---

Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Dr. Stephen Ladyman): The annual report for 2003 is being published today and copies have been placed in the Library. The report covers research and development work carried out by or on behalf of any Government Department in relation to equipment that might increase the range of activities and independence or well being of disabled people.

The current report places such research in the context of the national health service improvement plan, and outlines the role of assistive technology in making independent living easier for older people and people with disabilities. The report describes the wide range of Government funded projects supporting the development, introduction and evaluation of assistive technology.

NHS Purchasing and Supply Agency

The Minister of State, Department of Health (Mr. John Hutton): The NHS purchasing and supply agency's annual report and accounts has been published today and copies have been placed in the Library.

WORK AND PENSIONS

Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Chris Pond): On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate (BFI) inspection report on Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council was published today and copies of the report have been placed in the Library.

Following the housing Green Paper "Quality and Choice: A Decent Home for All", published in April 2000, the Department for Work and Pensions developed a performance framework for housing benefits. The "Performance Standards for housing benefits" allow local authorities to make a comprehensive self-assessment of whether they deliver benefit effectively and securely. They are the standards that the Department for Work and Pensions expects local authorities to aspire to and achieve in time.

In 2002–03, Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council administered some £70.8 million in housing benefits, about 19.3 per cent. of its gross revenue expenditure.

BFI inspected Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council against the performance standards for housing benefits, and concludes that the council's benefits service had not reached standard in any of the seven functional areas—strategic management, customer services, processing of claims, working with landlords, internal security, counter-fraud and overpayments.

The report finds that since 2000 the council had been implementing an ambitious programme of activity that included: implementation of the Verification
 
21 Jul 2004 : Column 52WS
 
Framework; implementing new IT systems; a re-organisation of its Revenues and Benefits division; and the establishment of one stop shops and a customer contact centre. Many of the earlier changes were responsible for a considerable backlog of housing benefit claims, attributed to poor management and pointing to a lack of effective planning and organisation.

The council's benefits service had improved from a "poor" classification in December 2002 to a "fair" classification in December 2003 as part of the comprehensive performance assessment programme. The benefits service had a committed workforce and the report acknowledges the considerable efforts made by Members, senior officers and staff over a sustained period of time.

The report finds that the council had not documented its approach to benefits administration, had not put in place essential strategic policies, and had insufficient procedural staff guidance which resulted in staff making inconsistent decisions when processing claims. The report notes serious concerns about the lack of management assurance and public accountability provided by the benefits service.

The council had received "Beacon Council" recognition for its accessible services, providing public access at several one stop shops and handling all incoming telephone calls at its customer contact centre. It had not however reviewed its service against the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and was also not complying with the Race Relations Amendment Act 1976. Physical access issues for customers with disabilities had been considered but their access to services including information needs had not been assessed neither had the needs of customers whose first language was not English. The council's benefit claim form was clear and simple.

The council had made an impressive effort to clear a backlog of new claims resulting in the council's average number of days to process new claims to housing benefits as being approximately 44 days, compared with the standard of 36 days. However, the council was not consistently applying the standards required for gathering and confirming supporting evidence. Claims processing had taken priority over other work, resulting in a backlog of over 20,000 items of post that was not being managed, contributing to high levels of avoidable overpayments. Sampling showed the average time taken to process changes of circumstances was 58.2 days, compared with the standard of nine days.

The council was making positive efforts to raise the profile of counter-fraud activity but it needs to improve publicity of its prosecution policy both internally and externally to demonstrate that it takes fraud seriously. The report notes extreme concerns that the prosecution process used by Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council allowed customers to remain under caution for excessive periods of time. Also that the council's prosecution referral process and scoring system that determined appropriate action to be taken and sanction to be applied, undermined the prosecution policy.

The council's benefit overpayment policies and procedures were of a good standard and fraud overpayments were pursued rigorously and promptly recovered. However, sampling showed that 70 per cent.
 
21 Jul 2004 : Column 53WS
 
of benefit overpayments were as a result of the council not promptly processing notified changes of circumstances.

The on-site phase of the inspection took place in October and November 2003, and the report was cleared on 16 April 2004. The 17-week timeline was not met due to key officers in the council not being available for the clearance of the report.

The report makes recommendations to help the council address weaknesses and further to improve the administration of housing benefit and council tax benefit, as well as counter-fraud activities.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is now considering the report and will be asking the council for its proposals in response to the BFI's findings and recommendations.

Bristol City Council

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Chris Pond): On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate (BFI) inspection report on Bristol City Council was published today and copies of the report have been placed in the Library.

Following the housing Green Paper "Quality and Choice: A Decent Home for All", published in April 2000, the Department for Work and Pensions developed a performance framework for housing benefits. The "Performance Standards for Housing Benefits" allow local authorities to make a comprehensive self-assessment of whether they deliver benefit effectively and securely. They are the standards that the Department for Work and Pensions expects local authorities to aspire to and achieve in time.

In 2002–03, Bristol City Council administered some £78.7 million in housing benefits, about 9.7 per cent. of its gross revenue expenditure.

BFI inspected Bristol City Council against the performance standards for housing benefits, and concludes that the council's benefits service had not reached standard in any of the seven functional areas—strategic management, customer services, processing of claims, working with landlords, internal security, counter-fraud and overpayments.

The report finds a high level of commitment by the council to improve its benefit service. During the inspection, the council implemented a number of changes to address issues that were highlighted by BFI.

In April 2001, having acknowledged that there were problems with the speed and quality of the service it was providing, the council began a programme of fundamental changes in the way it administered housing benefits. Changes included the centralisation and reorganisation of its benefits processing work, and an upgrade to the benefits IT system.

Despite the changes, delays in processing benefit claims and a significant backlog of work were still evident at the time of the inspection. Customers had to wait an average 74 days to have their new benefit claims processed compared to the standard of 36 days. Verification of supporting evidence for benefit claims was generally conducted to a good standard. However, insufficient and ineffective management checking meant
 
21 Jul 2004 : Column 54WS
 
that the council did not have sufficient assurance that the benefits system was secure or that benefit was being paid correctly. Accuracy rates in 2002–03 were reported as 86 per cent., placing the council in the bottom three of all councils.

Customers experienced problems with the council's benefits service, with almost a third of all calls being abandoned unanswered, and customers being asked to supply evidence to support a claim more than once.

The report finds that the quality of the council's counter-fraud investigation work was very effective and it was applying the full range of sanctions in line with its policies. All benefit fraud investigations staff were trained to professional standards.

The council was committed to the recovery of benefit overpayments and had a recovery team within the benefits service. However, many overpayments were caused by the council not processing reported changes of circumstances promptly, and delays in the adjudication of fraud overpayments. The lack of procedural guidance and management checking meant the council had no assurance to the accuracy of overpayments and recovery work.

The report makes recommendations to help the council address weaknesses and to further improve the administration of housing benefit and council tax benefit, as well as counter-fraud activities.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is now considering the report and will be asking the council for its proposals in response to the BFF's findings and recommendations.

---