asked the Minister of Social Security whether, in cases where the husband or the wife is a chronic invalid, she will disregard the earnings rule.

I assume that the hon. Gentleman has in mind the earnings limit for a dependency increase. This will be carefully considered in the course of our review of the National Insurance Scheme.

May I ask the Minister not to reply that something has been done already under the Ministry of Social Security Act, because the £2 given is exactly the same as under National Assistance? Could something be done quickly, because the Minister is being very hard-hearted to this very small section?

At least we have given some help. This problem has existed ever since the National Insurance Scheme was introduced in 1948 and it is one among many to which we have been left to try to find a solution.

May I say from this side of the House that we are very glad that this matter has been referred to the inquiry? Would not the right hon. Lady agree that it is plain that as long as no invalid benefit is paid in cases like this suspension of the earnings rule would be a simple act of social justice?

It is because we feel that this should be examined very carefully that we have decided that it will be considered under the review.

asked the Minister of Social Security (1) whether she will amend the rules covering entitlement to retirement pension increments so that, where a person defers retirement beyond minimum pension age, the increment will be based on the contributions paid in the five years immediately before retirement rather than on those paid in the five years following minimum pension age;

My Department identifies insured persons approaching age 70 (men) or 65 (women) who have not claimed their retirement pension and invites them to make a claim, but I regret that the information requested about the numbers who fail to claim and about savings to the National Insurance Fund is not available. I do not consider that a change on the lines suggested by the hon. Gentleman in the provisions for earning increments to pension would be justified.

On the last part of the right hon. Lady's Answer, may I ask whether she recognises that the problem arises where there is an increase in the rate of payment and a corresponding increase in the rate of contribution? A person who defers retirement beyond normal retiring age can therefore be paying contributions at a higher rate but become entitled to increments only at a lower rate. Does she not think that this is rather unfair?

If one were to adopt the suggestion in the hon. Member's question it would be much more unfair to the general mass of the contributors to the scheme.

Can the Minister say whether this and similar questions will be considered by the National Insurance Advisory Committee when it looks at the retirement conditions and earnings rule?

At present the National Insurance Advisory Committee is examining very carefully all aspects of the earnings rule as it applies to pensions.

asked the Minister of Social Security (1) whether tenants in furnished accommodation on National Assistance, whose rents are increased as a result of a rent tribunal decision, are normally paid an additional sum to cover the increase; and to what extent they are instructed to find other, less expensive, accommodation;

A rent increase of this kind will be met in full unless it would be unreasonable to do so, for example, where the accommodation is excessive for the person's requirements or there is somebody sharing it who could reasonably be expected to make a contribution.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that people on National Assistance are not being asked to look for other accommodation which is cheaper, when this is not in fact available locally?

The National Assistance Board has never instructed any recipient of assistance to seek alternative accommodation, as is implied in the hon. Gentleman's Question. All aspects of rent increases are taken into account by the National Assistance Board in the past, and in the future by the new Commission.

Does my hon. Friend's Department keep statistics to show to what extent rents are being paid out of National Assistance supplementary grants? Up to now it has been quite impossible to find out exactly how much the Government are paying out in respect of increasing rents from year to year.

At the end of 1965 only 1·1 per cent. of cases—that is, 18,000 out of 1,604,000 householders—did not have their rent met in full.

asked the Minister of Social Security what proportion of the gross national product is devoted to social security for benefits and payments in the current financial year; and what proposals she will make for increasing this proportion.

Expenditure on social security benefits and payments represented about 8 per cent. of the United Kingdom gross national product in 1965–66 and is expected to represent a rather similar proportion in the current financial year. The Government are pledged to ensure to those receiving social security benefits have a fair share in the country's rising living standards, and to this end we are continuing our review of the present arrangements.

I appreciate my right hon. Friend's comment in the last part of her reply, but will she agree that in this country 8 per cent. is an inadequate amount from the gross national product to be devoted to this cause?

The percentage has risen over the years and it now stands higher than ever before. Moreover, when one is examining these matters and making comparisons with other countries, one has also to take into account the other services which are provided in this country and may not be provided elsewhere

asked the Minister of Social Security when the report on the review of the social security system will be received by her Department.

Measures arising from the Government's review of the social security schemes have been brought forward as they have become ready, and this will continue.

Does my right hon. Friend recall that a major research was promised two years ago and the House is still awaiting this major report?

At no time have we said that a major report would be supplied. The review has been going on since we came into office in October, 1964, and as each part of the review was completed we have brought measures before the House so that people may benefit rather than wait until every part of the social security system has been reviewed. We intend to carry on in that way.

asked the Minister of Social Security if she will seek to amend Regulation 4 of the National Insurance Contributions Amendment Regulations 1956 to enable contributors to make good any deficiency in their contributions at any time, as long as they contributed for not less than 10 years.

No, Sir. In the cases to which this Regulation applies there is already a time-limit of over six years, which should allow ample latitude in a scheme based on weekly contributions.

But does not the hon. Gentleman appreciate the appalling anomaly here in that there are many people who paid for 40 years, since long before the war and who, because they have missed a year or two since the war, receive less in pension than people who have paid just for 10 years, 1948–58? I have brought to his attention the case of Mrs. Nisbet. Why cannot she have her full pension? The six-year time limit is quite arbitrary. Why cannot it be 10 years or any period, so long as people make up their contribution deficit?

I am aware of the case to which the hon. Gentleman refers. The Minister has discretion to extend the normal time limits, including the time limit covered in my reply, in exceptional cases where she is satisfied that failure to keep within the Regulations was due to ignorance or error on the part of the contributor for which he was not at fault.

asked the Minister of Social Security when she will publish the main findings of her survey of family circumstances.

asked the Minister of Social Security when her department's special survey of the needs of poor families will be published.

asked the Minister of Social Security when she will publish the results of her study of poverty among the families of lower wage earners; and whether in the meantime she will suspend the wage-stop provisions for National Assistance over the Christmas period.

I hope to be able to publish a full report on this inquiry in the late spring of next year.

I welcome my right hon. Friend's great personal interest in this long-standing problem, but can she do nothing to speed up this report, as the inquiry was carried out in June and, with some effort, it might be possible to have at least some interim information before the date she suggests?

We already have some interim information from it. This inquiry inquired not only into the financial circumstances of these families but into many of the social matters which are of great importance. I understand that my hon. Friend wishes there to be an interim report soon so that we may come to a decision on family endowment. I assure him that the Committee which is dealing with this matter already has the interim information.

If as a result of this survey the right hon. Lady decides that some of the money which is at present used in granting Income Tax and Surtax concessions to families with large numbers of children should be used instead to increase family allowances, this will have to be done through the Budget. As the answer which she has given means that it cannot be done before 1968 at the earliest, could not she speed up preparation of the report?

If the hon. Gentleman had listened to the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend, he would realise that what he has said is just not the case.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that it is urgent to remedy the impact of the wage-stop on families living below social security levels of subsistence?

It is urgent, of course, but it is just as urgent to help the great number of families in which the father is in full-time work but earning less than the supplementary benefit scales.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in spite of all that has been done over the years by way of pensions, National Assistance and the like, there is in this country a vast amount of poverty and, indeed, there seems to be a greater disparity between rich and poor now than we have had for many years? Will she seek to expedite this inquiry, as this Government are pledged to remove poverty?

I agree very much with what my right hon. Friend has said, and I have time and again let hon. Members know how deeply concerned I am, particularly for the children who are deprived. I assure him that we are pushing on as quickly as possible in trying to find a solution to this problem.

asked the Minister of Social Security in how many cases in the last 10 years, when the death certificate has certified that death is partly attributable to pneumoconiosis, no industrial diseases benefit has been paid to the widow.

I regret that this information is not available.

Will not my hon. Friend agree that there is need for a further investigation in the light of rejection of death claims when assessments have been granted during life, and will he agree also to have an investigation to find out the reasons for rejecting pneumoconiosis as a contributory cause when the patient has died of emphysema, heart disease or broncho-pneumonia?

I agree in the main with the first part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, but I must point out that any collection of statistics about those who have been turned down would be meaningless because we do not keep account of those who may have had slight pneumoconiosis but in respect of whom no claim is made for dependants or widows.

Will the hon. Gentleman realise that, as his hon. Friend has pointed out, it is exceedingly difficult to diagnose this disease and the borderline between it and emphysema or bronchitis is very narrow? We feel, as the hon. Gentleman feels, that there are many cases where people are not getting a fair deal. Will the hon. Gentleman look into it the position again?

Certainly, and I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for putting that point of view. My Answer to the next Question may help a little to make clear that we are doing our utmost in this direction.

asked the Minister of Social Security what medical research is now going on in her Department to arrive at a more accurate diagnosis in the case of pneumoconiosis.

Accurate diagnosis of pneumoconiosis depends on a combination of skill, knowledge and experience in the interpretation of X-rays and their correlation with clinical findings and industrial history. We encourage continuous research by members of pneumoconiosis medical panels, who have the closest contact with the pneumoconiosis research unit. universities and overseas bodies concerned with authoritative research into this disease.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply, but will he agree that variations in the past suggest that standards of diagnosis have fluctuated and give rise to the suspicion that the fall in the number of cases is not a true reflection of the incidence of this terrible disease?

