HC Deb 17 February 1988 vol 127 cc627-8W
Mr. Graham

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) if he will supply details of the following on(a) on a national basis, (b) on a regional basis, and (c) for Renfrew, West and Inverclyde: the number of married or cohabitating men in receipt of invalid care allowance who have been successful in claiming the supplementary benefit long-term scale rate since married women were allowed to claim invalid care allowance;

(2) if he will list (a) on a national basis, (b) on a regional basis, (c) for Renfrew, West and Inverclyde, the number of married women in receipt of invalid care allowance who have been refused the supplementary benefits long-term scale rate because their husband is or has been unemployed and who has been deemed to be an alternative means of care;

(3) if he will give the criteria whereby someone is categorised by his Department as representing a alternative means of care under regulation 6(b)(ii) of the Supplementary Benefit (Conditions of Entitlement) Regulations 1981;

(4) if he will list (a) on a national basis, (b) on a regional basis, and (c) for Renfrew, West and Inverclyde, the number of times regulation 6(b)(ii) of Supplementary Benefit (Conditions of Entitlement) Regulations 1981 has been implemented against married or cohabiting men since married or cohabiting men were allowed to claim;

(5) if he will list (a) on a national basis, (b) on a regional basis, and (c) for Renfrew, West and Inverclyde, the number of married or cohabiting women in receipt of invalid care allowance who have been successful in claiming the supplementary benefit long-term scale rate since that section of the community were allowed to claim invalid care allowance;

(6) if he will list (a) on a national basis, (b) on a regional basis, and (c) for Renfrew, West and Inverclyde, the number of times regulation 6(b)(ii) of the Supplementary Benefit (Conditions of Entitlement) Regulations 1981 has been implemented against married or cohabiting women since they became eligible to claim;

(7) if he will list (a) on a national basis, (b) on a regional basis, and (c) for Renfrew, West and Inverclyde, the number of couples, one of whom is in receipt of invalid care allowance, who have been refused the right to transfer the role of claimant due to regulation 6(b)(ii) of the Supplementary Benefit (Conditions of Entitlement) Regulations 1981 because the husband is unemployed and thus deemed by his Department to be an alternative of care.

Mr. Scott

It is the independent adjudicating authorities rather than the Department who decide whether a claimant for supplementary benefit should be exempt from the requirement to be available for work by virtue of regulation 6(b) of the Supplementary Benefits (Conditions of Entitlement) Regulations 1981. The guidance relating to alternative means of caring issued by the Chief Adjudication Officer is that the adjudication officer should:

  1. (1) have regard to medical opinion, the views of social workers and the wishes of the family;
  2. (2) consider whether the severity of the disablement of itself means that temporary relief from such as a friend or neighbour is inadequate or inappropriate;
  3. (3) consider whether there is anyone else in the household who could provide the necessary help or whether the disabled person is able to pay for professional assistance.

The statistical information requested is not collected and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Back to