| Previous Section | Home Page |
Column 1017
SOCIAL SECURITY
Incapacity Benefit
Dr. Wright : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will estimate the likely level of administrative costs for the planned incapacity benefit as a proportion for all such benefit paid.
Mr. Scott : Information is not available in the form requested.
Mr. Alan Howarth : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what estimates he makes of the proportion of recipients of incapacity benefit who are likely to be receiving occupational pension payments (a) between the 29th and 52nd week of incapacity and (b) after the 52nd week ; and what is its basis for these estimates.
Mr. Scott : The information is not available.
Mr. Bradley : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security at what intervals new claimants for incapacity benefit who pass the test of incapacity for work after 28 weeks will be re-tested.
Mr. Scott : Claimants who are terminally ill or in receipt of the highest rate care component of disability living allowance or suffering from one of the prescribed severe incapacitating disabilities will not be retested. In other cases, the adjudication officer will decide on the intervals between reviews of the case, based on advice from a doctor from the Benefits Agency medical service. The intervals will depend on the type of medical condition involved and the particular circumstances of each case.
Mr. Frank Field : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many of those who are expected to fail to satisfy the test for incapacity benefit are protected tenants for the purposes of regulation 11 of the Housing Benefit (General) Regulations 1987 ; and whether he will consider extending transitional protection for two years to protected tenants on the date when the Act comes into force.
Mr. Scott : The information requested is not available. We have no plans to introduce rules allowing people found capable of work to remain on incapacity benefit.
Chronic Bronchitis and Emphysema
Dr. Wright : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many claims for chronic bronchitis and emphysema have been examined by special medical boards and by medical appeal tribunal since the scheme was introduced ; and in how many and what percentage of cases medical appeal tribunals have upheld the appeal.
Mr. Scott : This information is not available in the format requested. As at 20 March 1994, about 20,000 claims have been considered under the medical criteria by a specially qualified adjudicating medical practitioner. Some 2,960 appeals have been referred to a further adjudicating medical authority and 385 subsequent appeals have been referred to medical appeal tribunals. Of the nine
Column 1018
cases where the MAT result is known, three, 33 per cent. have been upheld. The information is based on a 100 per cent. count and is subject to amendment.Invalidity Benefit
Ms Armstrong : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is his estimate of the number of people entitled to claim invalidity benefit in each region.
Mr. Scott : Information is not available in the form requested. The available information is in the table :
Invalidity Benefit recipients on 4 April 1992 by Region Region |Invalidity |benefit |recipients ------------------------------------------------------------------Northern England |137,000 Yorkshire and Humberside |137,000 East Midlands |80,000 East Anglia |31,000 South East England-Greater London |109,000 South East England-excluding Greater London |134,000 South Western |78,000 West Midlands |120,000 North Western England |247,000 Scotland |200,000 Wales |159,000 Overseas |8,000 |---- Total-Great Britain |1,439,000 Note: Based on a 1 per cent. sample of claimants in Great Britain at 4 April 1992, the latest date information available, rounded to the nearest thousand. Figures may not sum due to rounding.
Mr. Alan Howarth : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many people in receipt of invalidity benefit have occupational pensions ; and what is his source of information on this.
Mr. Scott : About 40 per cent. of invalidity benefit recipients were in receipt of occupational pensions in 1990 and 1991. The information is drawn from the 1990 and 1992 family expenditure surveys and is subject to significant margins of error.
Community Care Grant
Mr. Lewis : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what categories of persons constitute (a) high and (b) medium property for community care grant purposes.
Mr. Scott : The guidance that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State issues on priorities for social fund community care grants is set out in the social fund guide--a copy of which is in the Library. The priority groups included in that list are in no particular order.
Child Support Agency
Mr. Gordon Prentice : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many people have asked the Child Support Agency for a review of their assessments ; and how many such applications have been refused.
Mr. Burt : The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.
Column 1019
Letter from Ros Hepplewhite to Mr. Gordon Prentice, dated 30 March 1994 :I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about the number of review requests received by the Child Support Agency.
To 31 January 1994, the Agency has received 16,600 requests for second tier reviews. Information is not available on the number of cases where a review has been refused because a client has failed to show adequate grounds for the request.
Mr. Ingram : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many section 18 and section 17 reviews of child support officers' decisions had been requested by the end of January 1994 ; how many of each of these had been resolved by that date ; in how many of each of those the decision had been revised ; and what is the average number of weeks that the outstanding reviews have been awaiting decisions in each Child Support Agency centre.
