| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
ONE Service
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when, following the assessment of the first four ONE service pilots, changes will be made in the way that benefits are claimed. [125878]
Angela Eagle: The ONE pilots are planned to run until March 2002 and will be fully evaluated. No decision has yet been taken as to when the changes to the claiming process, being trialled within those pilots, may be more widely applied or the possibility of extending these arrangements beyond the pilot areas.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will publish the assessments that have been made of the first four pilot schemes for the ONE service; and if he will make a statement. [125444]
Angela Eagle: The ONE pilots are planned to run until March 2002 and are the subject of thorough evaluation. When robust and reliable research findings are available they will be published.
Appeals
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many awards of each type of benefit were made or increased as a result of appeals in the year 1999-2000; what the cost to his Department will be of the making or increasing of those awards; how much the appeal process cost his Department in that year; and if he will make a statement. [125879]
15 Jun 2000 : Column: 710W
Angela Eagle: The information is not available in the format requested and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. Such information as is available is as follows.
In the year ending September 1999 (the latest date available), of 262,971 appeals heard by the Appeals Service, 92,776 were found in the appellants favour.
- Notes:
- 1. As figures for September 1999 are not due to be published until 22 June, the figures quoted are provisional and may be subject to revision.
- 2. Appeals found in the appellants favour includes References revised in favour of the appellant.
- Source:
- 100 per cent. download from the Appeals Service Generic Appeals Processing system.
| Estimated cost | |
|---|---|
| Appeals Services | (5)56.917 |
| Benefits Agency | (6)24.260 |
| Child Support Agency | 4.000 |
(5) This figure excludes the cost of the launch of the Appeals Service agency and the introduction of the Decision Making and Appeals changes.
(6) This figure reflects appeals processing within the district network and Disability and Carers Benefit Directorate only. Appeals costs for the Child Benefit Directorate and Pensions Overseas Directorate cannot be separately identified.
A new system to streamline and modernise the appeals system has been introduced. This will lead to a faster and more efficient service. The Appeals Service has already made significant improvements to clear backlogs and reduce waiting times. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has set challenging targets to improve the service still further.
Client Surveys
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what changes have been made by his Department as a result of representative surveys of its clients carried out in 1998-99 and 1999-2000; and what the (a) costs and (b) savings from such changes will be in each of the next five years. [125876]
Mr. Rooker: Representative surveys of clients are only one of many sources of information and evidence the Department uses to develop, monitor and evaluate policies and their delivery. Survey findings do not contribute to the policy process in isolation but are used alongside other information such as management and administrative data. It is not possible, therefore, to say what changes have been made directly as a result of representative surveys of clients and to determine costs and savings arising.
Benefit Fraud
Mr. Fraser: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) if he will make a statement on the role of the National Intelligence Unit in tackling benefit fraud in Dorset; [125724]
- (2) what recent discussions he has had with the Benefits Agency about tackling benefit fraud in Dorset. [125730]
15 Jun 2000 : Column: 711W
Mr. Rooker: The purpose of the National Intelligence Unit (NIU) is to provide "information for action" or anti-fraud intelligence that facilitates better informed decision making at managerial and operational levels. The NIU is located over five sites and consists primarily of data collection sections and teams of analysts. Once analysed, all intelligence which can be used to help combat benefit fraud is referred to relevant sections of the Benefits Agency. No information is available on the role of the NIU in tackling benefit fraud in specific towns, cities or counties as the unit operates on a national level.
Although we have held no recent discussions with the Benefits Agency about tackling benefit fraud specifically in Dorset, national policy on combating fraud applies throughout Great Britain. We set out the strategy for tackling fraud in the White Paper "Safeguarding Social Security" presented to Parliament in March 1999.
The four key principles are; getting it right--benefit payments should be correct from day one; keeping it right--ensuring payments are adjusted as circumstances change; putting it right--detecting when payments go wrong and taking prompt action to correct them with appropriate penalties to prevent a recurrence; and making sure our strategy works--by monitoring progress, evaluating the strength of our defences and adjusting them in the light of experience.
Mr. Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will estimate the value of additional detected fraud and overpayments if the National Fraud Initiative scheme was extended to all councils in the UK. [125283]
Mr. Rooker: The estimates requested are not available. However, we welcome the recently published National Fraud Initiative report which, like this Departments' Housing Benefit Matching Service, is a good example of what can be achieved by well targeted data matching.
Child Support
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security in how many cases since 1 April the Benefits Agency has decided that a lone parent has good cause not to co-operate with the Child Support Agency in obtaining maintenance; what estimate he has made of the financial benefits which have accrued to (a) his Department, (b) claimants and (c) children affected; and if he will make a statement. [125440]
Angela Eagle: During April this year, the latest date for which information is available, it was accepted that 501 parents with care had good cause for not co-operating with the Child Support Agency. This compares with some 11,000 parents with care claiming Income Support or income-based Jobseeker's Allowance over the same period.
The underlying purpose of the requirement to co-operate with the Child Support Agency where these benefits are in payment is to ensure that, wherever possible, parents and not the taxpayer take responsibility for supporting their children. The receipt of regular maintenance can also play an important part in helping to lift children out of poverty.
15 Jun 2000 : Column: 712W
Earnings Disregard
Ms Buck: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will estimate the (a) gross and (b) net costs of increasing the Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit earnings disregard by (i) £5, (ii) £10, (iii) £15 and (iv) £20 per week; and how many households would (1) benefit and (2) be taken off Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit as a result. [125575]
Angela Eagle: The information is in the table.
No cases would be lifted out of Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit (CTB) as a result of these measures. In fact extra cases will become entitled to the benefits.
| Number of cases benefiting | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Cost in 2000-01 (£ million) | HB (thousand) | CTB (thousand) | |
| £5 | 75 | 390 | 350 |
| £10 | 175 | 400 | 360 |
| £15 | 250 | 420 | 380 |
| £20 | 350 | 450 | 400 |
Notes:
1. The gross and net costs of increasing the Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit earnings disregard will be identical, since Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit are not taken into account in the calculation of other benefits.
2. Estimates based on the 1997-98 Family Resources Survey and Housing Benefit Administrative data for May 1998.
3. Costs are rounded to the nearest £5 million, gainers are rounded to the nearest 10,000 cases.
4. The numbers benefiting are expressed in terms of benefit units rather than households. It is not possible to calculate the total number of households benefiting from the measures by summing the Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit gainers since some cases will gain in both benefits.
5. The number of cases benefiting includes cases who float on to the benefits as a result of these measures.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |