---

7 Jun 2004 : Column 82W—continued

Mr. Graham Cotton

Mr. John Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether Mr. Graham Cotton of Olton in Solihull, a Qa pensioner, would be eligible for compensation under the provisions of the Pensions Bill. [176233]

Malcolm Wicks: It is not yet possible to say exactly who will be eligible for help through the proposed financial assistance scheme provision of the Pensions Bill. This is a difficult and complex area and, as explained at Report stage of the Bill on 19 May, we shall be working on the detail over the coming months, in consultation with interested parties, to ensure that the scheme is workable and provides appropriate levels of assistance to the right people. Eligibility of individuals will depend on the detailed design of the scheme and the circumstances of particular schemes and scheme members.

Pension Protection Fund

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what contribution the Government will make to the Pension Protection Fund in lieu of any contribution under the current guaranteed minimum pension arrangements. [175901]

 
7 Jun 2004 : Column 83W
 

Malcolm Wicks: When an eligible scheme enters the PPF, and it is a contracted-out occupational pension scheme, the PPF will not take on specific responsibility for paying the guaranteed minimum pension. This is to simplify the PPF rules in relation to entitlement to compensation.

However, the level of compensation payable will be significant, and reflect the individual scheme rules. PPF will pay 100 per cent. level of compensation to members who are over their pension scheme's normal pension age (NPA) and 90 per cent. level to members below their pension scheme's NPA, subject to a benefit cap.

The basic benefits for members below NPA will reflect the following:

NPA;

accrual rate;

pensionable salary; and

pensionable service

Pension Schemes

Richard Burden: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what inquiries he has made about the wind-up of the Warwick and Debenholt pension schemes since 19 April 2002; and if he will make a statement. [176532]

Malcolm Wicks: The Government are aware of these three pension schemes. The Occupational Pensions Regulatory Authority investigated these schemes and published a report with their findings. Opra found that there were breaches of the Pensions Act 1995. The two trustees of the schemes were disqualified from acting as trustees of any occupational pension scheme and were fined.

One of the schemes has been wound up and Opra has continued to monitor the other two schemes as they are being wound up by the independent trustee. There have also been complaints made to the Pensions Ombudsman regarding these two schemes, which the Ombudsman is considering.

The Government are sympathetic to all members of final salary occupational pension schemes that will not receive the pensions they worked to build up for their future retirement.

It is because of these situations that the Government are introducing, from April 2005, the Pension Protection Fund which will mean that members of final salary schemes based in the UK can rest assured that they will always receive a meaningful pension in future, even if their employer goes bust and leaves the pension scheme underfunded.

Richard Burden: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what inquiries he has made about the wind-up of the Cheney pension schemes since 19 April 2002; and if he will make a statement. [176533]

Malcolm Wicks: We continue to take an interest in the Cheney pension scheme. However, as this case is still subject to ongoing legal proceedings, we are unable to comment further at this time.
 
7 Jun 2004 : Column 84W
 

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will list the pension schemes which have come forward so far to claim compensation under the proposed fund to compensate people who have lost their pensions through pension wind-ups. [175900]

Malcolm Wicks: No schemes or members have been invited to claim assistance from the financial assistance scheme proposed in the Pensions Bill. As explained at Report stage of the Bill on 19 May, we are currently working on the detail of the scheme.

In the meantime, we have been collecting data on schemes that are winding up, or that have wound up, to establish firm estimates of the numbers affected and the extent of the problem. We shall lay a report on the results of this exercise by the end of June. As this exercise was conducted in confidence, the data published will be collated and not identified with any individual scheme.

Post Office Card Account

Miss Begg: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what plans he has to make it easier for benefit claimants to open a Post Office card account. [177331]

Mr. Pond: The process for opening a Post Office card account is already a straightforward one and over 3 million customers have so far said they want to open one.

We have already made some improvements to the Post Office card account process where real problems have been identified and continue to closely monitor its operation. We want to make further changes which would include less form-filling and a straightforward process for customers getting account details back to DWP via their postmaster.

