The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: Benefits

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Income Support – 13 February 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Income Support on 13th February 1986.

    Mr. Ralph Howell Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what income support or other benefits a British citizen receives if he is without any form of income in (i) Eire, (ii) France, (iii) West Germany and (iv) Italy if he has been in the country (a) less than three months, (b) less than 6 months and (c) less than 12 months.

    Mr. Major I refer my hon. Friend to the Department’s publication, “Tables of Social Benefit Systems in the Member States of the European Communities. Portugal and Spain (position at 1 January 1985)”, a copy of which is in the Library. Section IX contains information on social assistance schemes in the European Community member states.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Supplementary Benefit – 12 February 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Supplementary Benefit on 12th February 1986.

    Mr. Kirkwood Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many couples there are without dependent children where the husband is in receipt of supplementary benefit and the wife is employed 24 or more hours per week; and how many couples there are without dependent children where the wife is in receipt of supplementary benefit and the husband is employed 24 or more hours per week.

    Mr. Major It is regretted that the information is not available.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Unemployment Benefit – 12 February 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Unemployment Benefit on 12th February 1986.

    Mr. Kirkwood Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services according to the most recent available figures how many claimants are in receipt of unemployment benefit at less than the full rate (a) by sex and martial status and (b) where married, by sex and employment status of spouse.

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

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Unemployment Benefit – 11 February 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Unemployment Benefit on 11th February 1986.

    Mr. McGuire Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will introduce legislation to seek to enable YTS trainees to qualify for unemployment benefit after they have completed their training; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major To receive unemployment benefit a person must satisfy two conditions. First he must have actually paid a certain amount of Class 1 contributions at some time; and second, he must have paid or been credited with enough contributions in the relevant tax year. YTS trainees receive a training allowance, not earnings, and they are not in class 1 employment. They therefore do not pay contributions but they are given credits for the training period which assist them to satisfy the second contribution condition. A YTS trainee will therefore receive unemployment benefit only if he paid enough contributions before commencing training to satisfy the first contribution condition. The Government have no plans to alter this situation. Supplementary benefit, which is not dependent on contribution conditions, is available to trainees who are unemployed on completion of their training.

    Mr. Robert Banks Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is the benefit to the Exchequer of reduced unemployment benefits being paid to those who undertake duties in the Territorial Army volunteer reserve.

    Mr. Major A reservist who is in receipt of unemployment benefit loses benefit of up to £5.07 for himself, or £8.21 if he has an adult dependant, for each day, other than Sundays, on which he undertakes duties in the Territorial Army Volunteer Reserve and earns more than £2. Supplementary benefit is reduced by the amount by which TA pay exceeds £32 in a month. Both benefits are withdrawn for the period of the annual camp. Information on the total amount of benefit withheld as a result of these procedures is not available.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Single Payments – 10 February 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Single Payments on 10th February 1986.

    Mr. Meadowcroft Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish in the Official Report comparable statistics on the total amount paid out in single payments to claimants in different areas, based on the smallest convenient geographical areas, and on the most recent convenient dates.

    Mr. Major I am arranging for a table, showing the total amounts paid out in single payments by each of the Department’s local offices during the year ended 9 April 1985, to be placed in the Library as soon as possible.

    Mr. Meacher Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will give, for the most recent month for which information is available (a) the number of single payment awards as a rate per 1,000 claimants and (b) the average single payment to (i) persons under pension age not required to register for work, (ii) persons under pension age required to register for work and (iii) persons over pension age for each social security office.

    Mr. Major This information is not immediately available but will be obtained as soon as possible.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Benefits (Payment) – 7 February 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Benefits (Payment) on 7th February 1986.

    Mr. Patchett Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what discussions he is having with the banks about the Government’s response to the recommendations of the 20th report of the Public Accounts Committee about switching benefit payments from post offices to banks; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major No such discussions are currently taking place. The position remains as described in the Government response to the Public Accounts Committee’s report.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Supplementary Benefit – 6 February 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Supplementary Benefit on 6th February 1986.

    Mr. Foulkes Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) if he will state, for each of the following categories of supplementary benefit recipients, the numbers receiving laundry additions, the average amount received by each person and the total amount paid (a) pensioners aged 60 to 79 years of age, (b) pensioners aged 80 years and over, (c) disabled pensioners, namely, those receiving benefits related to disability or continuing incapacity, aged 60 to 79 years and (d) all other non-pensioner recipients;

    (2) if he will state, for each of the following categories of supplementary benefit recipients, the numbers receiving diet additions, the average amount received by each person and the total amount paid (a) pensioners aged 60 to 79 years, (b) pensioners aged 80 years and over, (c) disabled pensioners, namely, those receiving benefits related to disability or continuing incapacity, aged 60 to 79 years and (d) all other non-pensioner recipients;

    (3) if he will state, for each of the following categories of supplementary benefit recipients, the numbers receiving heating additions, the average amount received by each person and the total amount paid (a) pensioners aged 60 to 79, (b) pensioners aged 80 years and over, (c) disabled pensioners, namely, those receiving benefits related to disability or continuing incapacity, aged 60 to 79 years and (d) all other non-pensioner recipients.

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

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Fraud Investigators – 30 January 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Fraud Investigators on 30th January 1986.

    Mr. Cohen Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many fraud investigators his Department employs; and what is his estimate of the amount of public money they saved in 1985.

    Mr. Major [pursuant to his reply, 27 January 1986, c. 399]: In the financial year 1984-85, the latest period for which information is available, the equivalent of 2,195 staff were employed full-time on fraud investigation and benefit saving was estimated to be £103 million.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Benefits (Uprating) – 28 January 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Benefits (Uprating) on 28th January 1986.

    Mr. Andrew Bowden Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he expects to announce the next benefits uprating, and on which date in July it is proposed that this uprating will come into effect.

    Mr. Major The next main uprating of social security benefits will come into effect in the week beginning 28 July. The uprating will be based on the movement of the retail price index from May 1985 to January 1986. The January RPI will be published on 21 February and my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State, will make a statement shortly afterwards giving the details of the uprating.

  • Mr Major’s Parliamentary Answer on Maternity Benefit – 28 January 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s Parliamentary Answer on Maternity Benefit on 28th January 1986.

    Mr. Nellist Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many women he estimates will be affected annually by the changes in the payment of maternity benefit proposed in his White Paper.

    Mr. Major Provisional estimates are that an additional 5,000 to 10,000 women will qualify for maternity allowance for the first time. About 75,000 to 85,000 women will no longer qualify because they were not working when their pregnancies began. However, many of those women will be eligible for some sickness benefit as a result of their previous national insurance contributions. As to maternity grant, the abolition of the £25 lump sum will affect an estimated 750,000 women, but this will be replaced by a payment of about £75 to low income families.

    Mr. Nellist Given that the Tories are the party of family, why is it that The Times estimated last year that 500,000 women would lose entitlement to maternity grant, and that the new payment, which will go to 220,000 785 women, is about £62.88 less than they would have received had the Government increased the grant to the equivalent of its 1969 level? How much does the Minister estimate is the cost of essentials for a new baby? Does he agree with the estimate made by The Mirror last year that the cost is about £450, not the miserable £75 which the Government propose?

    Mr. Major I rarely agree with The Mirror. In this instance, to restore the maternity grant to the 1969 level  – I am bound to say that it was not restored adequately by the Labour Government – would mean providing a grant of £125, at a cost of about £70 million to the Exchequer.

    Mr. Favell Far from the Tories not being the party of the family, would it not be far better, as the Minister for Health suggested earlier, for families to look after their own fathers and mothers, to look after their own children and to provide for their own maternity?

    Mr. Major My hon. Friend makes a valuable point. It might be worth drawing to the attention of the House the fact that our changes in maternity benefits have several important features that will benefit mothers. For the first time, pregnant widows will receive the statutory maternity allowance as well as the widow’s allowance.

    Ms. Richardson Does the Minister realise from the figures that he read out that many women will lose altogether? Does he know that more than 1 million families live on or below the poverty line and that an increasing number of children are born into low-income families? With the changes that the Government propose in the Social Security Bill, more pregnant women will suffer stress and will have to go, with a begging bowl in their hands, to the social fund, but will get nothing. That, together with the cut in child benefit, will lead to a worsening of family support.

    Mr. Major I cannot agree with the hon. Lady. The reality is that most of the families of whom she speaks, and for whom she cares a great deal, will be entitled to the £75 maternity grant from the social fund, which is triple the sum presently paid.