–83. The estimate for 1983–84 is £210 million. The average number of persons who would benefit at any one time would be about 360,000.
It is not possible to provide a reliable estimate of the savings on other benefits if earnings related supplement were restored, as there is no information available on the amounts of the supplement for which those presently receiving supplementary benefit would become eligible.
§ Mr. Austin Mitchellasked the Secretary of State for Social Services, further to his reply dated 22 February, Official Report, c. 425–26, concerning savings which might be expected from raising child benefit, whether and by how much the prescribed amounts have been raised as a result of the increase in child benefit announced in the Budget; whether he has reduced or expects to reduce the rates of child dependency addition payable with certain other benefits; and what in each case is the expected saving.
§ Mr. NewtonNo changes in either the prescribed amounts or child dependency additions have yet been made as a consequence of the increase in child benefit which was announced in the Budget and which will become payable in November. Until the main uprating decisions are taken next month, I cannot say what the effect of that increase will be.
§ Mr. Alfred Morrisasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will estimate the number of couples who will become entitled to the long-term rate of supplementary benefit as a result of the effect of the Supplementary Benefit (Equal Treatment) Regulations because the woman is incapable of work or otherwise is not required to be available for employment and the man is unemployed.
149W
§ Mr. NewtonThe draft Supplementary Benefit (Equal Treatment) Regulations which are at present with the SSAC for consultation will enable either partner to claim benefit for a couple if they can demonstrate previous contact with the employment field or a prescribed reason, such as a period of sickness, or disability, for exclusion from it. Normal rules on entitlement to the long-term rate will then apply. The estimated number of couples where the woman will claim and the couple will become entitled to the long-term rate through her incapacity for work is about 5,000. This also takes account of our proposal to allow periods in receipt of long-term incapacity benefits to count towards the qualifying period for the long-term rate.
The draft Supplementary Benefit (Requirements) (Long-term Rates) Amendment (No. 2) Regulations, which also form part of the equal treatment package, will entitle couples to the long-term rate if either partner is age 60 or over. The estimated number of couples who will receive the higher rate because the woman has reached 60 is 6,000 to 7,000.
§ Mr. Stallardasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if, further to his answer to the hon. Member for St. Pancras, North on 11 April, Official Report, c. 335, he will list for each benefit and pension the anticipated weekly saving on the assumptions made in that answer.
§ Mr. NewtonIt would be misleading to draw hypothetical conclusions about particular benefits from a global figure, which was itself based only on illustrative assumptions, in circumstances where different benefits are subject to different uprating requirements or conventions.