Special inquiries have been made into the correlation of the findings of the pneumoconiosis medical panels in life and in death, and these findings show that the diagnoses of pneumoconiosis by the panels in life agree with post-mortem findings in 95 per cent. of cases. This is higher than the general rule. Nevertheless, research by our medical officers is continuously carried on, and only last September one of our principal medical officers visited the Vienna Industrial Medicine Conference to look into these problems. As the House knows, we are at this moment continuing research with the pneumoconiosis unit at the Glamorgan hospital and with universities. We are aware of this problem and of its importance to industry.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that there is still a strong feeling that where there is a doubt, in too many cases it tends to be decided against the person concerned rather than in his favour?

I should not like to give a categorical answer to that question. We are aware of the feelings in industry about these findings, and we are doing out utmost to find an answer to this very difficult problem. The hon. Gentleman earlier today admitted that it was a difficult problem.

asked the Minister of Social Security (1) what long-term plans she has for dealing with the overcrowding of her Jamaica Street offices, Bristol;

My right hon. Friend is aware that conditions at this office are unsatisfactory and it is hoped that premises will before long be made available for setting up an additional office in that locality. Meanwhile as a temporary relief I hope that overflow accommodation in another building will be ready for receiving callers by the end of the year.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask him to continue to keep this situation under review, as very serious overcrowding is taking place, and to provide such assistance as may become necessary?

Yes, Sir. As I have said, we are aware that the premises are highly unsatisfactory and we are doing what we can about it.

May I have an assurance from my hon. Friend that the other premises which are to be used are not one of the other offices in Bristol—the Woodborough Street office, which is operating at the moment under the same sort of conditions as those at the Jamaica Street office?

No, I cannot give my hon. Friend that assurance. But I can assure him that it is hoped that suitable premises will be found soon and that the necessary internal structural work and the provision of the new equipment and so on will be completed in time for the office to be set up within five or six months.

asked the Minister of Social Security how many insured persons are of the Moslem faith and have more than one wife; and what plans she has for legislation to regulate the provision of National Insurance benefits for the dependants of insured persons who embrace the Moslem faith and take wives additional to the one already covered by the insured person's National Insurance contributions.

The information requested by the hon. Member is not available. As to the second part of the Question, the National Insurance Scheme provides increases of benefit only for wives of monogamous marriages and I have no plans for change.

Does this mean that a Moslem with more than one wife does not have benefits for his second wife? Is that why the information is not available—or is it that a Moslem does have benefits for both wives and we do not know how many?

A Moslem has benefits for only one wife, as is the case with anyone else in this country.

asked the Minister of Social Security (1) whether she will increase retirement pensions and National Assistance rates, as soon as the period of the income standstill has terminated; and if she will make a statement;

I would remind my hon. Friend that the increase in pensions in March 1965 was one of about 18 per cent. against an increase in the Retail Prices Index since then of 6·8 per cent.

While appreciating the Answer and recognising the great work done by my right hon. Friend, may I ask her nevertheless to give an assurance that at intervals the retirement pensions will be carefully looked at with a view to increasing them at intervals?

I can assure my hon. Friend that each month I look at the movement of the Retail Prices Index because I am concerned that our old people should not suffer. It is because of this that I was able to give the figures which I have given today.

While recognising the large increase which took place in retirement pensions in March, 1965, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether she does not agree that there is still a very strong case indeed for a further substantial increase as soon as possible? Secondly, now that social secrurity minima have been established for elderly people, does she hope that within six months these minima will be reviewed in order that they may be increased?

I am afraid at this stage I cannot add anything to the answers which I have given to my hon. Friends.

asked the Minister of Social Security whether she will introduce legislation to enable widows' pension to be paid in arrears to widows, who having lived apart from their hubsands were not aware of the fact of their husband's death, whatever the period which may have elapsed since that date.

I am aware of the effect of the time limits on claims to benefits. They apply to all benefits, however, and it is not possible to consider any particular aspect in isolation.

Would the right hon. Lady agree to look at all these aspects in her review? Is she aware that it is very harsh on a woman who may be living apart from her husband, and who has no reason to know of his death, to find subsequently that she is not able to draw money to which she was entitled?

Help is given to such women. It may be difficult for them to go to the local offices from time to time to see whether anything has happened, but if they do—and some women do—then they get the information and are able to make application for their pensions when the time arrives. But I agree with the hon. Member that this question of time limit—not just in this case but applying to all benefits—is one which we hope to have looked at.

asked the Minister of Social Security whether she will make a statement on the effect of the entry into the European Economic Community on pensioners; and what action the Government propose to take in view of the estimated rise in the price of food which will result from entry.

Entry into the European Economic Community would not affect pension rights. The Government keep a continuous watch on the level of pensions in relation to all relevant factors, of which food prices is only one.

As pensioners' living standards are falling very considerably, besides those of the rest of industry, will the Minister assure the House that pensioners will not suffer because of the 14 per cent. rise in the cost of food due to entry into the Common Market?

The first part of the hon. Member's supplementary question is quite wrong. In real terms the pensioners today still have more money than they had in 1964 or have had at any earlier time. As for the other matters, of course we keep under review the whole time anything which will affect the standard of living of the pensioner.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that we cannot go on for ever appreciating the increase in benefits introduced in March, 1965, and that something should be done to make sure that the pension retains its value for the people for whom we introduced that benefit in the spring of last year?

I could understand my hon. Friend's supplementary question if the pension rate today were less in real terms than just before it was raised in March of last year, but that just is not the case. [HON. MEMBERS: "That was a Tory standard."] It is not a Tory standard. We gave an increase last March which was very much higher than was needed in proportion to the increase in the Retail Prices Index and, moreover, higher than was needed in proportion to the increase in earnings.

Does not the right hon. Lady appreciate that her hon. Friend the Member for Willesden, East (Mr. Freeson) is really asking her to fulfil her election pledges made at the last election?

There need be no fear about that. The very first thing that the Government did was to give to the old people the biggest increase ever given in real terms. This very day those who are betting supplementary benefits, the old people, will receive payments 27 per cent. higher than when we came to power.

asked the Minister of Social Security whether she will carry out a survey to discover the number of employed persons, whether part time or full time, aged 65 years or over in the case of men and 60 years and over in the case of women, in respect of whom the Selective Employment Tax is payable.

asked the Minister of Social Security whether she will carry out a survey to discover the number of employed persons, whether part time or full time, aged 65 years or over in the case of men and 60 years and over in the case of women, in respect of whom the Selective Employment Tax is payable.

My right hon. Friend has no special survey of this sort in mind at present.

Would the Parliamentary Secretary reconsider this question since one reason for setting up the new Ministry was to ensure better information about elderly people for whom the social security benefits are paid? Surely it should be a matter of concern to his Department that a good many of the elderly people then in work have since lost their jobs as a result of the application of the pernicious Selective Employment Tax? Surely this information should be obtained?

I do not appreciate the hon. Member's supplementary question. We just do not know that yet, and the facts will not become apparent for a long time to come.

Does the Minister seriously tell the House that he does not believe that the effect of Selective Employment Tax is to keep elderly people out of employment? This is a fact, and it is happenng all over the country.

I am here to apply my mind to the facts as they are before me, otherwise the House would call me back to the Question.

asked the Minister of Social Security how many people have applied for the monthly instead of three-monthly repayment of Selective Employment Tax paid in respect of nursing or domestic assistance in the home for an elderly or disabled person.

asked the Minister of Social Security how many people have applied for the monthly instead of three-monthly repayment of Selective Employment Tax paid in respect of nursing or domestic assistance in the home for an elderly or disabled person.

asked the Minister of Social Security (1) on what grounds those applying for the monthly instead of three-monthly repayments of Selective Employment Tax paid in respect of nursing or domestic assistance in the home for an elderly or disabled person are being subjected to a means test;

asked the Minister of Social Security what will be the administrative cost of the means test which applicants have to undergo in order to obtain monthly instead of three-monthly repayment of Selective Employment Tax paid in respect of nursing or domestic assistance in the home for an elderly or disabled person.

At 22nd November, 40 such applications had been received. Monthly repayments are intended for persons for whom the longer waiting period would cause hardship. The claimant is asked for brief details of his income and expenses on which the question of hardship is decided. The procedure for considering a claim for monthly repayments is simple and if applications continue to be received at the present rate, the administrative costs are not likely to exceed £100 a year. If the standard period of repayment were monthly instead of quarterly, substantial additional administrative costs would, however, be incurred.

Does not the hon. Gentleman think it just a little iniquitous that these people, many of them elderly and infirm, should be subjected to a means test in order to qualify not for a grant but for repayment of their own money in a shorter length of time than other people?

No, Sir. This is necessary in order that we can apply this Selective Employment Tax as it was intended to be applied. Up to 22nd November, the total number of claims for repayment received was 8,882, of which 6,768 have so far been allowed.

Until this unjust impost on the old and disabled is removed, will the hon. Gentleman at least look at the possibility of paying back this money at monthly intervals to all those in the special household category?

I cannot forecast what the future may hold, but if monthly repayments were the general rule, claims would have to be examined and payments made to employers 12 times a year instead of four times a year under the present arrangement for refunds at three-monthly intervals. This could give rise, according to the Department's information, to a threefold increase in administrative costs.

Do not the hon. Gentleman's replies bear out our view that the tax should never have been imposed on these households? Does not the need for this particularly miserable application of the means test bear out our whole attitude when the Selective Employment Payments Act was going through the House?

We are concerned only with the collection of the tax. The hon. Gentleman's supplementary question should be put to the Treasury.

Is it not clear from the hon. Gentleman's replies that, first, his Department is not aware of the full impact of the tax upon various categories of people? The hon. Gentleman says that he is only concerned with the facts. Secondly, is not what guides him in this, apparently, the administrative convenience of the Department?

Not at all. We are aware of the facts. For the hon. Gentleman's information, I will tell him that monthly repayment is made where the gross weekly income of the claimant after paying for the National Insurance stamp and the wages of the employed person, and allowing 30s. for each dependent child, is less than £10 if the claimant is married or £8 if single. These income limits closely follow those prescribed for a full rates rebate under the Rating Act. 1966.

asked the Minister of Social Security whether she will introduce legislation to amend Section 22(1) of the National Insurance Act, 1965, to ensure that people who have received redundancy notices prior to the start of a trade dispute shall be entitled to un-employment benefit.

All aspects of the trade dispute disqualification for unemployment benefit are at present being examined by the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers' Associations and I propose to await its recommendations on this very complicated subject before deciding whether any changes should be made in the present provisions.

We all appreciate that the right hon. Lady is very sympathetic to cases of hardship. Is she aware that in my constituency many car transporter employees were given redundancy notices on one weekend, that a strike started during the following week and that, since then some of these notices have expired and the employment terminated? This is causing hardship and, although we are grateful for having heard her views now, cannot she go further?

I am sorry, but under the present legislation there is nothing that can be done. This position has obtained since 1927. I am hoping that the Royal Commission will be able to put forward proposals that will ease the hardship—or perhaps I should say injustice— as our people see it at the present time.

asked the Minister of Social Security how many potential recipients of unemployment benefit in the latest period for which figures are available have been refused benefit under Section 13(1) of the National Insurance Act 1946, although not themselves participating in a trade dispute.

I regret that this information is not available.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that the effect of the Section at the moment is that if there is one member in a workshop in a different union from the others it may deprive all of the employees of any benefit? In addition to the injustice of this, does it not provide a real incentive for a closed shop?

It is because of the difficulties involved in trade disputes and how unemployment benefit is affected by them that I felt it was important for the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers' Associations to examine the whole of this matter.

asked the Minister of Social Security what methods she intends to use, and what definition of need she has in mind, in her plans to help low wage earners with large families; and how she proposes to ensure that payments to relieve such need are confined to those included in her definition.

asked the Minister of Social Security if, in the light of the reference to the priority for lowest-paid workers in the White Paper on Prices and Incomes Standstill (Period of Severe Restraint), she will seek power to make an early substantial increase in family allowances.

I would refer the hon. Gentlemen to my replies on this subject on 21st November.—[Vol. 736, c. 929–31.]

I thank the right hon. Lady but will she give us an assurance that, whatever administrative method she may choose—and she has given an interview on this subject to the Financial Times—she will make sure that the payment is as rapid as possible in time and is not held up in order to make the administrative survey more complete?

In answer to an earlier Question, I said that the Committee dealing with this matter had already got interim information as a result of the survey and I give an assurance, as I have given it before, that we are pressing on as speedily as possible with this matter.

Now that we have had the White Paper on the prices and incomes standstill, with specific priority given in it to lower-paid workers, and since these workers are not likely to get a general increase because they are usually in a package deal with higher-paid workers, would not my right hon. Friend agree that a very special responsibility rests on her Department to get something for the large families during the period of severe restraint from January to July?

Without even mentioning the White Paper, I believe strongly that a very special responsibility lies with the Government to ensure as quickly as possible an end to the deprivation from which so many children—half a million it is reckoned—are suffering at the present time.

asked the Minister of Social Security what increases in family allowances would be necessary to restore them to the same real value as when they were first introduced.

Approximately 2s. 6d. on the allowance for the second child and 6d. on the allowances for subsequent children.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that, even if these increases were made, it would not be enough to eradicate poverty which exists, particularly among large families?

Yes, I would agree. As we have said many times, the Government have the whole system of family allowances under consideration.

asked the Minister of Social Security what increases in family allowances would be necessary to restore them to the same proportion of average earnings as when they were first introduced.

Approximately 8s 9d. on the allowance for the second child and 6s. 9d. on the allowances for subsequent children.

Has the hon. Gentleman seen the radical proposals put forward at the Liberal Party conference this year for reforming the family provisions? A copy was sent to him. When can we expect these proposals to be implemented now that they have so much support on the benches behind him?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that anything the Liberal Party can do we can do better.

asked the Minister of Social Security if she will seek power to introduce National Insurance benefits and supplementary benefits adjusted to cost-of-living changes at regular intervals.

These matters naturally fall to be considered as part of our review of social security, but I would remind my hon. Friend that National Insurance and supplementary benefits are substantially higher at the present time than they would have been if they had been tied to the cost of living in the past.

I thank my right hon. Friend for the latter part of that reply, but does she agree that, in the coming economic expansion, if there is any increase in the cost of living, there is danger that the pensioners may be left behind again? Will she assure us that, at the end of the present freeze, people on pensions and benefits of all types will be given No. 1 priority?

It is difficult to say what will be given No. 1 priority, particularly when one listens to all the pressures being exercised, quite rightly, from this side of the House. All I can say is that this is a matter which the Government keep under review continually and that we are determined to safeguard the position and the standard of living of our old people.

May I press the right hon. Lady again on this? Does not she agree that she is pledged, by the Labour Party's last election manifesto, to tie pensions and other benefits to the cost of living?

The hon. Gentleman is wrong again. We pledged far more than that. We said in 1964 that they would be tied to rises in earnings.

asked the Minister of Social Security how many people qualifying for supplementary benefits are not drawing them; and what steps she is taking to see that these people are catered for.

As regards the first part of the Question, it is not possible to say how many people will qualify for supplementary benefits when these become payable on 28th November, that is, today. Since 3rd October, when claims were invited from people over pension age, about half a million new claims for supplementary pension have been received. This indicates that the initial publicity for the scheme has been effective; measures to encourage people to claim will of course continue.

I am sure that we are all equally glad that we are moving away from the position of the Tory Party when——

Order. Question.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that finding these people must be the spearhead of our drive against poverty? Will she undertake to organise a house-to-house anti-poverty campaign, using all the facilities of her Ministry and local authorities, so that we can find in their own homes these needy people who are incapable of applying for help?

I am delighted that 500,000 people have applied and it seems so far that about two-thirds will be getting supplementary pensions. We have made great publicity efforts, and I think that this is the result. As part of our continuing effort to encourage people to make a claim, a special leaflet has been prepared for members of statutory and voluntary organisations, social workers and churches, all of whom can help greatly.

But is it not a fact that, far from everyone having become greedy and grasping, there are very many poor people who are not claiming what they are entitled to? Will my right hon. Friend therefore heed my hon. Friend's plea to see that there is a visit to the home of every person who might be entitled to such supplement?

There were more than 700,000 people who should have had a payment but who had not applied, and about one-quarter of these people were below the National Assistance level. Some were not suffering. About 500,000 have now applied, and we will continue our efforts until we have claims from all of them.

asked the Minister of Social Security how many persons receiving reduced National Assistance allowances because of the wage-stop at the end of 1965 were classified as general labourers and light labourers, respectively; and how many were disabled.

Of the 14,839 unemployed persons receiving reduced assistance allowances because of wage-stop on 28th September, 1965, 6,200 were classified as general labourers and 4,800 as light labourers. It is not known how many were disabled.

asked the Minister of Social Security whether she will take steps to ensure that the Supplementary Benefits Commission do not make the right to a supplementary allowance conditional on registration for employment in the case of persons who are unlikely to obtain full-time employment.

Registration is required when a person claiming a supplementary allowance is capable of full or part-time employment and without domestic ties. I do not think it would be in the interests of the community or the individual concerned to waive this requirement solely because of difficulty in finding work.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in the past sticking to hard-and-fast rules has caused some hardship and injustice? In the light of that, will he consider whether this matter does not require to be weighed very carefully indeed?

We should be quite prepared to accept any evidence coming from any of my hon. Friends about the imposition of hardship, but the waiving of any requirement to register in the case of a man fit for work could have exceedingly bad effects psychologically. We also have to accept that a disabled man particularly might think that he had been more or less thrown on the scrap heap. We have to watch that very carefully.

asked the Minister of Social Security whether she is satisfied that under her regulations the Supplementary Benefits Commission will not apply the wage-stop to people who are drawing sickness benefit; and if she will make a statement.

As my right hon. Friend explained to the House during the debate on the Ministry of Social Security Bill, the wage-stop cannot be applied to the long-term or the chronic sick, but only to the unemployed and to people who are temporarily not available for work because of sickness.

Is my hon. Friend aware that more and more people are expressing concern about the effects of the wage-stop, particularly on the man with a young and large family? Should not cognisance be taken of that growing concern?

Yes, Sir. I cannot improve on what my right hon. Friend has already said about the wage-stop. However, if it is clear at the time of the claim for benefit that the sickness is not temporary, the wage-stop will not be applied. If the wage-stop is applied in a case of sickness benefit, it will be reviewed after the claimant has been sick for six months.

asked the Minister of Social Security what would be the weekly rates of the National Insurance retirement pension if those rates had kept pace with the increase in average male industrial earnings since March, 1965, when pension rates were last increased.

On the basis of the Ministry of Labour's inquiries into average earnings in April, 1965, and April, 1966, the latest date for which a figure is available, 85s. 8d. for a single person and 139s. 3d. for a couple.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that that is 5s. 8d. short of what it would have been if the Labour election pledge had been carried out, because the pledge clearly was that after the increase had been made, the pension would be linked to earnings?

All the pledges will be carried out.

When?

The hon. Lady may be interested to know that if in March, 1965, the pension had been put up only in line with the rise in average earnings between April, 1963, and October, 1964, the rates would have been 75s. 8d. for a single person and 122s. 2d. for a married couple, whereas in fact they become 80s. and 130s.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, while the interest of hon. Members opposite in this subject this afternoon will be noted outside the House, although they did not vote against the pension increases in March, 1965, they voted against the Finance Act provisions to implement them?

Yes, Sir.

Is not the point which the Parliamentary Secretary is seeking to evade and which has been raised on both sides of the House the fact not that the pension was increased substantially, as it was, but that the increase has since lost a great deal of its value through inflation?

No, Sir. What I was trying to impress on the House was that Labour will fulfil its pledges.—[HON. MEMBERS: "When?"]—If we were to make a comparison between the increase in March, 1965, and the average increase over the 13 years when the Tory Party was in power, it would be seen that our increase stood way above anything the Tory Party ever did.

asked the Minister of Social Security what decision she has now reached on raising the earnings limit for National Insurance retirement pensioners.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave my hon. Friend, the Member for Blaydon (Mr. Woof) on 14th November.—[Vol. 736, c. 5.]

Does not the Minister recognise that successive Labour Budgets have reduced the financial ability of many companies to provide this employment while S.E.T. imposes a penalty upon companies which do? Since it may be difficult for elderly persons to find this employment, will she not give them a reward for their assiduity?

The supplementary question that has been put has nothing whatever to do with the earnings rule. The rule and all its implications are being examined. We hope to have a report before very long and the Government will decide what action to take upon it.

asked the Minister of Social Security whether she will undertake a specific inquiry into the incidence of financial hardship among various categories of disabled people.

I would remind my hon. Friend that the new supplementary benefits scheme which came into operation today makes improved provision for disabled people, among others, who are suffering financial hardship.

While recognising the point made by my right hon. Friend, may I ask whether she would accept that there is a very real problem here, namely, the fact that benefits depend not upon need or the nature of the disability but upon the historical accident of how it arose?

There is a benefit for war disablement, or industrial disablement; and then there is the ordinary National Insurance sickness benefit, but even this does not apply to the wife who has had no contributions. We are well aware of the whole position.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that there is a growing volume of evidence to show that very real hardship is being caused in families where the wife is totally incapacitated and there is no constant attendance allowance, or where she has to go out to work and the earnings rule is applied and she has a totally incapacitated husband? Is there not a case for examining this in the review which is now under way?

All of this is being looked at in the review. There are many, many things which have to be looked at, not because the problems arose after October, 1964, but because they were never thoroughly examined by previous Governments. In one breath the Opposition Front Bench is saying that we ought to cut down taxes and yet if I were to do everything asked of me by hon. Members opposite it would mean a very great increase in taxation.

asked the Minister of Social Security whether Her Majesty's Government will introduce early legislation to provide for advancement of retirement pensions to workers over 50 years of age, now rendered redundant and unable to find suitable alternative employment on account of their age as a result of the Government's re-deployment policy.

I do not think that it would be right to introduce an earlier pension age in the circumstances which my hon. Friend has in mind.

While recognising what has already been done for redundant workers through redundancy payments, redeployment and training schemes, may I ask whether my right hon. Friend is aware that many of these men are not susceptible to training for other jobs? Does the Minister appreciate that many are semi-casual workers not benefiting from the redundancy payments, and will she have another look at this to see that those suffering from the Government's policies have compensation, as do other workers?

I realise the difficulties, but I still think that it would be very wrong to say that any worker ought to have a pension at 50, because it would mean that one was throwing him on the scrapheap and saying that the country had no further need of him. I would be completely opposed to that. On the other hand, I should like to see more training facilities, and employers being urged to give the opportunities of work to these men.

While expressing every sympathy for workers over 50 who find it difficult to get other jobs, may I ask the Minister to make it clear to both sides of the House that greater pensions cannot be paid unless industrial productivity increases and real national income increases?

There are two matters to be taken into account when thinking of increases in social benefits. One is what one will be able to do from greater productivity and the other is what one can do from redistribution of income. Both of these matters are being taken into account by the Government.

asked the hon. and learned Member for Brigg, as Second Church Estates Commissioner, what were the results of the talks held recently between the representatives of the Church Commission and the International Language Club, Croydon.

No talks have taken place recently between representatives of the Church Commissioners and the International Language Club.

Have not talks taken place between solicitors acting for the Church Commissioners and the International Language Club? Would not my hon. and learned Friend agree that if the International Language Club, Croydon, is closed down, a tremendous amount of hardship will be caused to individual students? May I appeal to him to use his good offices as Second Church Estates Commissioner to try to make sure that talks take place directly between the Church Commissioners and the manager of the International Language Club and out of 21,500,000—

Long enough.

No, it is not a fact that solicitors representing the Church Commissioners are talking to the International Language Club. I agree that it would be undesirable for the Club to close down, but that, unfortunately, is not the responsibility of the Church Commissioners.

asked the Minister of Health what action is being taken to deal with the special problem of hypothermia during the winter for very elderly pensioners; and whether he will introduce legislation to provide all-night storage heaters to those in need.

My right hon. Friend proposes shortly to remind health and welfare authorities of this danger, to which their attention was drawn two years ago. He does not think that legislation is necessary to enable local authorities to take the appropriate action where required.

Does the Minister not consider this to be a very urgent problem indeed? Have not a very large number of very elderly people died during the winter months because of the intense cold? If a circular is to be sent to local authorities can it be done as soon as possible?

I assure my hon. Friend that the circular will be reissued as soon as possible and that we are concerned about the possibility of deaths among old people as a result of hypothermia. We will get the circular off as quickly as possible.

asked the Minister of Health what is the ratio of patients to doctors in the Hull Executive Council area; and how this ratio compares with the ratio of patients to doctors for the United Kingdom as a whole.

The average list at 1st October, 1965, was 2,703 for unrestricted principals working mainly in Hull, and 2,356 for the United Kingdom as a whole.

Would my hon. Friend agree that these figures show quite a serious situation? Would he tell the House what steps he is taking to keep this situation under control?

It is a serious situation and we appreciate that Hull is under-doctored. The whole of Hull has now been designated as an under-doctored area, although, with the exception of the east part of Hull, it has not been so designated for three years. This is the only thing that we can do. There is no restriction on any doctor setting up practice in Hull.

asked the Minister of Health what plans are envisaged for a comprehensive review of pay and conditions for nurses; and if he will make a statement.

The pay and conditions of service of nursing staff in the National Health Service are matters in the first instance for the Nurses and Midwives Whitley Council. The pay agreement made by the Council in 1965 provided that it would run for two years from 1st July, 1965 and that during this time no major issue should be raised except with the consent of both sides.

Would not my right hon Friend agree that since that meeting of the Whitley Council there is now an urgent need for a special examination of the problem affecting nurses? Would he also comment on the fact that private agencies have sprung up recruiting nurses, which are not in any way connected with the Ministry or local authority organisations?

Nursing agencies are no new thing. If my hon. Friend wants to ask me a question about the relationship to the National Health Service perhaps he would put it on the Order Paper. I can assure him that there are claims for a reduction in working hours and also for overtime pay, but so far there is no claim for a general review of pay before the Whitley Council.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether, within the context of the prices and incomes policy, the wages and conditions of nurses come within the category of lower-paid workers, because if they do not they jolly well should?

This is not an interpretation which I ought to give off the cuff at Question Time.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that there is a good deal of confusion among nurses and other staff about how they will be affected during the period of severe restraint? Can the right hon. Gentleman clear this up as soon as possible?

The consideration of nurses' remuneration will not come within the period of severe restraint because the two years to which I have referred do not expire until 1st July.

asked the Minister of Health what is the average length of time spent in hospital by in-patients occupying acute general beds at the last convenient date; and how this compares with the situation 10 years ago.

The average length of stay in acute general beds has fallen from 18·2 days in 1955 to 12·7 days in 1965.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that this is a quite outstanding example of increased productivity that gives the answer to the many people who inaccurately suggest that over the years the standards of treatment in the National Health Service have deteriorated?

I agree that this is a remarkable statistic, and I feel that it fully bears out the interpretation put on it by my hon. Friend.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman also agree that this is a remarkable tribute to the researchers and others in the drug industry to whom a great deal of the credit needs to be given?

I agree that advances in medical techniques, including chemotherapeutic techniques, have contributed to this, but that is only one of a number of factors.

Would the Minister agree that this is remarkable and beneficial to the patients as a whole only if it has been paralleled by a development of local authority services? Is he satisfied that the local authority services in the area in question can cope with the people discharged early from hospital?

This is a general question; there is no "area in question". I am satisfied that community services have expanded considerably and, in general, are quite capable of handling the additional work which arises from the earlier discharge of patients.