RNIB (Tactile Markings)

Mr. Berry: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what progress has been made, following representations by the Royal National Institute for the Blind, regarding the provision of tactile markings that will be issued as part of the Department's exception scheme to facilitate blind and partially sighted people's identification of them amongst other postal items they might receive. [177311]

Mr. Pond: Many blind and partially sighted people have no problems using cash machines or the PIN pads at Post Offices.

We will use cheque payments for those who we are unable to pay into any sort of account.

We want to ensure that cheque payments meet the needs of blind and partially sighted people in these circumstances and I have met the RNIB on a number of occasions to discuss this.

We carefully considered the RNIB's suggestion to include tactile markings on cheques. But such markings would make cheques more easily identifiable and, therefore, more susceptible to theft before they reach the customer. Cheques with such markings would take longer to process through the banks' clearing system.
 
7 Jun 2004 : Column 85W
 

However, we are continuing to work closely with RNIB. And if security and other technological improvements make this a viable option in the future then we will, of course, look again at the provision of tactile markings on payment cheques.

Sure Start

Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when Sure Start maternity grant leaflets were distributed to Job Centre Plus local offices; and what steps he has taken to ensure that (a) all Job Centre Plus local offices were supplied with leaflets from the start of the scheme and (b) staff were fully briefed about it. [176771]

Mr. Pond: The "Good News for Babies" leaflet was produced in March 2000 when the Sure Start Maternity Grant (SSMG) replaced the Maternity Payment. Over 440,000 leaflets were distributed to local offices using
 
7 Jun 2004 : Column 86W
 
the Department's internal distribution network. The leaflet was also available on the DSS/DWP website. In addition a number of other departmental leaflets were revised to include information on SSMGs and were available to local offices from April 2000.

Staff dealing with the Social Fund and those with customer contact were briefed in advance of the proposed SSMG scheme in November 1999. A detailed procedural bulletin, covering initial training and guidance, was issued on 16 February 2000. The Social Fund new entrant training was also amended to include SSMG procedures by April 2000.

Unemployment Benefits

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much was spent by Government in real terms on unemployment benefits in each of the last 25 years. [175028]

Mr. Pond: The information requested is in the tables.
£ million real terms 2004–05 prices

	Unemployment benefit	Supplementary benefit/income support paid to the unemployed	Jobseeker's allowance (contribution based)	Jobseeker's allowance (income based)	Total
1979–80	2,091	1,675	—	—	3,766
1980–81	3,469	2,152	—	—	5,621
1981–82	4,211	3,741	—	—	7,953
1982–83	3,467	5,932	—	—	9,399
1983–84	3,308	7,195	—	—	10,503
1984–85	3,314	7,832	—	—	11,146
1985–86	3,166	8,396	—	—	11,562
1986–87	3,348	8,372	—	—	11,720
1987–88	2,684	7,286	—	—	9,971
1988–89	1,892	5,205	—	—	7,097
1989–90	1,171	4,201	—	—	5,372
1990–91	1,287	4,352	—	—	5,639
1991–92	2,238	5,861	—	—	8,099

Note:
The GDP deflator used to convert figures to real terms was published at Budget.

	Unemployment benefit	Supplementary benefit/income support paid to the unemployed	Jobseeker's allowance (contribution based)	Jobseeker's allowance (income based)	Total
1992–93	2,378	7,268	—	—	9,646
1993–94	2,172	7,546	—	—	9,718
1994–95	1,684	6,718	—	—	8,402
1995–96	1,388	6,074	—	—	7,462
1996–97	715	2,872	405	2,232	6,223
1997–98	—	—	564	4,059	4,623
1998–99	—	—	547	3,558	4,106
1999–2000	—	—	518	3,157	3,675
2000–01	—	—	498	2,714	3,213
2001–02	—	—	510	2,320	2,830
2002–03	—	—	545	2,214	2,760
2003–04(10)	—	—	543	2,074	2,617

⁽¹⁰⁾ 2004 figures are in 2004–05 prices.
Notes:
1. Supplementary benefit for the unemployed was replaced by income support for the unemployed in April 1988.
2. Unemployment benefit and income support for the unemployed were replaced by jobseeker's allowance contribution based and jobseeker's allowance income based in October 1996.
3. Totals may not sum due to rounding to nearest million.
4. Figures for 2003–04 are estimated outturn.





 
7 Jun 2004 : Column 87W
 

---