§ Mr. Gordon Brownasked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is his estimate of the cost of the transitional arrangements to prevent cash losses, as proposed in Cmnd. 9691, for each year that these transitional arrangements are expected to apply.
§ Mr. NewtonIt is not possible to provide an accurate estimate of the cost of transitional protection until final decisions are taken about the rates of benefit that will apply from April 1988.
§ Mr. Gordon Brownasked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) how many households currently 597W claiming housing benefit will lose entitlement to (a) rent rebate and (b) rate rebate, under the proposals in Cmnd. 9691; and, in each case, what is the number of pensioner households and the number of working households with and without children;
(2) how many families currently receiving family income supplement will not be entitled to family credit. on the basis of the structural reforms proposed in Cmnd. 9691;
(3) if he will publish a table in the Official Report showing the changes in disposable income after meeting housing costs as a result of the changes proposed in housing benefit in Cmnd. 9691, by client group, on the same bases as the tables showing the effect of structural reform, including the 20 per cent. rates contribution, in the technical annex to Cmnd. 9691;
(4) how many working households with children currently receive (a) both family income supplement and housing benefit, (b) just family income supplement and (c) just housing benefit; and how many, under the structural proposals in Cmnd. 9691, will receive (i) both family credit and housing benefit, (ii) just family credit and (iii) just housing benefit.
§ Mr. NewtonI shall let the hon. Member have replies as soon as possible.
§ Mr. Gordon Brownasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will specify the amounts of supplementary benefit that will be received by unemployed single childless people and couples and lone parents aged 16 and 17 years.
§ Mr. NewtonI assume the hon. Member has in mind income support rather than supplementary benefit, and I refer him to my reply to the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher) on 13 January at column495.
§ Mr. Gordon Brownasked the Secretary of State for Social Services what compensation, if any, is allowed for the loss of (i) the direct payment of water rates and (ii) payment for residual housing costs in the illustrative benefit rates given in the technical annexe to Cmnd. 9691 for (a) single persons aged 18 to 25 years. (b) single persons aged 25 years and over and lone parents and (c) couples.
§ Mr. NewtonThe technical annex assumes that the resources currently devoted to water rates and residual housing costs are included in the overall amounts available in setting the illustrative rates of weekly benefit. The changes in underlying benefit entitlement of those claimants who currently receive such payments are therefore included in the illustrative tables set out in the annex, along with the other factors that might affect their benefit entitlement. In common with other claimants, transitional protection will ensure that claimants currently receiving payments for water rates and residual housing costs will not experience a fall in cash income as a result of the change from supplementary benefit to income support.
§ Mr. Gordon Brownasked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether the double family premium for a disabled child will be paid only if the child is blind or in receipt of mobility or attendance allowance; and whether the double premium will also be payable under the family credit scheme.
598W
§ Mr. NewtonYes, as regards income support and housing benefit.
In the case of family credit, the structure described in paragraph 3.69 of the White Paper "Reform of Social Security" (Cmnd. 9691) is based on a maximum credit consisting simply of an adult credit and a child credit, which will be age-related for each child. It does not include the payment of a double family premium. As with the other income-related benefits, any mobility allowance or attendance allowance will be disregarded in full in estimating a family's income.
§ Mr. Gordon Brownasked the Secretary of State for Social Services what proportion of the responses to the Green Paper, "Reform of Social Security", had been analysed before the publication of the White Paper; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. NewtonAll responses to the Green Paper were fully considered, but as indicated in my reply to the hon. Member for Barnsley, West and Penistone (Mr. McKay) on 10 December at column597, they were not generally in a form which could sensibly be used to provide a simple breakdown of numbers for or against particular aspects of the proposals.
§ Mr. Gordon Brownasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish in the Official Report a table of gains and losses resulting from the proposed structural reforms contained in Cmnd. 9691, including 20 per cent. rates contribution. which also takes account of the cuts in rate rebates, child benefit and central heating additions and related changes which took effect in 1985.
§ Mr. NewtonI refer the hon. Member to my reply to him on 20 December at columns 435–436.
§ Mr. Meacherasked the Secretary of State for Social Services what plans the Government have for payment and assessment of family credit to strikers' families during the period of a strike under the White Paper on the reform of social security.
§ Mr. Newton[pursuant to his reply, 13 January 1985, c. 495]: The Government intend to consult further on the operational procedures for family credit. However it is envisaged that payment of the credit would generally be suspended when the recipient was on strike, but that payment would be allowed to continue if a strike lasted for no more than a few days. It would of course be open to the striker to claim income support, subject to the trade dispute rules, in respect of his dependants. Assessment of family credit claimed where a member of the family is on strike will be on the basis of the latter's normal earnings.