| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Winter Fuel Payments
Shona McIsaac: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will extend Winter Fuel Payments to people with disabilities who are not in receipt of Income Support. [115047]
Angela Eagle: Following the European Court of Justice ruling Winter Fuel Payments were extended to both men and women aged 60 and over and the need to be in receipt of a qualifying benefit was removed. As before, payments are restricted to people who are ordinarily resident in Great Britain. As long as they satisfy the qualifying conditions, disabled people will be eligible for a Winter Fuel Payment, like anyone else in the same position.
As well as Winter Fuel Payments, we also provide Cold Weather Payments towards additional heating costs for vulnerable groups on Income Support or income-based Jobseeker's Allowance. Disabled people, regardless of age, who are in receipt of Income Support or income- based Jobseeker's Allowance which includes a disability premium, are among those eligible for Cold Weather Payments. There are no plans to change these eligibility rules.
Family Credit (Norwich)
Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many people in Norwich were in receipt of (a) Family Credit and (b) the child care allowance in each of the last five years. [115096]
Angela Eagle:
The information is in the tables.
22 Mar 2000 : Column: 592W
| Year | Number |
|---|---|
| August 1995 | 1.6 |
| August 1996 | 1.8 |
| August 1997 | 2.0 |
| August 1998 | 2.1 |
| August 1999 | 2.0 |
Notes:
1. Case load figures are taken at a point in time for which the month is August.
2. Sample size is 5 per cent. As the numbers are based on a relatively small number of sample cases the estimates are subject to a high degree of sampling error, ie for an estimate of 2,000 the true value will lie somewhere in the range 1,628 to 2,382.
3. Family Credit was replaced by Working Families Tax Credit in October 1999.
4. Local authorities are assigned by matching the postcode against the 1999 version 1 of the postcode directory.
5. Numbers are rounded to the nearest hundred and expressed in thousands.
Source:
Family Credit 5 per cent. sample of awards.
| Year | Number |
|---|---|
| August 1995 | 1.3 |
| August 1996 | 1.8 |
| August 1997 | 2.0 |
| August 1998 | 2.4 |
| August 1999 | 3.1 |
Notes:
1. Case load figures are taken at a point in time for which the month is August.
2. Numbers are based on a 5 per cent. sample and are therefore subject to a degree of sampling error.
3. Family Credit was replaced by Working Families Tax Credit in October 1999.
4. Numbers are rounded to the nearest hundred and expressed in thousands.
SERPS
Mr. Gardiner: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what estimate he has made of the number of contributors to SERPS and their dependants who have suffered financial or other hardship as a result of the misleading information issued between 1986 and 1996 on changes in the provision of inherited SERPS. [115369]
Mr. Rooker: No one should have suffered financial loss as a result of the information issued as the change was not due to come into effect until April 2000 and is now intended to be postponed for two and a half years until 6 October 2002. The inherited SERPS scheme will provide redress for those people who were wrongly informed and who, had they known the true position, would have made different arrangements.
Mr. Gardiner:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) what was the nature of the evidence referred to in the NAO report on SERPS (HC320) about the noting by his Department of the absence of information about changes to inherited SERPS in a draft leaflet on the changes to retirement pensions; and if the investigations
22 Mar 2000 : Column: 593W
referred to in his oral statement of 15 March 2000, Official Report, column 307, established whether Ministers' attention was drawn to this fact; [115368]
Mr. Rooker:
The failure to include the correct information about SERPS inheritance provisions in leaflets was an extended failure over a period of time. The National Audit Office and the Ombudsman have reviewed the available evidence and concluded that there is no documentary evidence that enables them to conclude one way or the other about the cause of the omission. All Ministers must inevitably bear a measure of responsibility for the leaflets issued by the Departments in which they hold office.
Mr. Gardiner:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what will be the average weekly change, as a result of the changes to SERPS in the Social Security Act 1986, in inherited pension received by a surviving spouse whose partner dies after 5 April 2000 rather than before. [115373]
Mr. Rooker:
The changes referred to are to be postponed by two and a half years until 6 October 2002. There will therefore be no average weekly change in inherited pension for people whose spouse dies after 5 April 2000 rather than before.
Mr. Gardiner:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if the investigations referred to in his oral statement of 15 March 2000, Official Report, column 307, established whether Ministers had (a) sight of and (b) responsibility for the leaflet contained in the DSS briefing pack publicising the 1986 reforms that mentioned the 50 per cent. reduction in inherited SERPS. [115372]
Mr. Rooker:
The National Audit Office reviewed the available evidence and has published its report. This particular leaflet had a signed foreword from the then Secretary of State. All Ministers must inevitably bear a measure of responsibility for the leaflets issued by the Departments in which they hold office.
My hon. Friend is aware that Ministers in the current Administration do not have available to them papers from the previous Administration, although both the NAO and the PCA had access to all the papers on which to base their reports.
Mr. Crausby:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what the difference in the cost of benefit payments is between an automatic credit transfer transaction and payment by giro; and if he will break down the cost difference between payments to the agencies concerned. [115483]
Mr. Rooker:
Payment by girocheque is over 130 times more expensive than payment by automated credit transfer (ACT).
22 Mar 2000 : Column: 594W
The overall average total unit costs to the Benefits Agency are in the order of £1.36 for each girocheque and 1p for each ACT transaction. These figures include the production processing and distribution costs as well as the transaction charges paid to paying agents.
A breakdown of the costs to the individual components cannot be disclosed as some of this information is commercial in confidence.
Jean Corston:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what assessment he has made of the responses received during the recent consultation exercise on pensions indexation and investment-linked annuities. [116204]
Mr. Rooker:
We asked for views from the pensions industry, employers and the public on whether it would be right to relax the current indexation rules for money purchase pension schemes, to allow schemes to offer investment-linked annuities to any members who might wish to choose this option as an alternative to a traditional indexed annuity. Investment-linked annuities enable the annuitant to benefit from growth in a range of underlying investments after retirement, though this goes hand in hand with a risk of possible falls in pension income if investment performance is poor.
The principle of introducing this greater flexibility for occupational scheme members was widely welcomed. The balance of opinion was against the introduction of mandatory guarantees to protect the level of pension paid by investment-linked annuities, because this would hamper product design and could have a significant effect on the potential growth in the annuitant's future income. A mixed response was received to the question of whether investment-linked annuities should also be allowed to be bought from "protected rights" elements of funds (that is, any part of the fund which has accrued in place of rights in SERPS).
(2) if the investigations referred to in his oral statement of 15 March 2000, Official Report, column 307, established whether Ministers had (a) sight of or (b) responsibility for the 1987 revision of the DSS leaflet, "Your Retirement Pension" (NP32), concerning the 50 per cent. reduction in inherited SERPS. [115371]
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |