| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Disabled Claimants
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will estimate the cost of introducing an all savings disregard for all benefit claimants with disabilities, broken down into the cost associated with each benefit. [141086]
Mr. Bayley: It is not possible to estimate the cost of introducing an all savings disregard for all benefit claimants with disabilities, without specifying more fully the underlying assumptions.
Pension Credit
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what steps he will take to distinguish between the pension credit allocating pension rights after divorce and the pension credit announced by the Chancellor in his Pre-Budget report. [141031]
Mr. Rooker: They are clearly distinguishable.
Mr. Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Newport, West on 20 November 2000, Official Report, columns 67-68W, on pensioner income, if he will provide an amended version of the table on page 30 of the consultation paper on the Pension Credit indicating how it will reward savings income of up to £135 a week in the case of a single pensioner with a full basic state pension. [140625]
Mr. Rooker: This information is available in the table on page 30 of the Pension Credit consultation document (Cm 4900). This table assumes a full basic state pension of £77. This shows how the credit rewards savings, second pensions and earnings up to incomes of £135 a week for a single pensioner.
Benefit Errors
Mr. Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security on how many occasions in the past three years a
30 Nov 2000 : Column: 859W
computer error has led to duplicate payments of benefit amounting to £1 million or more; and how many benefit claims were affected on each occasion. [140947]
Mr. Rooker: We will write to my right hon. Friend.
Claimants (Police Information)
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) if he will make a statement on the level of discretion available to officials in his Department to disclose information to the police on claimants under the new guidance, indicating the extent to which the discretion differs from previous guidance; [138700]
- (2) what discussions he has held with the Home Secretary on the new guidance issued to officials in his Department on the disclosure of information on claimants to the police; [138699]
(3) if he will place a copy in the Library of the (a) new guidance and (b) previous guidance issued to officials in his Department on the disclosure of information on claimants to the police; [138697]
(4) what definition he applies to serious and minor crimes in his new guidance issued to officials in his Department on co-operation with the police on the disclosure of information on claimants; [138698]
(5) what representations he has received from the Police Federation on the new guidance issued to officials in his Department on the disclosure of information on claimants to the police. [138696]
Mr. Rooker: Guidance on the level of discretion available to officials in this Department and other matters relating to disclosure of information to the police is contained in the Protection of Customer Information Guide. This was published in April 2000, to replace previous guidance which had been issued in 1992 and which had become out of date. The level of discretion available to officials was unaffected by the revision of the guidance.
We have had an exchange of correspondence with ministerial colleagues in the Home Office about the guidance and officials have had discussions with the Association of Chief Police Officers. We have received no representations from the Police Federation about it. A copy of the new guidance has been placed in the Library. The new guidance can also be viewed on the DSS homepage at www.dss.gov.uk. The previous guidance was withdrawn when the new guide was published, but I am arranging to place a copy in the Library for comparison purposes until the end of 2000.
Asylum Seekers (Benefits)
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what his Department spent on social security benefits for asylum seekers in the financial year 1999-2000; what his estimate is of the amount paid in social security benefits to asylum seekers in 2000-01 to date; what his estimate is of the likely total of such expenditure for the entire financial year 2000-01; if he will show for each period (a) the total estimated expenditure, (b) expenditure on Income Support and Jobseeker's Allowance, (c) expenditure on Housing Benefit and (d) expenditure on Council Tax Benefit; and if he will make a statement. [139373]
30 Nov 2000 : Column: 860W
Angela Eagle [holding answer 20 November 2000]: Information is not available in the format requested. Such information as is available is in the table.
| £ million | |
|---|---|
| 1999-2000 | 136 |
| 2000-01 | (30)57 |
(30) To date
Notes:
1. Expenditure for 2000-01 to date covers the period April to September 2000 and does not include Jobseeker's Allowance (income-based). Jobseeker's Allowance expenditure on Asylum Seekers is, however, negligible.
2. Estimates are based on the Income Support Quarterly Statistical Enquiries from May 1999 to August 2000, and the Jobseeker's Allowance Quarterly Statistical Enquiries from May 1999 to February 2000.
3. The amounts shown reflect the revised figures for Asylum Seekers receiving Income Support published in table 7.1 of the August 2000 Quarterly Statistical Enquiry. Figures previously published and used as the basis for previous calculations of expenditure were incorrect due to a tabling error.
4. Housing Benefit (HB) and Council Tax Benefit (CTB) expenditure on Asylum Seekers in 1999-2000 cannot be estimated until the May 2000 1 per cent. sample of HB and CTB claims has been published (spring 2001).
5. Responsibility for the costs of asylum seeker support passed to the Home Office in April 1999 following the Comprehensive Spending Review. The Department is reimbursed by the Home Office for the costs of social security benefits paid to asylum seekers.
Social Fund
Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what proportion of applicants to the Social Fund received (a) loans, (b) grants and (c) refusals in the last 12 months. [139713]
Angela Eagle: The information is in the table.
| Percentage of applications on which an initial award was: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Made | Refused | |
| Community Care Grants | 37 | 63 |
| Budgeting Loans | 67 | 30 |
| Crisis Loans | 72 | 27 |
Notes:
1. The number of awards after review are not included in the table; if these awards were included then the percentage of applications resulting in an award would be Community Care Grants 46 per cent., Budgeting Loans 68 per cent. and Crisis Loans 72 per cent.
2. Percentages may not sum due to rounding, applications being withdrawn, applicants not responding to loan offers and applications not decided at the time of the count.
Compensation Recovery Unit
Mr. Wigley: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what percentage of the compensation package for sick miners the Compensation Recovery Unit expects to (a) deduct and (b) retain. [140448]
30 Nov 2000 : Column: 861W
Mr. Bayley: The amount recovered is in respect of benefits already paid to the miners in consequence of their illness and is recovered direct from the Department of Trade and Industry not from the miners themselves. At present, this stands at £14,868,340.07.
Child Support Agency
Mr. Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) if he will take measures to ensure that complaints awaiting investigation by the Independent Case Examiner for the Child Support Agency are investigated more promptly; and if he will direct more resources towards achieving this; [140469]
- (2) what the backlog of complaints awaiting investigation by the Independent Case Examiner for the Child Support Agency was in (a) November 1999, (b) May 2000 and (c) November 2000. [140468]
Angela Eagle: In November 1999 there were 170 cases awaiting investigation. By May 2000, this had risen to 204 cases and by November 2000 there were 218 cases in this category. Overall, the percentage of cases referred to the Independent Case Examiner as a percentage of the Child Support Agency caseload has fallen from 0.17 per cent. in 1989-99 to 0.11 per cent. in 1999-2000
Additional funding was allocated in September 2000 which will mean a 17 per cent. increase in investigative resources.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |