Category: 1983-1987 Parliament

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on War Pensions – 20 May 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on War Pensions on 20th May 1986.


    Mr. Kirkwood Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he proposes to bring war pensions available to war widows in the period before 1973 into line with the levels of pension paid since that date; how much it would cost to increase all pre-1973 level pensions by £5 per week; how much it cost to pay war widows’ pensions for the last five years for which figures are available; and how many persons are in receipt of war pensions in the area served by the Galashiels ILO in the Scottish Borders.

    Mr. Major Under the war pensions scheme, widows’ pensions are paid at the same rate regardless of the date of the service man’s death or of when he served. The precise number widowed before 1973 is not known, but the estimated cost of the increase suggested would be in the region of £16 million per year. The Department’s expenditure on war widows’ pensions was as follows:

    Year | £ million

    1980-81 | 146
    1981-82 | 166
    1982-83 | 174
    1983-84 | 177
    1984-85 | 184

    The remaining information requested is not available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the Personal Injuries Scheme – 19 May 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the Personal Injuries Scheme on 19th May 1986.


    Mrs. Beckett Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many persons he expects to be affected by the amendments to (a) articles 23 and 48 and (b) article 25A of the Personal Injuries (Civilians) Scheme 1983, proposed in the Personal Injuries (Civilians) Amendment Scheme 1986 (S.I., 1986, No. 628); and what will be the effect on public expenditure of (a) and (b).

    Mr. Major The personal injuries (civilians) scheme provides for the payment of pensions and allowances, similar to those made to service men under the war pensions scheme, to civilians who were disabled or died as a result of enemy action during the 1939-45 war. The amendments remove some ambiguities in the legislation that have recently come to light. The number of people affected will be minimal, as will the effect on public expenditure.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the Glasgow Resettlement Unit – 19 May 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the Glasgow Resettlement Unit on 19th May 1986.


    Mr. Craigen Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make a statement on the implications for his policy concerning the Glasgow resettlement unit of the recent report sent to him by the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill; and what consideration he is giving to the points raised concerning its provision of services and accommodation for single homeless men.

    Mr. Major The report on the Glasgow resettlement unit, which was drawn up by the Council of Civil Service Unions, will be considered in the light of the recommendations made by the regional review team which has been looking at the needs of and provision for single homeless people in Scotland. The outcome of our regional consultation exercise, of which the Scotland review forms a part, will be discussed at a national resettlement conference on 3 June, after which we will decide on the next steps.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Claimants (Camden) – 19 May 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Claimants (Camden) on 19th May 1986.


    Mr. Dobson Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will give for the latest available year (a) the number of disqualifications for unemployment benefit and (b) the number of deductions from supplementary benefit experienced by claimants in Camden on the ground of voluntary unemployment.

    Mr. Major [pursuant to his reply, 12 May 1986, c. 384-5]: I regret that information on the number of deductions from supplementary benefit experienced by claimants in Camden on the grounds of voluntary unemployment is not available centrally. Statistics are not kept routinely, so that the information could be obtained only by a special exercise which would be disproportionately expensive.
    The Department of Employment informs me that in the year ended 31 March 1986, 888 claims for unemployment benefit were disqualified on the grounds of voluntary unemployment at the two Camden unemployment benefit offices.

    Mr. Nicholas Winterton Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what information he has concerning the numbers of war widows who are in receipt only of the Department of Health and Social Security pension.

    Mr. Major [pursuant to his reply, 14 May 1986, c. 497]: Of the 65,000 widows receiving war widows pension, a small minority also receive a pension from the Ministry of Defence under the armed forces pension scheme.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the Statutory Sick Pay Scheme – 19 May 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the Statutory Sick Pay Scheme on 19th May 1986.


    Mr. Janner Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what plans his Department has to review the operation of the statutory sick pay scheme since April 1983 in the light of the criticisms contained in the new report published by the Disability Alliance, ERA, Leicester rights centre and the Leicester city council low pay campaign, copies of which were sent to him; and whether he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major [pursuant to his reply, 9 May 1986, c. 290]: We have kept the operation of the statutory sick pay scheme under continuous review since its introduction in April 1983 and devoted considerable effort to making employers familiar with it. In the first year of the scheme, 85 per cent. of all employers were visited by DHSS inspectors and SSP payments checked. The overall error rate was 15 per cent. but this will have improved as more employers have become accustomed to the rules. Since then we have concentrated our checks on those employers whom we believe to be most likely to make mistakes, either because of our findings on the first phase of visits or because the employer may be less familiar with the SSP arrangements. The error rate is correspondingly high (28 per cent.), made up of 16 per cent. overpayments and 12 per cent. underpayments. These mistakes are discussed with the employer to ensure that he understands the rules for the future. In 1985 we checked 116,000 employee records in this way. We also maintain a random sample check of employers generally. Our monitoring generally is at a level recommended by the Public Accounts Committee.

