The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: 1987

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Benefits – 25 February 1987

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Benefits on 25th February 1987.

    Mr. Carter-Jones Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) whether the supplementary benefit board and lodging allowance for people living in residential care homes includes a specific allocation towards each of the following (i) day care, (ii) purchase of clothing and (iii) holidays;
    (2) if he is planning to introduce any extra financial help to people receiving supplementary board and lodging allowance in residential care homes;
    (3) how any specific allocations within the supplementary benefit board and lodging allowance for people living in residential care homes are determined;
    (4) when he is planning to announce the next increase in supplementary benefit board and lodging allowance for people living in residential care homes.

    Mr. Major The supplementary benefit board and lodging allowance for people in residential care homes contains no specific allocations for particular items of expenditure.

    Proposals for increases in benefits for people in homes were announced in my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, North-East (Mr. Thurnham) on 12 February at column 362.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the Social Security Act 1986 – 24 February 1987

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the Social Security Act 1986 on 24th February 1987.

    Mr. Ashley Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he has received from voluntary organisations concerning implementation of the Social Security Act of 1986; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major The Social Security Act 1986 was passed by Parliament on 25 July 1986 after 230 hours of debate. The Act was the culmination of two and a half years of intense review and discussion.

    Four thousand five hundred organisations and individuals accepted an invitation to comment. Nineteen public sessions were held by Ministers with 62 organisations and individuals contributing.

    The Green Paper “Reform of Social Security” (Cmnd. 9518) received over 7,000 responses. Before and after publication of the subsequent White Paper (Cmnd. 9691) in December 1985 proposals were discussed with many welfare and voluntary organisations and representatives of industry (this included the Child Poverty Action Group, Age Concern, the Disablement Income Group, the Equal Opportunity Commission, the Confederation of British Industry and the Trade Union Council).

    More recently Ministers have met representatives of the Child Poverty Action Group, National Council for One Parent Families, Age Concern, Youthaid, Cleveland Welfare Rights and the Union Coalition for Social Security to discuss specific issues. Discussions are currently under way with the local authority associations on draft housing benefit regulations; with the Association of County Councils on the Social fund and with major pension interests on changes relating to pensions.

    Since the autumn of last year, Ministers have attended outside engagements or held meetings with many interested organisations. Examples of these are the National Council for Voluntary Organisations, the Child Poverty Action Group, the Spastic Society, Age Concern, the Personal Finance Editors Association, the Confederation of British Industry, the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmens and Families Association and the National Association of Pension Funds.

    We have received substantial, and diverse representations on the implementation of the legislation. The consultations we have fully entered into reflect the importance of the subject.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the McColl Report – 24 February 1987

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the McColl Report on 24th February 1987.

    Mr. Hannam Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make a further statement on any implementation of the recommendations of the McColl report.

    Mr. Major As I said during the debate in the House on 17 February at column 796, I hope to announce decisions on some of the central recommendations of the McColl report very shortly.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Medical Practitioners (Fees) – 24 February 1987

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Medical Practitioners (Fees) on 24th February 1987.

    Mr. Holt Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how much has been paid to medical practitioners for services in examining claimants for (a) mobility allowance and (b) attendance allowance in each of the past 15 years. comparable at 1985 prices.

    Mr. Major The available information is in the table. Comparable information is not available for earlier years. All figures are at 1985 prices.

    Total paid in respect of claims to: (a) Mobility allowance (in £) | (b) Attendance Allowance (in £)
    1981-82 | 2,519,415 | 5,369,717
    1982-83 | 2,964,121 | 7,194,835
    1983-84 | 3,547,567 | 7,709,134
    1984-85 | 4,770,862 | 8,701,248
    1985-86 | 4,459,386 | 9,391,078

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Severe Weather Payments – 23 February 1987

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Severe Weather Payments on 23rd February 1987.

    Mr. Meacher Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services why Tottenham Department of Health and Social Security office has refused to accept a bulk claim for severe weather payments for the week 12 to 18 January inclusive from the Broadwater Farm neighbourhood office on behalf of pensioners over 65 years and families with children under the age of two years on supplementary benefit living within the London borough of Haringey; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major [pursuant to his reply, 26 January 1987 c. 89]: Supplementary benefit claims, including single payment claims, are normally accepted from a third party only where it has been confirmed both that the claimant is unable to act on his own behalf and that the third party is able to act for him.

    A bulk claim would not enable all potential beneficiaries to be correctly identified, nor would it contain all the necessary information to establish entitlement.

    The Department’s Tottenham local office could not, therefore, accept a bulk claim for exceptionally cold weather payments on behalf of residents of the London borough of Haringey. Instead, the office agreed to accept a list of names and addresses of potential claimants and to send each of them an invitation to claim.

    The office received the list on 2 February 1987 and invitations to claim were issued on 10 February 1987.

    Mr. Gordon Brown Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many applications in (a) Scotland and (b) Britain for severe weather payment have come from persons not on supplementary benefit; and what proportion of these are now being processed with a view to checking entitlement to supplementary benefit.

    Mr. Major [pursuant to his reply, 12 February 1987, c. 341]: Information on the number of exceptionally cold weather claims received from people not on supplementary benefit is not available.

    People who fail to qualify for a cold weather payment because they are not in receipt of benefit are given a full explanation of why payment has been refused, with advice on how to go about claiming supplementary benefit.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Public Bodies (Appointments) – 23 February 1987

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Public Bodies (Appointments) on 23rd February 1987.

    Mr. Alfred Morris Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will list all the public bodies for which he is responsible on which the consideration of the appointment or co-option of a person with knowledge of disability is a statutory requirement; if he will name the persons so appointed or co-opted on each body; and if he will indicate which of those persons is a person with a disability.

    Mr. Major [pursuant to his reply, 21 January 1987 c. 613–14]: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is responsible for one body where the appointment of a person with knowledge of disability is a statutory requirement. That body is the Social Security Advisory Committee which contains at least one such person.

    In addition, my right hon. Friend has responsibility for the Central Advisory Committee on War Pensions, together with the local war pensions committees, of which there are 81. The central committee is required to contain at least one disabled war pensioner; the local committees contain at least four representatives of disabled ex-service men.

    I regret that the need for personal confidentiality prevents me from naming the persons who fulfil the above statutory requirements.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the Family Income Supplement – 23 February 1987

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the Family Income Supplement on 23rd February 1987.

    Mr. Frank Field Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is the latest estimate of the number claiming family income supplement.

    Mr. Major At May 1986, the latest date for which information is available, there were 202,000 families receiving family income supplement.

    Mr. Frank Field Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many family income supplement claimants are currently paying (a) income tax and (b) national insurance contributions.

    Mr. Major At April 1986 there were a total of 200,000 families in receipt of family income supplement and of those 138,000 were paying income tax and 188,000 were paying national insurance contributions.

    Mr. Frank Field Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will state the percentage of family income supplement claimants paying (a) tax and national insurance and (b) national insurance only.

    Mr. Major At April 1986 there were a total of 200,000 families in receipt of family income supplement and of those 69 per cent, were paying both tax and national insurance contributions and 25 per cent, were paying national insurance contributions only.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Industrial Deafness – 23 February 1987

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Industrial Deafness on 23rd February 1987.

    Dr. Godman Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he has any plans to change the criteria by which industrial deafness is determined; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major The Industrial Injuries Advisory Council is keeping the occupational deafness scheme under continuous review and a report is expected later this year. We will give careful consideration to its recommendations.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the Social Fund – 23 February 1987

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the Social Fund on 23rd February 1987.

    Mr. Deakins Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what estimate he has made of the change in expenditure by his Department from the introduction of the social fund in Brighton; how many payments he estimates will be made from this fund; and what is the estimated average amount.

    Mr. Major Decisions on the total size of the social fund and on allocations to different parts of the country will be taken nearer to the time of its full introduction in April 1988.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on State Pensions – 23 February 1987

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on State Pensions on 23rd February 1987.

    Mr. Adley Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make a statement on the future funding of state pensions.

    Mr. Major State retirement pensions will continue to be funded principally through national insurance contributions by employers and employees. We took steps in the Social Security Act 1986 to modify the future costs of the state earnings-related pension in order to ensure that it would be possible to fund increasing pensions for growing numbers of pensioners.