---

Miss H. McNulty

Mr. Winnick: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will state the outcome of the home visit made by the Benefits Agency to Miss H. McNulty ref. JP/4L/JKM. [82274]

Angela Eagle: The administration of the Social Fund 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. David Winnick, dated 27 April 1999:

The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking about the outcome of the visit by an officer of the Benefits Agency to Miss H. McNulty.

28 Apr 1999 : Column: 172

The purpose of the visit on 22 March was to obtain the fullest possible details of the need for a mobility scooter before undertaking a review of the decision to refuse a Community Care Grant or Budgeting Loan for the scooter.

On 25 March the reviewing officer, taking full account of the details obtained at the visit, decided that Miss McNulty's application should be treated as having medium priority for either a Community Care Grant or a Budgeting Loan, but because the District budget could only sustain applications with high priority, a payment was again refused.

A request that the application should be looked at by a Social Fund Inspector (SFI) was received from Miss McNulty on 30 March. On 6 April the relevant papers were copied to Miss McNulty to give her the opportunity to comment. Her reply was sent to the SFI dated 8 April. The outcome of the decision of the SFI, issued on 21 April 1999, was that the decision of the reviewing officer to refuse a payment from the Social Fund was correct.

I am sorry I have to give what must be a disappointing reply for Miss McNulty.

Marginal Tax Rates

Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) how many people faced marginal tax rates, including social security of over (a) 40 per cent., (b) 50 per cent., (c) 60 per cent., (d) 70 per cent., (e) 80 per cent., (f) 90 per cent. and (g) 100 per cent. in each year since 1996-97; [82237]

(2) how many people will face marginal tax rates including social security of over (a) 40 per cent., (b) 50 per cent., (c) 60 per cent., (d) 70 per cent., (e) 80 per cent., (f) 90 per cent. and (g) 100 per cent. taking account of the introduction of the working family tax credit and the children's tax credit. [82236]

Dawn Primarolo: I have been asked to reply.

The data requested are contained in the table. The table illustrates the combined effect of the 1999 Budget and the Government's reforms since the election which will see the numbers of those facing marginal rates of over 70 per cent. reduced by two thirds, significantly relieving the poverty trap.

The increased generosity of the Working Families Tax Credit (WFTC) compared with Family Credit will see an extension of in work support for families with children. Even those whose marginal rate increases as a result of this change will be better off in cash terms and see an increased return to working compared to being on benefit. On average, WFTC will give low earning families an extra £24 per week compared with Family Credit.

Impact of the 1998 and 1999 budgets on the number of families with marginal deduction rates of 40 per cent. or more (5)

		Thousand
	Before	After
100 per cent. or more	5	0
90 per cent. or more	115	15
80 per cent. or more	255	175
70 per cent. or more	715	230
60 per cent. or more	730	950
50 per cent. or more	730	1,110
40 per cent. or more	775	1,150

(5) Figures are for families in receipt of income-related benefits or the WFTC where at least one partner works 16 hours or more, and are based on 1998-99 caseload and take-up rates.

Available historical estimates of marginal deduction rates are published in the DSS's annual departmental report, on page 16 of the 1998 report and page 57 of the 1997 report.

28 Apr 1999 : Column: 173

SCOTLAND

Scottish Parliament Building

Mr. Gorrie: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the estimated cost of the conversion of the Church of Scotland assembly hall and nearby City of Edinburgh Council office buildings, for use as a temporary home of the Scottish Parliament, broken down in to costs in respect of (i) VAT, (ii) fees, (iii) furnishings and fittings, (iv) information technology and TV facilities, (v) returning the Assembly Hall to its original state and (vi) compensating the Church of Scotland for disruption and the hire of the Edinburgh International Conference Centre as its meeting place. [77799]

Mr. Dewar [holding answer 25 March 1999]: The cost of converting the Church of Scotland Assembly Hall and refurbishing the nearby former City of Edinburgh Council buildings to house the Scottish Parliament is estimated to be around £7.62 million in total. Of that figure, some £4.5 million is being spent on the principal works programme, and can be broken down as follows:

Conversion/refurbishment works £3.3 million

Fees £0.5 million

VAT £0.7 million.

The cost of the works carried out to install the infrastructure to support the IT and telecoms networks and the TV production facilities are not separately identifiable, but are included in the conversion/refurbishment figure of £3.3 million given.

Fitting out the accommodation is an additional £3.1 million including VAT. The cost of furniture (£0.75 million) and IT equipment (£1.5 million) are included in that figure, and the remainder covers mainly the costs of the provision of telecoms, security systems and office equipment.

The Church of Scotland wishes to retain the new layout prepared for the Debating Chamber. Some readjustment works will be necessary, but it is too early to provide an estimate of the likely costs involved.

The Church of Scotland has neither sought nor been paid any form of compensation for disruption. The cost of hiring the EICC and related expenditure totals just over £140,000 including VAT.

Social Inclusion

Mrs. Fyfe: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will estimate the total of resources to be made available to social inclusion projects under (a) the New Deal and New Futures Fund, (b) new community schools, (c) early intervention schemes, (d) alternatives to exclusion (schools), (e) pre-school education initiatives, (f) new housing partnerships, (g) Rough Sleepers Initiative, (h) Empty Homes Initiative and (i) social inclusion partnerships (1) in Glasgow and (2) in Scotland. [78346]

28 Apr 1999 : Column: 174

Mr. Macdonald [holding answer 31 March 1999]: The Government have already allocated significant resources to these and other initiatives as part of their commitment to promote social inclusion in Scotland. The figures given relate to funding committed or estimated to be spent over the financial years 1999-2000, 2000-01 and 2001-02.

For most of these programmes, some of the committed funds have yet to be allocated to specific areas of Scotland. Where this is the case, the figures given include the total already allocated; the amount already allocated to Glasgow; and the amount which remains to be allocated. Furthermore, some of the figures given are estimated rather than formal allocations.

It is estimated that £290 million will be spent on the New Deals in Scotland in the next three years (1999-2000 to 2001-02). Of this, it is estimated that at least £54 million will be spent in Glasgow (no decision has yet been made on resources available for Glasgow under the New Deal for the Disabled). These figures make no provision for underspends in the period until March 1999.

Of the £2.0 million that has been committed from the New Futures Fund (NFF) for 1999-2000 and 2000-01 a total of £1.1 million has already been allocated to projects in Glasgow. A number of other projects are still under consideration and may receive financial support during this period. Over the next three years it is estimated that a total of £12.4 million will be spent in Scotland on NFF projects.

We plan to invest £26 million to pilot New Community Schools in every education authority over the next 3 years. On this basis, it is estimated that £1 million of the funds will be spent in Glasgow.

Of the £42 million committed to early intervention schemes over the next three years, Glasgow will receive £4.5 million in total.

Of the £24 million committed to alternatives to exclusion from school schemes over the next 3 years, £2.34 million has been allocated to Glasgow.

Of the £111 million committed to pre-school education initiatives in the first of the next three years (1999-2000), Glasgow's provisional allocation is over £12 million. A further £269 million has been committed to Scotland for the 2 subsequent years (£131 million in 2000-01 and £138 million in 2001-02) but estimates of allocations are not available at this stage.

Of the £208 million which has been earmarked to councils to support New Housing Partnerships (NHPs), £32 million has been earmarked for Glasgow. A total of £333 million has been committed to support NHPs in Scotland over the next 3 years. £125 million of that total has been set aside for assistance with debt in connection with whole stock transfers.

Of the £7 million to be spent under the Rough Sleepers Initiative in 1999-2000, £2.4 million has been allocated to Glasgow. A further £14 million has been committed to the initiative in the following 2 years.

£15 million has been committed to the Empty House Initiative over the next 3 years, of which £2.77 million has been allocated to Glasgow.

28 Apr 1999 : Column: 175

£137 million has been committed to Social Inclusion Partnerships over the next 3 years, including £48 million for the new Social Inclusion Partnerships designated in Spring 1999. Of the total, £51 million will be spent in Glasgow, of which over £24 million relates to the new Social Inclusion Partnerships.

From 1 July 1999 these programmes, apart from the New Deal, will be matters for the Scottish Parliament.

---