Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether attendance allowances and other allowances paid to elected members of local authorities are regarded by the Child Support Agency as income for the purpose of determining the level of child support; and if he will make a statement. [182041]
Mr. Pond:
In the old child support scheme, allowances paid to elected members of local authorities are taken into account as income when assessing maintenance liability. The only exception is when these allowances are payments for expenses incurred "wholly, exclusively and necessarily" in performance of their duties.
14 Jul 2004 : Column 1205W
In the new child support scheme income and allowances paid to elected members of local authorities are disregarded when calculating maintenance.
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many (a) days have been disrupted and (b) man-hours have been lost at the Belfast Office of the Child Support Agency as a result of the current industrial action of civil servants. [180799]
Mr. Pond: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. David Lidington, dated 14 July 2004:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many (a) days have been disrupted and (b) man hours have been lost at the Belfast Office of the Child Support Agency as a result of the current industrial action of civil servants.
Staff in Belfast are employees of the Northern Ireland Child Support Agency. They provide services, under contract, to the Child Support Agency in Great Britain. The delivery of child support services in Belfast has been partially disrupted on 8.5 days, resulting in the loss of approximately 15,000 man hours between December 2003 to April 2004. The impact on customers has been minimised by management prioritising work and directing resources accordingly.
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many cases handled by the Child Support Agency in Northern Ireland have been delayed as a result of the current industrial action by civil servants. [180807]
Mr. Pond: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. David Lidington, dated 14 July 2004:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many cases handled by the Child Support Agency in Northern Ireland have been delayed as a result of the current industrial action by civil servants.
Staff in Belfast are employees of the Northern Ireland Child Support Agency. My understanding is that managers in Northern Ireland have been able to contain the impact of the current industrial action and do not believe that cases have been delayed directly as a result of it.
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the costs to his Department of refurbishments to buildings have been since 2001. [182078]
Maria Eagle: The available information is in the table.
Business-related refurbishment works (non-modernisation programme) (19) | Modernisation programme works (20) | Total | |
---|---|---|---|
200102 | 27.483 | 41.517 | 69 |
200203 | 25.819 | 274.181 | 300 |
200304 | 22.932 | 335.068 | 358 |
Mr. David Stewart: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will introduce legislation to support disability leave for those people who develop a disability and need time away from work to adjust and learn new working methods. [182598]
Maria Eagle: Where an employee is covered by the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA), the provision of disability leave might be a reasonable adjustment for an employer to make. Therefore, we do not consider it necessary to introduce legislation to provide for statutory disability leave.
The Code of Practice on the employment provisions of the DDA, published by the Disability Rights Commission, suggests that allowing time off during working hours for rehabilitation, assessment or treatment is likely to constitute a reasonable adjustment.
John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much money was claimed in disability living allowance in Scotland in 200304, broken down by local authority. [183112]
Maria Eagle:
The requested information is in the table.
14 Jul 2004 : Column 1207W
Local authority | Estimated disability living allowance expenditure in 200304 |
---|---|
Aberdeen City | 26 |
Aberdeenshire | 27 |
Angus | 14 |
Argyll and Bute | 12 |
Clackmannanshire | 9 |
Dumfries and Galloway | 24 |
Dundee City | 26 |
East Ayrshire | 23 |
East Dunbartonshire | 12 |
East Lothian | 14 |
East Renfrewshire | 10 |
City of Edinburgh | 57 |
Comhairle nan Eilean Siar (previously Western Isles) | 3 |
Falkirk | 25 |
Fife | 57 |
Glasgow City | 149 |
Highland | 27 |
Inverclyde | 17 |
Midlothian | 15 |
Moray | 9 |
North Ayrshire | 25 |
North Lanarkshire | 74 |
Orkney Islands | 2 |
Perth and Kinross (previously Perthshire and Kinross) | 15 |
Renfrewshire | 33 |
The Scottish Borders | 12 |
Shetland Isles | 2 |
South Ayrshire | 18 |
South Lanarkshire | 59 |
Stirling | 14 |
West Dunbartonshire (previously Dumbarton and Clydebank) | 21 |
West Lothian | 31 |
David Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) why the level of benefit payable to in-patients who have been in hospital for more than a year is set at 20 per cent. of the basic state pension; [183162]
(2) what reviews of the level of benefit payable to long-term in-patients have been conducted since it was first set at 20 per cent. of the basic state pension; and what the findings were; [183190]
(3) what assessment was made of the (a) therapeutic and (b) financial needs of in-patients who have been in hospital over a year when the decision to maintain the level of benefit entitlement at 20 per cent. of the basic state pension was taken; and if he will make a statement; [183191]
(4) what research he has commissioned on the (a) economic and (b) therapeutic effects of setting the level of benefit payable to long-term in-patients at 20 per cent. of the basic state pension. [183245]
Malcolm Wicks: The National Insurance Advisory Committee (NIAC) originally considered the amount of benefit that should be paid to long-term in-patients in 1949. Although they said that there would be grounds for withholding the whole of benefit because no allowance should be paid for outside commitments, they thought it desirable that benefit should not be reduced below "a reasonable amount for personal needs in hospital". They recommended an amount which was roughly 20 per cent. of the standard rate of state pension. (A higher rate was set for long-term in-patients with respiratory tuberculosis.)
When asked to review the amount of benefit paid to in-patients in 1952, the NIAC recommended that the amount paid to long-term in-patients should be increased to reflect increases in the cost of living. This increased amount continued to represent 20 per cent. of the prevailing rate of state pension.
Changes were introduced in 1988 to abolish the resettlement benefit payable to long-term in-patients without a dependant on discharge, and to reduce the amount payable to dependants of long-term in-patients. The Social Security Advisory Committee (SSAC), when considering those changes, said that they had received several representations that the level of benefit paid to long-term in-patients (that is, the 20 per cent. of basic state pension) was too low to meet their needs. SSAC said that they had seen no evidence to convince them that the level of benefit should be raised.
The benefit paid to long-term in-patients is to meet their personal day-to-day requirements, such as newspapers, magazines, and toiletry items. It is not intended to cover the purchase of more expensive items such as clothing. That is the responsibility of the local NHS trust.
We have seen no convincing evidence that the current level of benefit is causing long-term in-patients either therapeutic or economic harm.
Next Section | Index | Home Page |