Power cost hits low-income families

Press, 2 December 1981, Page 6

Power cost hits low-income families

PA Wellington Low-income families and beneficiaries are suffering because of rapidly ' rising electricity costs, according to a study by the Council of Social Services. The study says the average consumer in a main centre paid about $6O more for electricity in 1980 than the previous year, an increase of 35 to 40 per cent. The percentage of household expenditure spent on fuel by low-income groups was more than double that for high-income groups. Beneficiaries were particularly badly off because though their benefits were updated regularly this was done on the basis of the average consumer, not on the beneficiaries’ particular needs. “It is clear that recent energy-pricing policy related to investment for future en-ergy-intensive industry has caused difficulties for particular groups in our society,” the study says. The study suggests two broad approaches to provide

relief — a universal one applying to all domestic, electricity consumers, or a selective approach aimed at groups most affected by the high prices. Universal relief measures could include:— • Reduction of bulk tariff for electricity. • Manipulation of the domestic pricing policies. • Establishment of a disconnections policy. Selective measures suggested are:— ■ • Extending the Needy Families Assistance Scheme? • Extending the Additional Benefit (now replaced by the Accommodation Benefit and Special Benefit) provisions. • Introducing a discount scheme. • Regional variations in benefits. • Increasing benefits beyond the movement in the Comsumer Price Index. The Minister of Social Welfare (Mr Gair) said the Government would not support universal reduction in hulk tariffs as it would be a

very non-selective means of assisting a relatively small number of people. He said some of the selective relief measures suggested would only help beneficiaries and not low income earners who may receive only marginally more money. However, he said he was interested in the suggestion of a discount scheme which could apply to both beneficiaries and low-income earners. The department was getting more information about the running of such a scheme from the United Kingdom. Developing a plan for regional differences in benefit rates would be extremely complex, he said, and differences in consumption were not great enough to warrant this. Another possibility, he suggested, was that beneficiaries voluntarily assign part of their benefit payments direct to electrical supply authorities to ensure regular payments.