Mr. Burt : The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Ros Hepplewhite to Mr. Adam Ingram, dated 30 March 1994 :
I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about child support reviews. Between 5 April 1993 and 1 January 1994, there were 16,600 requests for a second tier review under Section 18 of the Child Support Act 1991, of which 5,800 were cleared. Information on the number of these in which the decision was revised is not currently available. In the same period, the Agency processed 10,800 section 17 reviews, prompted by changes to either party's circumstances. The assessment was revised in 10,700 cases.
You also asked for the time taken to carry out a review and the length of time that outstanding reviews have been awaiting decisions. Information on clearance times is being collected, but reliable information is not yet available.
Mr. Ingram : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many of the maintenance application forms issued by the end of January, have been issued to (a) non-benefit claimants, (b) family credit claimants, (c) new income support claimants and (d) existing income support claimants ; how many existing income support claimants remain to be issued with a maintenance application form ; and what is the expected rate at which these cases will be taken-on before April 1996.
Mr. Burt : The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Ros Hepplewhite to Mr. Adam Ingram, dated 31 March 1994 :
I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about the issuing of maintenance application forms to benefit claimants.
Of the 755,000 maintenance application forms issued to parents with care by the Child Support Agency in the period up to 31 January 1994 ; 26,100 were issued to non-benefit clients ; 279,000 to clients already in receipt of Income Support, 257,400 to clients making new claims for Income Support ; and 193,400 to clients making claims for Family Credit.
It is estimated that approximately 380,000 existing cases where income support was in payment prior to 5 April 1993 remained to be taken on at the end of January. It is planned to complete the take on of these cases by April 1996, in line with the original schedule. The actual rate of take on will vary in relation to factors such as the volume of other cases received in the period.
Column 1020
I hope this reply is helpful.Mr. Ingram : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many absent parents whose cases have already been taken on by the Child Support Agency are on income support ; of these how many were (a) exempt from the £2.20 deductions made from income support in lieu of child maintenance and (b) subject to the £2.20 deductions ; and how many of the maintenance assessments calculated using the child support formula issued by the end of January 1994 were (i) nil assessments, other than those for absent parents on income support or (ii) minimum assessments of £2.20 a week, as opposed to deductions from income support.
Mr. Burt : The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Ros Hepplewhite to Mr. Adam Ingram, dated 31 March 1994 :
I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about absent parents claiming income support and the numbers subject to the £2.20 deduction from their benefit as a contribution to child maintenance.
During the period April 1993 to 31 January 1994, there were almost 36,500 cases where the maintenance assessment was zero. The figure includes over 32,000 cases where the absent parent was in receipt of income support. The deduction (currently £2.20) is made from income support unless the absent parent is exempt. Information on the number subject to the statutory deduction is not available. However, it has been estimated that around 50 per cent. of 32,000 are liable to pay £2.20.
You asked how many absent parents other than those on income support were paying the minimum amount of £2.20. This information is not currently available.
I am sorry I cannot be more helpful.
Mr. Ingram : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many section 6 child support applicants to date have argued that they are at risk of harm or undue distress ; in how many of these cases the reasons were accepted by the Child Support Agency ; how many parents with care subsequently gave the authorisation or information ; how many reduced benefit directions have been issued in the first 11 months of the Child Support Agency's activity ; how many of these directions have been appealed against ; and how many applicants who have given authorisation have subsequently sought to withdraw it and in how many of these cases the reasons for the withdrawal have been accepted.
Mr. Burt : The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Ros Hepplewhite to Mr. Adam Ingram, dated 31 March 1994 :
I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about clients of the Child Support Agency where the requirement to co-operate is an issue. During the period from 5 April 1993 to 31 January 1994, the requirement to co-operate was considered in 44,600 cases. It is not known in how many cases the parent with care argued that they were at risk of harm or undue distress. However, of the 25,000 cases in which good cause not to co-operate was accepted, risk of harm or undue distress was accepted as the reason in 11,300 cases. There were 11, 600 cases where further to the investigation the absent parent was identified.
Column 1021
You asked about reduced benefit directions. In the period up to 31 January, 320 were referred to the Benefits Agency for implementation. No information is available on the number of appeals against the reduction in benefit.You also asked about cases where having initially agreed to name the absent parent, the parent with care subsequently withdrew authorisation. There is currently no information available on the numbers of cases where this occurs.
I hope this reply is helpful.
Mr. Ingram : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will update the table of 18 February, Official Report, column 1023, giving clearance times for Child Support Agency applications ; and if he will give an indication of the usual time taken between, (a) the issue of the maintenance application form and its return, (b) the return of the maintenance application form and issue of the maintenance inquiry form and (c) issue of the maintenance inquiry form and its return.
Mr. Burt : The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Ros Hepplewhite to Mr. Adam Ingram, dated 31 March 1994 :
I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security asking for an update to the table showing clearance times for the maintenance application process by each Child Support Agency Centre, and a breakdown of the times between the issue and return of the application and enquiry forms. For the period from 5 April 1993 to 31 January 1994, information is available on the percentage of cases cleared by individual Agency centres within given time bands ; under 40 days, between 40 and 100 days, and in over 100 days. This information is tabulated as annex A.
A more detailed break-down in the form you requested is not available.
Mr. Ingram : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when information will be available on the numbers of child support accounts with arrears, the numbers of deductions of earnings orders issued by the Child Support Agency, the numbers of liability orders applied for by the agency ; and what is the extent of the information on the collection and enforcement service that will be readily available at that stage.
Mr. Burt : The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Ros Hepplewhite to Mr. Adam Ingram, dated31 March 1994 :
I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about the availability of information from the Child Support Agency on arrears, deduction from earnings orders and enforcement.
Information on deductions from earnings orders has been obtained by means of a clerical sampling exercise. This shows that to the end of February 1994, the Agency had issued deductions from earnings orders in an estimated 1,400 cases.
The Child Support Computer System is currently being upgraded to provide more information. We anticipate that further data relating to each stage of the collection and enforcement process will be progressively available during the financial year 1994-95 as a result of this upgrading process.
I hope this reply is helpful.
Mr. Ingram : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security in how many cases dealt with by the Child
Column 1022
Support Agency the alleged absent parent has disputed paternity ; how many of these cases have been resolved without reference to court ; how many of these have been referred to court by the agency ; how many have been heard by the court ; and how many are unresolved to date.Mr. Burt : The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Ros Hepplewhite to Mr. Adam Ingram, dated 31 March 1994 :
I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about the number of cases dealt with by Child Support Agency in which disputed paternity was an issue.
Between 5 April 1993 and 31 January 1994, 2,270 cases were referred for further inquiries to be made because the alleged absent parent had disputed paternity. Of these cases, 457 were resolved without reference to the courts. The Agency referred 22 cases to the courts, 13 being heard. Of these, paternity was established in 2 cases, and not established in 11. At 31 January 1994, 1,800 cases remained to be resolved.
I hope that this reply is helpful.
Mr. Ingram : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the current target for the amount of child maintenance to be collected by the Child Support Agency in 1993-94.
Mr. Burt : The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Ros Hepplewhite to Mr. Adam Ingram, dated 31 March 1994 :
I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about the money recovered by the Agency.
The Agency was set a target to recover £530 million in benefit savings in the financial year 1993-94. To 31 January 1994, £250 million had been recorded as recovered. This does not represent the total amount of savings during the period as some will be scored retrospectively.
I hope this reply is helpful.
Mr. Ingram : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many maintenance applications had been terminated without a maintenance assessment by the end of January ; what efforts are being made to ascertain the reasons for these cleared cases ; and on what evidence he based his answer of 10 February, Official Report, column 502, that some were due to collusive desertions.
Mr. Burt : Between April 1993 and January 1994, there were 95,400 cases cleared without a maintenance assessment. This includes cases where the parent with care is ineligible for maintenance ; where she withdraws her application to benefit before the Child Support Agency has assessed her case ; and where it has been accepted that the parent with care has "good cause" for not providing details of the absent parent.
There are many reasons why a parent with care might withdraw an application before a maintenance assessment. These include being reconciled with the absent parent or starting a job. A number of these will have been withdrawn due to collusive desertion, but, by the very nature of these cases, detailed reasons for the withdrawal of applications are not known.
Column 1023
Mr. Ingram : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many appeals have been made to child support appeal tribunals by the end of February ; in how many of these cases the Child Support Agency has met its target of responding to the independent tribunal service within 18 days ; how many of these appeals have been heard to date ; and in how many of those the child support officer's decision has been overturned.
Mr. Burt : I am informed that the number of appeals received by the independent tribunal service to the end of 25 February is 1,134. On these appeals, the Child Support Agency has forwarded a total of 361 submissions ; 164 within the 18-day target. By 25 March, 165 appeals had been heard, of which 147 had been finally decided. In 56 of the decided appeals the child support officer's decision was overturned.
Mr. Ingram : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will outline the compensation available to clients of the Child Support Agency who lose out financially as a result of the agency's operations ; and whether compensation is avaialble for those section 6 applicants who were refused a maintenance application form before the change of policy announced on 1 November 1993.