    We expect and wish to achieve lower error rates. We shall keep the operation of the scheme under close scrutiny and seek continued improvement, which I believe will come as all employers gain more experience of SSP. The report to which the hon. and learned Member refers concludes that the transfer of sickness payments to employers has been a failure, but I cannot accept this. The vast majority of employers take their responsibilities in this area seriously. Most of their mistakes have been technical – for example, failure to apply the rule about waiting days – and I am sure that we are right to concentrate our checking efforts on the minority of employers where mistakes persist at an unduly high rate.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Unclaimed Benefits – 19 May 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Unclaimed Benefits on 19th May 1986.


    Mr. Evans Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will estimate the amount of money saved by his Department each year by the failure of people to claim benefits for which they would be eligible.

    Mr. Major I shall let the hon. Member have a reply as soon as possible.

    Mr. Evans Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will estimate the number of people who failed to claim unemployment benefit for which they were eligible in each of the last three years.

    Mr. Major No estimates are available on the number of people who fail to claim unemployment benefit.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Social Security Appeals – 19 May 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Social Security Appeals on 19th May 1986.


    Mrs. Renee Short Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will list the number of social security appeals which have been referred by the Social Security Commissioners to the European Court of Justice; and what was the ruling in each case, during the last five years.

    Mr. Major During the period 1981-86, the Social Security Commissioners referred five cases to the European Court of Justice. Rulings on three of these are awaited. The rulings of the two cases received are as follows:

    (1) The issue concerned the applicability of Community overlapping benefit provisions and whether a divorced woman residing in the United Kingdom could continue to receive United Kingdom child benefit for the same period and in respect of the same children for whom a corresponding benefit was being paid in the Republic of Ireland to her former husband.

    The court ruled:

    “i. the provision for suspension contained in the first sentence of Article 10(1)(a) of Regulation No 574/72 of the Council of 21.3.72 must be interpreted as meaning that it applies whenever the institution of another Member State has in fact granted family benefits to a worker in respect of the same child, in pursuance of Article 73 of Regulation No 1408/71 of the Council of 14.6.71, without it being necessary to examine whether all the conditions for the grant of those benefits are satisfied under the legislation of that other Member State.
    ii. the second sentence of Article 10(1)(a) of Regulation No 574/72 must be interpreted as meaning that it applies to a divorced spouse.”
    This ruling extended the meaning of the word “spouses” in the relevant EC provisions to include “former spouses” so as to prevent the overlapping benefit provisions from operating unjustly in the case of divorced claimants of family benefits. As the claimant was working in the United Kingdom, she continued to receive the United Kingdom benefit and the Irish benefit was suspended.

    (2) The issue concerned the application of Community provisions on the taking into account of contributions paid in another member state for the purpose of entitlement to sickness benefit/invalidity benefit, where those contributions had been paid after, rather than before, the period of the claim for which the United Kingdom was responsible.

    The court ruled:

    only the legislation of the Member State in whose territory the worker is or was last employed is applicable with regard to sickness benefit by virtue of Article 13(2)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971. The competent institution or institutions of the Member States are competent to aggregate the insurance periods pursuant to Article 18 of that regulation;

    ii. invalidity benefit due under the legislation of a Member State following a period of incapacity for work during which the worker received benefits in respect of that incapacity, including benefit from another Member State, which is to be taken into account pursuant to Article 40(3) of Regulation No 1408/71, may, where appropriate, be validly reduced pursuant to Article 46(3) of that regulation.”

    This ruling means that, in deciding a claim to sickness benefit, contributions paid in another member state are to be taken into account only if they were paid prior to the period of the current claim.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Special Claims (Staff) – 19 May 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Special Claims (Staff) on 19th May 1986.


    Dr. Godman Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many of the 5,000 additional staff at the Department of Health and Social Security local offices will be posted to the special claims section; and if he will break this down by region.

    Mr. Major I shall let the hon. Member have a reply as soon as possible.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Local Office Staff – 19 May 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Local Office Staff on 19th May 1986.


    Dr. Godman Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many of the 5,000 additional staff at the Department of Health and Social Security local offices will be posted to the offices in (a) Greenock, (b) Port Glasgow, (c) Strathclyde and (d) Scotland.

    Mr. Major The increase of 5,000 staff was given against the baseline of the 1986-87 earned complement. On this basis, the figures requested are as follows:

    Local Office | Number of staff

    Greenock ILO | 26
    Port Glasgow AO | 14
    Strathclyde | 478
    Scotland | 804

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Invalidity Benefit – 15 May 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Invalidity Benefit on 15th May 1986.


    Mr. Barry Jones Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people in Wales are currently in receipt of invalidity benefit.

    Mr. Major One hundred and eight thousand as at 30 March 1985, the latest date for which information is available.