---

27 May 2004 : Column 1804W—continued

Mr. F.A. Street

Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when the decision of the appeal tribunal on 23 April to pay income support to Mr. F A Street of Kingsbridge, Devon from 31 October 2003 will be implemented; and what the reasons are why payment has not been made. [176216]

Mr. Pond: The administration of Jobcentre Plus is a matter for the Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus, David Anderson. He will write to the hon. Member.

Letter from David Anderson to Mr. Steen, dated 27 May 2004:

The Secretary of State has asked me to reply direct to your question concerning payment of income support for Mr. F A Street, following an appeal tribunal decision. This is something which falls within the responsibilities delegated to me as Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus.

Details of benefit claims are confidential and I will write to you directly on the matter in question.

This is in line with Part 2, paragraph 12 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.

New Deal

Tony Lloyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many lone parents in Manchester, Central have gained work through the New Deal programme. [175714]

Jane Kennedy: 700 lone parents in Manchester, Central have gained work through the New Deal for Lone Parents since the start of the programme in October 1998. Figures for lone parents who have gained work through other New Deal programmes are not available.

Mr. Benton: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many women in Bootle have benefited from (a) the New Deal for Lone Parents and (b) the New Deal for Partners since 1997; and if he will make a statement. [176235]

Jane Kennedy: Through the New Deal we have introduced a wide range of initiatives to help individuals improve their employment prospects by giving them the skills, support and confidence they need to move into work. From 12 April we enhanced the New Deal for Partners in order to offer partners taking part in that programme the same level of help and support as our successful New Deal for Lone Parents programme. Also from this April we have started to roll out Work Focused Interviews for Partners, offering greater support to partners of benefit recipients.

Some 1,390 women have started New Deal for Lone Parents in Bootle since the beginning of the programme in October 1998, of whom, 800 have gained a job. Information on the number of women who have benefited from the New Deal for Partners is not available.

Mr. Benton: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many lone parents in Bootle have gained work through the New Deal programme. [176236]

 
27 May 2004 : Column 1805W
 

Jane Kennedy: 810 lone parents in Bootle have gained work through the New Deal for Lone Parents since the start of the programme in October 1998. Figures for lone parents who have gained work through other New Deal Programmes are not available.

Parental Income

Mr. Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) what the net effect has been of income tax, national insurance and benefits in each year since 1997 on the income of (a) two non-working parents with four children under 16 years and (b) two working parents with four children under 16 years earning up to (i) £10,000, (ii) £15,000, (iii) £20,000, (iv) £25,000 and (v) £30,000; [172831]

(2) what the net effect has been of income tax, national insurance and benefits in each year since 1997 on the income of (a) two non-working parents with three children under 16 years and (b) two working parents with three children under 16 years earning up to (i) £10,000, (ii) £15,000, (iii) £20,000, (iv) £25,000 and (v) £30,000; [172832]

(3) what the net effect has been of income tax, national insurance and benefits in each year since 1997 on the income of (a) one non-working parent with a child under 16 years and (b) one working parent with a child under 16 years earning up to (i) £10,000, (ii) £15,000, (iii) £20,000, (iv) £25,000 and (v) £30,000; [172833]

(4) what the net effect has been of income tax, national insurance and benefits in each year since 1997 on the income of (a) one non-working parent with two children under 16 years and (b) one working parent with two children under 16 years earning up to (i) £10,000, (ii) £15,000, (iii) £20,000, (iv) £25,000 and (v)  £30,000; [172834]

(5) what the net effect has been of income tax, national insurance and benefits in each year since 1997 on the income of (a) one non-working parent with three children under 16 years and (b) one working parent with three children under 16 years earning up to (i) £10,000, (ii) £15,000, (iii) £20,000, (iv) £25,000 and (v) £30,000. [172835]

(6) what the net effect has been of income tax, national insurance and benefits in each year since 1997 on the income of (a) one non-working parent with four children under 16 years and (b) one working parent with four children under 16 years earning up to (i) £10,000, (ii) £15,000, (iii) £20,000, (iv) £25,000 and (v) £30,000; [172836]

(7) what the net effect has been of income tax, national insurance and benefits in each year since 1997 on the income of (a) two non-working parents with a child under 16 years and (b) two working parents with a child under 16 years earning up to (i) £10,000, (ii) £15,000, (iii) £20,000, (iv) £25,000 and (v) £30,000; [172837]

(8) what the net effect has been of income tax, national insurance and benefits in each year since 1997 on the income of (a) two non-working parents with two
 
27 May 2004 : Column 1806W
 
children under 16 years and (b) two working parents with two children under 16 years earning up to (i) £10,000, (ii) £15,000, (iii) £20,000, (iv) £25,000 and (v) £30,000. [172838]

Mr. Pond: The information has been placed in the Library.

Parliamentary Questions

Mr. Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when he will answer questions (a) 152844, (b) 152845 and (c) 152855, tabled by the hon. Member for Northavon on 30 January. [167392]

Maria Eagle [holding answer 22 April 2004]: Replies were given to the hon. Member on 22 April, 12 February and 24 May respectively.

John Thurso: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what proportion of (a) ordinary written questions to his Department were answered within five sitting days of tabling and (b) questions for written answer on a named day received a substantive answer on   that day in (i) the 2002–03 parliamentary session and (ii) this parliamentary session, broken down by month. [171194]

Maria Eagle: The information is in the table.
Percentage

	Proportion of ordinary written questions answered within five sitting days	Proportion of named day written questions answered on that day
Session 2002–03
13–30 November	4	20
December	41	41
January	23	55
February	34	52
March	37	60
April	57	46
May	50	62
June	16	53
July	56	73
August	No questions tabled
September	80	79
October	45	73
1–20 November	74	75
Session 2003–04
26–30 November	35	100
December	62	73
January	39	78
February	48	83
March	52	81
April	85	72

Note:
Figures correct as at 5 May 2004.

Pension Protection Fund

Mr. Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will estimate the annual cost of running the Pension Protection Fund, broken down by (a) direct costs of employing staff, (b) costs paid to outside bodies including (i) investment managers and (ii) actuaries and (c) the costs of collecting the levy by the New Pension Regulator. [175945]

 
27 May 2004 : Column 1807W
 

Malcolm Wicks: Our initial estimates indicate that running costs for the early years of the PPF are between £9–15 million per year. These are order of magnitude figures and are based on a number of assumptions made very early on about the way the PPF might operate. The operating model and the detailed processes underpinning that model are now being refined; this is enabling us to have a much clearer view about not only the potential supply routes, but also the number of people, and necessary skills set, the PPF will need to deliver its business. It is important to note that final decisions relating to operations are very much a matter for the in-coming board. Estimates will be revised once these decisions are firmed up.

With those points in mind, the early numbers show that on the basis of PPF employing around 100 staff—including professionals such as actuaries—the staff costs represent approximately a third of the total. The charges relating to investment managers are not factored into the admin costs, as they are part and parcel of the on-going activity relating to the Fund itself. Assumptions relating to the charges in this area are, at this stage, commercially sensitive. We estimate costs relating to levy collection are in the order of less than half a million pounds.

---