| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Disability Living Allowance
Mr. Coleman: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many residents in Hammersmith and Fulham are in receipt of disability living allowance; and of those how many have had their benefits (a) reduced and (b) removed by the Benefit Integrity Project. [77841]
Mr. Bayley: The administration of Disability Living Allowance is a matter for Peter Mathison, Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to my hon. Friend.
Letter from Peter Mathison to Mr. Iain Coleman, dated 22 March 1999:
The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking how many residents in Hammersmith and Fulham are in receipt of Disability Living Allowance, and of those how many have had their benefits (a) reduced and (b) removed by the Benefit Integrity Project.
The number of people in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham who are in receipt of Disability Living Allowance, as at 31 May 1998 is 4,338.
The information concerning how many of these have had their benefits reduced or removed by the Benefit Integrity Project is not available. To provide geographical information routinely would incur high costs and disrupt the processing of ongoing case work.
You may find it helpful to know that a monthly statistical report can be found in the House of Commons Library.
Welfare Reform
Dr. Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will list those respondents to the welfare reform Green Paper, "New Ambitions for our Country: A New Contract for Welfare", who (a) requested the abolition of means testing and (b) called for means testing to be extended to all benefits. [77540]
Mr. Timms: The Welfare Reform Green Paper, "New Ambitions for our Country: A New Contract for Welfare" (CM 3805), set out the framework for welfare reform, based on eight principles, together with a range of success measures. Views were invited on the contents of the Green Paper, specifically on those principles and success measures. The information gathered from the responses was categorised to reflect this. As views were not specifically sought on means testing and it did not feature in the guiding principles or success measures, a list of those who commented on it is not available and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
A list of those organisations and academics who responded to the exercise, excluding those who requested confidentiality, has been placed in the Library. Copies of these responses are available on request from the Department. We have also placed in the Library a summary of responses.
Benefit Fraud
Mrs. Laing: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will estimate the cost of benefit fraud in Scotland in each year since 1992 in (a) cash terms and (b) 1998-99 prices. [77769]
Mr. Timms:
The information is not available in the format requested. Such information as is available is in the table.
23 Mar 1999 : Column: 148
| £ billion | |
|---|---|
| Amount | |
| Confirmed fraud | 2 |
| Strong suspicion of fraud | 3 |
| Low suspicion of fraud | 2 |
Kali Mountford: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when he will publish his strategy for combating fraud in social security. [78576]
Mr. Darling: I am publishing today "A New Contract for Welfare--Safeguarding Social Security", which sets out the Government's strategy for reducing fraud and error in the Social Security system.
When we came into office far too much money was being lost through fraud and error. Targets were set to find fraud but not to stop it happening, and safeguarding Social Security was too often an afterthought rather than an integral part of processing claims.
We are determined to focus on a single goal--reducing the amount of fraud and error. We will achieve this by getting payments right in the first place, keeping them right throughout the claim and putting mistakes right when we find them. We will make sure that we have a suitable range of sanctions, including prosecutions, to make those who steal Social Security realise that crime does not pay.
We have already made a good start and have set clear goals against which our success can be judged. By tightening the gateways to benefit and requiring more supporting evidence before benefit is paid we expect to save £1 billion in Income Support alone over this Parliament. We are providing an extra £100 million to local authorities so that they can make tougher checks on Housing Benefit. We are making greater use of new technology to share information between the agencies and councils paying benefits to improve service and to avoid duplication. We are helping local authorities to prosecute more cases of Housing Benefit fraud and have launched an independent review of how best to tackle the threats to Social Security from organised fraud.
We shall keep checking that our plans are working and we will review local performance to trace how well we are doing in each area. We have set a challenging target to reduce by 30 per cent., losses from fraud and error in Income Support and Jobseeker's Allowance, by 31 March 2007, with at least a 10 per cent. reduction by 31 March 2002. This will take sustained effort by all staff delivering Social Security. We know that they will rise to the challenge.
Our strategy builds on the work set out in the Green Paper published last July "Beating Fraud Is Everyone's Business: securing the future" (Cm 4012). The responses we had to the Green Paper were largely supportive and I am placing a summary of these in the Library today.
23 Mar 1999 : Column: 149
We are determined to root out fraud and reduce error in the Social Security system. It will be a tough job, but for the first time we have a systematic and deliverable strategy to reduce the losses from fraud and error and safeguard Social Security.
Mr. Wallace:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what estimate he has made of expenditure on housing benefit in Scotland in (a) 1997-98 and (b) 1998-99, for (i) public sector tenants, (ii) housing association tenants and (iii) other private sector tenants. [78213]
Angela Eagle:
The information is not yet available. The information will be available after the publication of the Departmental Report on 30 March 1999. I will write to the hon. and learned Member when the information is available.
Mr. Burstow:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what evaluation he has made of the effectiveness of the training undertaken by staff conducting Benefit Integrity Project interviews. [77890]
Mr. Bayley:
The training of Benefits Agency Staff is a matter for Peter Mathison, Chief Executive of the Agency. He will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Peter Mathison to Mr. Paul Burstow, dated 22 March 1999:
Mr. Shepherd:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what plans he has to amend regulation 81 of the Jobseeker's Allowance Regulations 1996; and if he will make a statement. [78244]
23 Mar 1999 : Column: 150
Angela Eagle:
We currently have no plans to amend regulation 81 of the Jobseeker's Allowance Regulations.
The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking what evaluation he has made of the effectiveness of the training undertaken by staff conducting Benefit Integrity Project interviews.
The Benefits Agency is committed to high quality training and all training courses, including those delivered to Benefit Integrity Project staff, are evaluated on an ongoing basis with training needs under continual review.
All training events, including refresher training undertaken with input from the Disablement Income Group (DIG), have been separately evaluated for their effectiveness. Post-course evaluation questionnaires are completed by all staff and post-training workshops have been carried out. This information has been used to further improve the training.
The findings of the evaluation were that the training:
sufficiently equipped the visiting staff to be able to carry out the visits
focused on good practices
reinforced the purpose of the project
Managers accompany visiting staff on a number of visits each year to ensure that the training principles have been assimilated. There has been much positive feedback from customers on how the visits have been carried out.
DIG has prepared a report for the Benefits Agency that summarises their input into the training. They have made valuable suggestions for the future. We will be using their findings and our own evaluation to develop training for staff who will be working on the new periodic enquiry process from April 1999.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |