| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
WORK AND PENSIONS
Departmental Budgets
Annabelle Ewing: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what is the budget for (a) the current fiscal year and (b) the next five years for (i) the UK and (ii) Scotland for departmental spending by his Department. [9398]
Mr. Nick Brown: The information requested is not available. Expenditure plans are published in Departmental Reports. However, the Department for Work and Pensions was created only in 2001–02 and the first Parliamentary Estimate covering the whole of the new Department is still being prepared.
Departmental plans are not broken down by region but information regarding expenditure in Scotland up to the 1999–2000 fiscal year is available in HM Treasury's publication "Public Expenditure Statistical Analysis (PESA) (2001–02)" published in April 2001 under Command Number 5101.
SEMA Doctors
Mr. Collins: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will make a statement on the work of SEMA doctors for the Benefits Agency in south Cumbria. [7524]
Maria Eagle: There is currently a shortage of examining doctors in south Cumbria. This has resulted in some delay, particularly during the summer months, to the processing of claims for Disability Living Allowance and Attendance Allowance. SchlumbergerSema Medical Services are actively recruiting new doctors to address the shortage, and as a temporary measure they are planning to use doctors from the North East to cover Cumbria if necessary.
Pension Awareness Advertising
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will place in the Library the research into the pension awareness advertising campaign referred to in his Department's press release of 21 September. [7901]
Mr. McCartney: The evaluation of the pensions education advertising campaign has been placed in the Library.
22 Oct 2001 : Column: 54W
Benefit Fraud
Mr. Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will list the targets set for reducing fraud in respect of each benefit and payment for which his Department has responsibility; and what progress has been made towards meeting such targets in each year since 1997. [7476]
Malcolm Wicks: We have put in place a comprehensive strategy to reduce fraud across all benefits. We are tightening up the system to make sure that from the very first claim, the right benefits are going to the right people.
We have firm targets for reducing the amount of fraud and error in Income Support and Jobseeker's Allowance. The Department is aiming for a reduction of 25 per cent. by 2004 and 50 per cent. by 2006. We have met our first milestone, which was to achieve a 10 per cent. reduction by March 2002, 18 months ahead of schedule.
This year we have also introduced for the first time a continuous measure of the level of Housing Benefit fraud. We will consider the appropriateness and scope for setting targets for reducing the level of incorrectness in Housing Benefit in the light of the results of this exercise.
We have also introduced an ongoing programme of National Benefit Reviews looking at other benefits. These reviews are providing us with the intelligence we need to focus our efforts where it is needed most.
Jobseeker's Allowance (Earnings Limit)
Mr. Allen: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will change the limit on earnings which can be retained by people on Jobseeker's Allowance; and if he will make a statement. [8097]
Malcolm Wicks: The earnings disregards for Jobseeker's Allowance are aimed at achieving a balance between encouraging people to undertake part-time work and remain in touch with the labour market, while not creating disincentives for them to take up full-time work and become independent.
We keep the levels of earnings disregards under review. The higher earnings disregard for lone parents, people with disabilities and certain other special groups was increased by a third to £20 from April this year.
Maintenance Payments
Mr. Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) how much money in excess of the proper calculation was paid by parents without care through the Child Support Agency to parents with care, in the last year for which information is available; and how much was recovered from parents with care and repaid to parents without care; [7718]
- (2) how much money below the proper calculation was paid by parents without care through the Child Support Agency to parents with care, in the last year for which information is available; and how much was subsequently recovered and paid over. [7719]
Malcolm Wicks: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member.
22 Oct 2001 : Column: 55W
Letter from Mike Isaac to Mr. Andrew Turner, dated 11 October 2001:
- I am replying to your Parliamentary Questions to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions about the Child Support Agency.
- Mr Smith is unavailable and therefore I am writing to you on his behalf.
- You asked how much money in excess of the proper calculation was paid by parents without care through the Child Support Agency to parents with care in the last year for which information is available; and how much was recovered from parents with care and repaid to parents without care.
- You also asked how much money below the proper calculation was paid by parents without care through the Child Support Agency to parents with care in the last year for which information is available; and how much was subsequently recovered and paid over.
- The information you have requested in the first part of each question is not available, as it is not collected in the format you have asked for.
- However in the Agency's Annual Report and Accounts for 2000–2001, the National Audit Office estimated that overpayments amounted to £5 million and underpayments amount to £12 million. These figures were based on a sample of cases examined, which showed underlying errors in maintenance assessments and incorrect adjustments to customer's accounts. Any variance of 1p of more in an assessment is regarded as an error.
- Where we identify that maintenance has been overpaid it will be refunded to the parent without care either in a lump sum or by means of reducing the ongoing liability that has to be paid.
- Maintenance that was due but not paid is collected as arrears. Arrears are either received in lump sum payments or agreements are reached where by a parent without care will pay an amount towards arrears in addition to regular maintenance. If no agreement can be reached between the Agency and the parent without care then that case would undergo enforcement action.
- The value of the excess of the proper calculation and also that, which is below the proper calculation, is not collected in the format you have requested to enable me to give a definitive reply.
- I hope this is helpful.
Invalid Care Allowance
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will set out for Q1 1998–99 to Q1 2001–02 (a) how many people were awaiting an appeal for Invalid Care Allowance at the end of each quarter, (b) the average time it took to process the appeal and (c) the average time it took to process the original claim. [7479]
Maria Eagle [holding answer 15 October 2001]: The information is as follows:
(a) The number of Invalid Care Allowance appeals outstanding at the end of each quarter from 1998 to 2001 are shown in table 1. The figures for 2001–02 are not available.
Notes:
1. Information taken from 100 per cent. download of the Generic Appeals Processing System (GAPS). All figures are subject to change. Figures are being provided by BA DCBD.
2. Quarters run:
1. April-June, 2. July-September, 3. October-December, 4. January– March each year.
22 Oct 2001 : Column: 56W
(b) The average clearance times from receipt of the Appeal by the Benefits Agency to the Appeals Service issuing the tribunal's decision and the average waiting times from receipt of the appeal by the Benefits Agency to the first hearing by a tribunal for 1998 to 2001 are shown in table 2. The figures for 2001–02 are not available.
| Clearance times(9) | Waiting times(10) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1998–99 | ||
| Quarter 1 | 28.2 | 27.5 |
| Quarter 2 | 28.5 | 27.8 |
| Quarter 3 | 26.2 | 24.1 |
| Quarter 4 | 28.6 | 24.6 |
| 1999–2000 | ||
| Quarter 1 | 28.9 | 24.4 |
| Quarter 2 | 29.3 | 25.2 |
| Quarter 3 | 30.8 | 23.6 |
| Quarter 4 | 39.1 | 26.5 |
| 2000–01 | ||
| Quarter 1 | 28.7 | 22.0 |
| Quarter 2 | 29.9 | 22.0 |
| Quarter 3 | 27.1 | 21.7 |
| Quarter 4 | 28.6 | 23.0 |
Notes:
1. Clearance times shown apply from the date of lodgement with the Benefits Agency to the Appeals Service issuing the tribunal's decision. Thus delays caused by adjournments are included. The time taken for the Benefits Agency to implement the decision is not included.
2. Waiting times shown apply from the date of lodgement with the Benefits Agency to the date of the first tribunal hearing.
3. Quarters run:
1. April-June, 2. July-September, 3. October-December, 4. January– March each year.
(c) The average times taken to process Invalid Care Allowance claims for 1998 to the first quarter of 2001–02 are shown in table 3.
Note:
1. Quarters run:
1. April-June, 2. July-September, 3. October-December, 4. January– March each year.
22 Oct 2001 : Column: 57W
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |