The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Author: admin

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Benefits – 3 November 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Benefits on 3rd November 1986.

    Mr. Kirkwood Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he has any plans to review existing procedures whereby interim financial assistance is not available to claimants in financial difficulties caused by administrative delay in processing benefits due to them; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major The interim payment provisions have been reviewed and the scope for such payments is being extended under section 51(1) of the Social Security Act 1986.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Benefit Claimants – 3 November 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Benefit Claimants on 3rd November 1986.

    Ms. Clare Short Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish information showing the number of claimants who have had their benefit (a) reduced or (b) withdrawn in connection with the restart scheme, the average duration of benefit withdrawal or reduction and the average loss and the numbers resulting from (i) failure to attend an interview, (ii) lack of interest in restart options and (iii) other reasons.

    Mr. Major Up to 9 October 1986, the latest date for which figures are available for the national restart scheme and by which time 522,668 people had been invited to interview, 10,842 decisions to disallow benefit or credits had been made. Of these, 9,757 were as a result of a failure to attend an interview without good cause 1,029 were on the grounds of non-availability for work and 56 resulted from a refusal of suitable employment. No information is available on the duration of benefit withdrawal or the average loss of benefit but where disallowance is the result of failure to attend for interview benefit is reinstated as soon as the person does attend or makes acceptable arrangements to be interviewed.

    Only the disqualifications resulting from a refusal of suitable employment would lead to a reduction in benefit by the imposition of a voluntary unemployment deduction, under regulation 8 of the Supplementary Benefit (Requirement) Regulations 1983. No information on this small number of cases is available. In the other circumstances benefit is withdrawn, though some claimants may then become entitled to payments under the Supplementary Benefit (Urgent Cases) Regulations. No information is available about payments made in these cases under these urgency provisions.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Family Income Supplement – 3 November 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Family Income Supplement on 3rd November 1986.

    Ms. Clare Short Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish the most recent estimate of the proportion of recipients of family income supplement who are liable to income tax.

    Mr. Major At April 1986, the latest date for which information is available, the proportion of family income supplement recipients whose declared income, at the time their claim was made, exceeded the level of income above which income tax is payable was 70 per cent.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Benefits – 31 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Benefits on 31st October 1986.

    Mr. Marlow Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will introduce legislation to place a limit on the amount of supplementary benefit that can be paid to foreigners, compatible with the respective levels available in their own countries; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major No. Entitlement to supplementary benefit depends upon immigration status and there is no nationality test. In those circumstances where benefit is payable to a person from abroad, it is at the rate appropriate to the person’s requirements and resources in this country and has no regard to levels of social assistance available in other countries where different costs of living apply.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on JE Hanger & Co – 30 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on JE Hanger & Co on 30th October 1986.

    Mr. Dobson Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will list and give the dates of approaches made by Ministers and officials respectively, to J. E. Hanger and Co. since 16 September about the current lock-out, together with the company’s response in each case.

    Mr. Major Under my direction officials in the Department’s headquarters and in the Department’s artificial limb and appliance centres have been in daily contact with J. E. Hanger and Co. Ltd. centrally and locally since the dispute at the Roehampton works began. Oral and written requests have been put to the management of the company from the first week enquiring what action the company were taking to maintain supply. Hanger management has not been prepared to go further than to make general assurances that they were making strenuous efforts to maintain the service.

    As far as patients are concerned, however, co-operation between the Department’s artificial limb and appliance centre staff and local Hanger branch management is very good. All urgent cases drawn to the attention of the company have been and are being dealt with expeditiously.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the Family Income Supplement – 30 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the Family Income Supplement on 30th October 1986.

    Mr. Clay Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish from the 1983 family expenditure survey (a) the number of those eligible claiming family income supplement, (b) the total amount of benefit unclaimed and (c) the average weekly amount of benefit unclaimed broken down into one and two parent families.

    Mr. Major An analysis of the data derived from the 1983 and 1984 family expenditure surveys in relation to take-up of family income supplement is almost complete. I hope to announce the results very shortly.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Housing Benefit – 30 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Housing Benefit on 30th October 1986.

    Mr. Clay Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish from the 1983 family expenditure survey (a) the number and percentage of those eligible claiming certificated, and standard housing benefit and housing benefit supplement, (b) the total amount of benefit unclaimed and (c) the average weekly amount of benefit unclaimed broken down according to the different groups of beneficiaries.

    Mr. Major The 1983 family expenditure survey data are not regarded as reliable in respect of estimates of the take-up of housing benefit, as the survey was carried out in the same year as the changeover to the new scheme. The first take-up estimates of housing benefit are expected shortly, however, based on analysis of data from the 1984 family expenditure survey.

    Mr. Meacher Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what has been the rent and rate increase each year since 1982; by how much the housing benefits needs allowance has been increased in each of these years, taking account of his statement of 22nd October; how many persons have lost each year that the the former has exceeded the latter; what was the total saving; what was the average individual loss and how many lost more than: (a) £1, (b) £2, and (c) £3 per week.

    Mr. Major I think there may be a misunderstanding underlying the hon. Member’s question. Increases in rent and rate levels are reflected in standard housing benefit entitlement in two ways. 60 per cent. of the claimant’s actual rent and rates are reflected automatically in the benefit calculation, and this has never been altered. In addition, 40 per cent. of the national average rents and rates were reflected in the needs allowances under the traditional uprating formula which was used each year from November 1982 to November 1985 inclusive. For last July’s interim uprating it was not possible to use the traditional formula, as was explained at the time, because the measurement period for the uprating did not include the month of April when rents and rates normally increase. The approach used for next April’s uprating, together with details of the effects, were explained fully in my right hon. Friend’s statement to the House, and subsequent exchanges, on 22 October.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on BCODP – 30 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on BCODP on 30th October 1986.

    Mr. Wareing Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what assistance his Department gives to the British Council of Organisations of Disabled People; what his plans are for any future assistance; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major The British Council of Organisations of Disabled People is currently in receipt of a two year grant from the Department for the years 1985-86 and 1986-87 of £9,000 and £10,000 respectively towards their central costs in establishing a development worker post. We have received an application from BCODP for a grant towards their international activities and towards a proposed meeting of the World Council of the Disabled People’s International in the United Kingdom in 1987. These applications are currently being considered.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Invalid Care Allowance – 30 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Invalid Care Allowance on 30th October 1986.

    Mr. Wareing Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many married women have now claimed invalid care allowance following his decision to extend it to them; what steps he is taking to ensure that all married women entitled to this benefit will have entered their claim before the end of the year; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major A total of around 75,000 married and cohabiting women have claimed invalid care allowance, 60,000 of these claims have been made since my right hon. Friend’s announcement on 23 June at column 21. We have sent individual letters to some 400,000 attendance allowance beneficiaries, asking them to pass on details of the extension to their carer. In addition there has been a national press campaign in newspapers and journals, including women’s magazines. All the publicity has explained the ability to claim back to 22 December 1984 if the claim is received in the Department by 31 December 1986.

    Mr. Foulkes Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is his estimate of the level of the earnings limit for the invalid care allowance at April 1987 had it risen in line with changes to the retail price index since it was last increased in November 1982.

    Mr. Major £14.27.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the Mobility Allowance – 30 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the Mobility Allowance on 30th October 1986.

    Mr. Alfred Morris Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will be introducing legislation to allow recipients of the mobility allowance to retain it beyond the age of 75 years.

    Mr. Major We have no present plans to do so.

    Mr. Dewar Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many applications for mobility allowance were made in Scotland in 1985; of these how many were (i) granted and (ii) refused; of the claimants whose applications were refused how many subsequently appealed to the medical boards; in how many of these cases the original refusal was overturned; and in how many cases a refusal by a medical board was subsequently overturned by the Medical Appeals Tribunal.

    Mr. Major I regret that this information can be obtained only at disproportionate cost.