| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Income Statistics
Mr. John M. Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what estimate he has made of the average income of (a) people in work in the United Kingdom and (b) people who have retired. [102618]
Mr. Rooker:
Comparisons between the average incomes of households can be misleading if not fully explained. The most appropriate income measure when comparing different types of households is weekly net (disposable) equivalised household income (that is to say income that is adjusted to reflect the size and composition of the household). It is standard HBAI practice to give results for income both before and after housing costs, in
20 Dec 1999 : Column: 334W
order to allow for the effect of variations in housing costs between households. Using this definition the following information is available:
20 Dec 1999 : Column: 335W
For families where someone is working the average net equivalised household income of individuals in benefit units with a working adult in 1997-98 (in April 1999 prices) was £367 per week Before Housing Costs (BHC), and £322 per week After Housing Costs (AHC).
For families with retired people the average net equivalised household income in 1997-98 (in April 1999 prices) was £242 per week BHC and £220 per week AHC.
Using an alternative definition, the average net unequivalised income of pensioner benefit units in 1996-97 was estimated at £175 per week BHC and £154 per week AHC (in July 1996 prices). These figures should not be directly compared to the equivalised income estimates given above.
Notes:
1. All equivalised figures are estimates and are taken from the Households Below Average Income (HBAI) data set which is based on the Family Resources Survey (FRS). The FRS does not include Northern Ireland. 1997-98 is the latest year for which information is available. All estimates are subject to sampling error.
2. The retired are defined as those in benefit units where the head or spouse is aged 60 or over and no adult is in work.
3. All unequivalised figures are taken from The Pensioners' Incomes Series 1996-97 publication (PI), based on the Family Expenditure Survey (FES). Pensioner benefit units are defined here as single people over state pension age (65 for men; 60 for women) and couples (married or cohabiting) where the man is over state pension age.
4. The PI figures for pensioners cannot be directly compared to other groups of the population since they are not equivalised (i.e. they do not take account of differences in size and composition of each household).
5. The PI figures for pensioners cannot be compared directly to HBAI figures for pensioners for several reasons. In addition to the fact that HBAI figures are equivalised, the PI figures relate to a different period (1996-97 compared with 1997-98) and a different geographical area (UK compared with GB). The PI figures are expressed in July 1996 prices and the HBAI figures in April 1999 prices. The PI figures relate to income at the benefit unit level, averaged over all benefit units, while HBAI figures relate to household income, averaged over all individuals.
6. The average net unequivalised income of single pensioners in 1996-97 was estimated at £129 per week BHC and £108 per week AHC (in July 1996 prices). The corresponding estimates for pensioner couples were £248 BHC and £229 AHC.
London Underground
Mr. Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on the level of (a) public and (b) private funding of London Underground from 1997-98 to 2001-02 using figures at 1997-98 prices. [100949]
Mr. Hill [holding answer 6 December 1999]: Figures are provided for the years 1997-98 to 2000-01. Figures for this year and next are plans/estimates. Levels of Government support for the Underground in 2001-02 have not yet been determined.
| Cash | 1997-98 prices | |
|---|---|---|
| 1997-98 | 629 | 629 |
| 1998-99 | 411 | 401 |
| 1999-2000 | 740 | 705 |
| 2000-01 | 349 | 324 |
Note:
These figures reflect the position up to the end of October 1999, including the allocation of the 15 July additional resource package. They will need to be adjusted to take account of more recent decisions including the £50 million for bus initiatives announced on 15 November.
20 Dec 1999 : Column: 336W
| Cash | 1997-98 prices | |
|---|---|---|
| 1997-98 | 961 (485) | 961 (485) |
| 1998-99 | 751 (468) | 733 (457) |
| 1999-2000 | 803 (531) | 765 (506) |
| 2000-01 | 753 (535) | 700 (497) |
Note:
Figures in brackets represent Underground investment excluding the Jubilee Line Extension.
| Cash | 1997-98 prices | |
|---|---|---|
| 1997-98 | 161 | 161 |
| 1998-99 | 53 | 52 |
| 1999-2000 | 179 | 171 |
| 2000-01 | 150 | 139 |
LT resources have been supplemented by the following contributions from third parties:
| Cash | 1997-98 prices | |
|---|---|---|
| 1997-98 | 31 | 31 |
| 1998-99 | 22 | 21.5 |
| 1999-2000 | -- | -- |
| 2000-01 | 65 | 60.4 |
Mr. Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on the Government's plans for the central funding of London's Underground over each of the next five years; and if he will list the figure for investment in each year in real terms. [100950]
Mr. Hill [holding answer 6 December 1999]: The Government provide grant to London Transport (LT) and not specifically to the Underground. LT have been allocated Government support of £349 million for 2000-01. Some of this funding will be transferred to the Mayor in July next year, when Transport for London assumes responsibility for LT activities other than the Underground.
Levels of government support for the London Underground (LU) in 2001-02 and thereafter have not yet been determined. They will depend on: the extent to which bidders for Public Private Partnership (PPP) contracts improve on the public sector comparator;
20 Dec 1999 : Column: 337W
decisions on the level of Government funding to be taken following the 2000 spending review; and decisions on funding and fares made by the Mayor for London.
Planned investment in the Underground in 2000-01 totals £753 million (£717 million in 1998-99 prices). This comprises investment of £535 million (£509 million in 1998-99 prices) in the core Underground and a projected £218 million (£207 million in 1998-99 prices) in payments to JLE contractors for investment that took place in previous years.
It is not possible to provide a breakdown of investment figures for 2001-02 and beyond. The PPP is designed to deliver around £8 billion worth of investment. PPP contractors will be required to implement a combination of specific projects and performance enhancements specified in terms of outputs to be delivered. Because the PPP contracts will require the delivery of service outputs, they will not generally specify particular works to be carried out or the amounts of money to be spent on them.
Mr. Brake:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what assessment he has made of the London Transport report of 1997 into options for London Underground; and if he will make a statement. [103562]
Mr. Hill:
The Government took account of LT's analysis in deciding on the Public Private Partnership route for London Underground. We published, and placed in the Library, a description of the facts and analysis underpinning our decision at the time.
Mr. Brake:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will list the Government and other reports compiled since May 1997 covering PPP, public interest companies, privatisation and other options for London Underground; if he will place them in the Library; and if he will make a statement. [103563]
Mr. Hill:
Price Waterhouse submitted a report on a variety of options for London Underground to us in 1997. London Transport also shared with us the analysis they had undertaken at that time. In order to avoid releasing material that would compromise our commercial negotiating position we published, and placed in the Library, a summary of the facts and analysis which underpinned our decision to proceed with the Public Private Partnership for London Underground in March 1998. PricewaterhouseCoopers produced a paper specifically comparing the PPP to a public sector bond- financed approach for us which was published, and placed in the Library, earlier this month.
Mr. Brake:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 6 December 1999, Official Report, column 431W, when he will report on London Transport's expenditure on external consultants up to the end of the first half of the current financial year. [103582]
Mr. Hill:
I shall shortly be providing an up-dated figure for London Transport's expenditure on external advice for the London Underground public private partnership.
20 Dec 1999 : Column: 338W
Mr. Livingstone:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what account the Government took, in developing its proposed public- private partnership scheme for London Underground, of the bond-financed investment scheme set out in the report, "The Way Out--An Alternative Approach to the Future of the Underground". [103018]
Mr. Hill:
The Government considered fully a variety of options for financing the investment needed in London Underground, including issuing bonds as advocated in this report. We continue to believe that the Public Private Partnership approach will achieve best value for taxpayers.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |