---

Social Security Numbers

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what steps are taken by his Department to ensure that social security numbers are given to the right person and linked to the right department; what is the cost of this; how many incidents in the years (a) 1998-99 and (b) 1999-2000 were found where people were (i) allocated and (ii) used the wrong national insurance number; and if he will make a statement. [124557]

Mr. Rooker: The National Insurance Number (NINO) exists to allow this Department and the Inland Revenue to differentiate accurately between the millions of people

7 Jun 2000 : Column: 289W

who do business with them. When a person applies for a NINO, the Department checks its records to see that a NINO has not already been issued and then interviews the person to confirm identity. The interviewer checks the person's circumstances, background and history by asking questions. Answers are confirmed and any documents produced as evidence are authenticated before a NINO is allocated.

The current annual cost of allocating NINOs is £5.4 million.

The total number of NINOs allocated in 1998 was 272,844 compared with 284,144 for 1999. Inevitably, with these volumes, the system is subject to instances of existing numbers not being traced correctly and duplicate accounts being created in error. Unfortunately, data on wrongly allocated NINOs are not available in the format requested. However, in order to address this issue the Department has established a comprehensive programme of data cleansing.

The Identity Fraud Unit has recorded 1,314 false NINOs and accounts since it was established in 1997.

The Department is committed to ensuring that NINOs are issued, used and controlled consistently. Our overall aim is to always establish the correct identity of a person prior to providing a benefit or service to ensure that we are dealing with the right person. We will continue to develop and implement strategies that enable us to achieve this aim.

Non-local Offices

Mr. Dobson: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is his Department's estimate of the annual savings to the social security budget of the disposal of non-local offices from London in each of the last five years. [124401]

Mr. Rooker: Prior to 1 April 1998 and within the last five years, the Department vacated only one "non-local office ¹ " in the London area, where it was the major Government occupier. This was Euston Tower, but being a leasehold building there was no disposal value; savings simply accrued through the discontinuance of rent, rates and the service charge.

On 31 March 1995, an initial release of space at Euston Tower produced net annual savings of £436,694, after the deduction of additional occupation costs following relocation of the Headquarters staff involved to the Adelphi. The final moves, involving a number of units, took place in 1996. The net annual savings after relocation were in the region of £1.4 million.

On 1 April 1998 the Department subsequently transferred all of its property, both freehold and leasehold, to the private sector consortium Trillium plc under the PRIME Agreement. We now no longer own nor rent any buildings. Instead, serviced office accommodation is purchased from Trillium. So now, if we withdraw entirely from a building, or hand back only a proportion of our space, it is for Trillium to dispose of.

In the two years since the PRIME contract began, as part of estates strategies in the London area, the Department has handed back some 45,431m ² of space in both local office and non-local office buildings. However, the only buildings that we have withdrawn from entirely

7 Jun 2000 : Column: 290W

are local office buildings. Consideration is presently being given also to taking on additional space elsewhere in London.

Note:

1. A non-local office has been defined as a building without public caller facilities.

Secondments

Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, pursuant to his answer of 9 February 2000, Official Report, column 213W, concerning secondments, which of the secondees listed were appointed for a period of 12 months or less. [124820]

Mr. Rooker: All three of the secondees listed were appointed for a period of 12 months or less.

Benefits Agency

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what action he is taking to improve the quality and accuracy of postcode data with the Analytical Services Division within the Benefits Agency. [124686]

Angela Eagle: The Department's Analytical Services Division currently produces a range of local level information by matching a claimant's postcode against the Office for National Statistics postcode directory for the key benefits including Income Support, Jobseeker's Allowance and Incapacity Benefit. For some benefits, incomplete or missing postcode information makes such a process unreliable and work to improve the accuracy of this information is ongoing. For example, August 1999 Child Benefit data were recently enhanced through the imputation of postcode from claimant address details. A final phase of work to match this against the 2000 postcode directory will soon result in the production of reliable small area estimates for child benefit for the first time.

A copy of the child benefit data for all parliamentary constituencies will be placed in the Houses of Parliament Libraries by the end of July 2000.

Pension Funds

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what assessment he has made of the minimum funding requirements for pension funds with reference to venture capital. [124756]

Mr. Rooker: The Minimum Funding Requirement (MFR) does not prescribe how pension funds should invest their assets. Investment practice is a matter for pension schemes. The MFR is intended to provide a reasonable level of security for members in the event of the employer becoming insolvent and requires defined benefit schemes to hold a minimum level of assets to meet their liabilities valued according to a prescribed methodology. We have asked the Faculty and Institute of Actuaries to carry out a review of the minimum funding requirement and will be consulting shortly on the proposals in their report. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has also asked Paul Myners to conduct a review of institutional investment which is considering this and other issues.

7 Jun 2000 : Column: 291W

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

Lord Levy

Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the oral answer of 11 April 2000, Official Report, column 179, if Lord Levy has held meetings with representatives of foreign (a) intelligence and (b) security agencies. [118947]

Mr. Hain: In line with long standing practice of successive Governments we do not comment on intelligence matters.

Mr. Maude: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs from which officials Lord Levy has received briefings on the Middle East. [119672]

Mr. Hain: Lord Levy has been briefed by officials responsible for the regional and bilateral issues on which he has passed messages from the Prime Minister, and by Ambassadors in the countries where he has passed such messages. As I know from having talked to the Ministers and others in these countries, his work is greatly appreciated and has helped enhance both Britain's standing and our contribution to the Middle East peace process.

British Council

Mr. Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many British Council offices there were overseas on 1 April. [123376]

Mr. Hain: On 1 April there were 243 British Council offices overseas, in 110 countries.

Joint Entry Clearance Unit

Mr. Derek Twigg: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the Joint Entry Clearance Unit. [125245]

Mr. Vaz: As I told the House on 20 March 2000, Official Report, column 833-36, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Home Office have signed a Memorandum of Understanding on the establishment of the Joint Entry Clearance Unit (the JECU). Copies of the document have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses. This week the JECU has moved to its new offices at 89 Albert Embankment. By bringing together Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Home Office expertise in a single unit, it will provide a better co-ordinated and more effective service to entry clearance applicants. More information about the new Unit, including contact numbers within it, will be circulated to Members.

Export Licences (Iran)

Ann Keen: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he has recently authorised the issue of export licences for Iran as an exception to the national arms embargo. [125251]

Mr. Hain: We have recently issued, as an exception to the national arms embargo on Iran, an export licence for the export of night vision equipment for the use of Iranian drug enforcement personnel. This equipment has been procured by a private company on behalf of the UN Drugs

7 Jun 2000 : Column: 292W

Control Programme (UNDCP) as a contribution to the UNDCP in Iran. These goods require a UK export licence as they are transiting the UK en route to Iran.

The UK fully supports assistance for the considerable efforts being made by the Iranian authorities to stem the trafficking of drugs through Iran. Since early 1999 the UK has contributed £l.5 million to support Iranian counter drugs activity.

---