Mr. Burt : The Department of Social Security operates non-statutory special payments arrangements under which compensation may be considered where, as a result of clear and unambiguous departmental error or unreasonable delay, actual financial loss has been suffered. Under section 6 of the Act, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State may require a parent with care to make an application to the Child Support Agency, but is not required to. There is no question of departmental error, and therefore compensation, in cases where he did not choose to exercise this power.
Accommodation Benefit
Mr. Morgan : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will specify the length of time that records of claims for part III accommodation benefit payments, completed application and claim forms are kept (a) in their original form, (b) on microfiche or (c) in any other form in either the DSS Benefits Agency local office concerned, or in a central registry ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Burt : The administration of income support is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member with such information as is available. Letter from Michael Bichard to Mr. Rhodri Morgan, dated 30 March 1994 :
The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking about the length of time that records of Part III benefit payments, completed application and claim forms are retained by the Benefits Agency (BA).
Claim forms from customers in Residential Accommodation (Part III) are treated in the same way as Income Support (IS) claim forms from other customers. Payments to customers in these circumstances are not recorded separately.
The BA policy on the destruction of documents requires all IS cases to be examined at certain times and unnecessary documents to be destroyed. This policy represents an attempt to balance the needs of customers against the administrative expense
Column 1024
of keeping all documents indefinitely. Instructions are in place advising staff not to destroy claim forms while active enquiries into the case are ongoing. Clerical records are normally kept for a minimum of 18 months after a claim goes dormant and then destroyed. Part III benefit payments are recorded in the same way as IS payments. Order book records are held for 3 years and girocheque copy sheets are held centrally for 12 months and then destroyed. This procedure is relevant to all BA offices including Benefit Centres who have Remote Storage facilities. Details on IS claims are not retained on microfiche.Child Support
Mr. Ingram : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many former (a) income support claimants and (b) family credit claimants have left benefit as a result of receiving child support maintenance ; and what efforts are being made to monitor this issue.
Mr. Burt : This information is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However, information will be collected as part of the long-term evaluation of child support policy.
Ministerial Replies
Mr. Winnick : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when the hon. Member for Walsall, North will receive a reply to his further letter of 28 February to the Under-Secretary of State concerning a constituent, reference 6/3644/70.
Mr. Scott : I replied to the hon. Member's letter yesterday.
Social Security Advisory Committee
e to Ministers) Mr. Madden : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what statutory requirement or other obligation is placed upon the Social Security Advisory Committee to advise Ministers of the possible legal implications of proposals referred to it by Ministers ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Scott : Under section 174 of the Social Security Administration Act 1992, the Social Security Advisory Committee is required to consider any proposals to make regulations referred to it by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and to make a report to him containing recommendations with regard to the subject matter of the proposals as the committee thinks appropriate. Legal advice of proposed regulations is provided by the Department's lawyers.
Lone Parents
Mr. Tony Lloyd : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will publish figures similar to those in his Department's tax model table, including the various component figures, (1) showing net weekly spending power of a lone parent with a child aged three years where (a) the parent is on income support, (b) the parent takes employment for 15 hours a week at £4 an hour and (c) the parent works from 16 hours a week with gross earnings of (i) £40, (ii) £50, (iii) £60, (iv) £70, (v) £80, (vi) £90, (vii) £100, (viii) £110 and (ix) £120 where travel-to-work costs are £10 a week and child care costs are (1) £25 per week, (2) £40 per week and (3) £60 per week, assuming that the new child care allowance for lone parents is in operation ;
Column 1025
(2) showing net weekly spending power of a lone parent with children aged one and three years where the parent works more than 16 hours a week and has gross earnings of (a) £40, (b) £50, (c) £60, (d) £70, (e) £80, (f) £90, (g) £100, (h) £110 and (i) £120, where travel-to-work costs are £10 per week, and where child care costs are (i) £25, (ii) £40 and (iii) £60 per week, assuming the new child care allowance for lone parents is in operation.Mr. Burt [holding answer 30 March 1994] : The information requested is in the tables. The level of child care costs specified in some of the questions is significantly higher than those typically encountered at the level of earnings specified. Recent research shows that the average weekly child care costs of working lone parents are £24.60 per week.
"Families, work, and Benefit" (Policy Studies Institute, June 1993).
Notes :
1. Assumptions are those used for the 1994 Tax-benefit Model. 2. Tax allowances and National Insurance contributions are those in force from 1 April 1994.
3. Childcare Allowance introduced from October 1994.
4. Average rent and council Tax values are those used for the 1993 Tax- benefit Model.
| Next Section
| Home Page |