| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
17 Nov 2004 : Column 1657W—continued
Jobcentres
Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what percentage of Jobcentres proposed for closure have been kept open following consultation. [196977]
Jane Kennedy: 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. Paul Holmes, dated 17 November 2004:
The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question concerning what percentage of Jobcentres proposed for closure have been kept open following consultation. This is something which falls within the responsibilities delegated to me as Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus.
Unfortunately, it is not possible to provide the information you have requested. It may be helpful if I explain that the process of sharing early plans with local stakeholders means our service delivery arrangements may change several times until we have a robust service delivery plan which meets the needs of the local community. Even after this plan has been approved and shared with stakeholders it is subject to change as the district progresses through a period of detailed design. District managers will keep local stakeholders informed of changes where they occur.
Consultation is an integral part of the planning process for rollout, and we consult very widely and listen carefully to all comments and views we receive.
Of course, we will not be able to satisfy the demands of each and every stakeholder, but my district managers are happy to meet with local people to discuss how decisions have been arrived at.
I understand that you have visited the Jobcentre Plus office in Chesterfield, but if you would find a further visit to see the new Jobcentre Plus service at first hand useful I would be happy to set this up for you. The new technology and process we are introducing enables customers to conduct more of their business with us by telephone and Internet. When they need to visit one of our offices it will usually be by appointment, with personal advisers tailoring the service to meet their needs.
We are also able to deliver some of our services from other locations, perhaps using partners' premises for advice and information sessions or locating a touch-screen Jobpoint in community premises, as part of an overall plan for delivering services in the area. We are pleased to be able to enhance the service we offer in this way where it is appropriate.
Our aim is to introduce a radically improved service for all of our customers to give them the best opportunity of finding work and to pay the benefits they are entitled to correctly and promptly.
Commencement of Legislation
Brian White: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what pieces of legislation passed in the last 30 years that the Department is responsible for remain to be brought into force, broken down by year of enactment. [195616]
Maria Eagle: The information for the period requested is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. Information on primary legislation enacted since 1997 for which the Department for Work and Pensions is responsible the provisions of which are not yet in force or not fully in force is as follows:
Social Security Administration (Fraud) Act 1997 (c.47)
Social Security Act 1998 (c.14)
Sections 1, 2, 4, 8 to 30, 33, 36 to 39, 45 to 47, 74 and 86 and Schedules 2 to 5 and 7 and 8 (not fully in force)
Social Security Contributions (Transfer of Functions, etc.) Act 1999(c.2)
Disability Rights Commission Act 1999 (c.17)
Welfare Reform and Pensions Act 1999 (c.30)
Child Support, Pensions and Social Security Act 2000 (c.19)
Sections 1 to 10, 12, 18 to 23, 25, 26, 49, 52, 54, 56, 62 to 66, 68, 73 and 85 and Schedules 1 to 3, 5, 7, and 9 (not fully in force)
Means-testing (Pensions)
Mr. McWalter: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made, with regard to the three schemes for phasing out means testing for pensions set out in the recent White Paper on pensions, of (a) the inflationary effects of each of the schemes, (b) the total cost of each of the measures in each scheme, (c) the administrative savings to be achieved under each scheme and (d) the number of pensioners who would be affected adversely under each scheme (i) ignoring income erosion caused by inflation and (ii) after factoring in erosion caused by inflation. [198800]
Malcolm Wicks: Our policy is to keep the State Pension as the foundation for income in retirement and to give additional help through Pension Credit to the poorest pensioners. set out any schemes to replace the current arrangements but have instead asked the Pensions Commission to look at and report on pensions. We will respond to any recommendations made in the report, which is expected in the autumn of next year, in the usual way.
Minimum Income Guarantee
Paul Farrelly: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) how many pensioners benefited from the minimum income guarantee in Newcastle-under-Lyme in each year it was in effect; [198525]
(2) how many pensioners have received pension credit in Newcastle-under-Lyme in each year since it was introduced. [198623]
Malcolm Wicks: The information is given in the two tables.
Notes:
1. Figures from May 1999 to November 2002 are taken from a 5 per cent. sample and are subject to a high degree of sampling variation.
2. Figures are rounded to the nearest hundred.
3. Individual recipients include claimants and partners only and may contain a small number of partners aged under 60.
4. Minimum income guarantee was introduced in April 1999.
5. The October figures relate to 3 October. Minimum income guarantee was replaced by pension credit from 6 October 2003.
17 Nov 2004 : Column 1660W
| Date | Households | Individuals |
|---|---|---|
| October 2003 | 2,775 | 3,200 |
| December 2003 | 3,170 | 3,755 |
| September 2004 | 4,120 | 4,960 |
Notes:
1. Figures are rounded to the nearest five.
2. Figures relate to the end of the month.
3. Pension credit replaced minimum income guarantee from 6 October 2003.
4. The figures for September 2004 are the latest available.
New Deal
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what percentage of individuals in (a) Buckinghamshire and (b) the UK have found permanent employment as a result of the New Deal for (i) the long-term unemployed over 25, (ii) lone parents, (iii) disabled people and (iv) the over 50s in each of the last three years. [191085]
Jane Kennedy: Information is provided for Great Britain rather than the UK as the Department for Work and Pensions New Deal Evaluation Databases do not hold information for Northern Ireland.
The available information is in the following tables.
Notes:
1. For the purposes of New Deal 25 plus, employment is regarded as sustained if no new claim is made for jobseeker's allowance within 13 weeks of leaving New Deal.
2. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
3. Percentages have been calculated from unrounded figures.
Source:
DWP Information and Analysis Directorate
Notes:
1. Data is for the following Buckinghamshire constituencies: Aylesbury, Buckingham, Chesham and Amersham, Milton Keynes South West, North East Milton Keynes and Wycombe.
2. For the purposes of New Deal 25 plus, employment is regarded as sustained if no new claim is made for jobseeker's allowance within 13 weeks of leaving New Deal.
3. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
4. Percentages have been calculated from unrounded figures.
Source:
DWP Information and Analysis Directorate
17 Nov 2004 : Column 1661W
Notes:
1. Information is not available at constituency level for New Deal for disabled people.
2. For the purposes of New Deal for disabled people, a job is regarded as sustained when a person, placed into work through a job broker, remains in work for 13 out of 39 weeks. Prior to October 2003, an NDDP job was regarded as sustained when a person, placed into work through a job broker, remained in work for 26 out of 39 weeks.
3. Data is up to March 2004 rather than June 2004 as 13 weeks has to be allowed for jobs to become sustained.
4. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
5. Percentages have been calculated from unrounded figures.
Source:
DWP Information and Analysis Directorate
| Period | Great Britain | Buckinghamshire |
|---|---|---|
| July 2001-June 2002 | 51,520 | 210 |
| July 2002-June 2003 | 55,880 | 150 |
| July 2003-June 2004 | 63,640 | 290 |
Notes:
1. There is no current measure of sustainability for New Deal for lone parents. Figures provided are for the numbers of individuals into jobs.
2. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
Source:
DWP Information and Analysis Directorate
| Period | Great Britain | Buckinghamshire |
|---|---|---|
| July 2001-June 2002 | 33,190 | 100 |
| July 2002-March 2003 | 22,730 | 100 |
| April 2003-June 2003 | 6,830 | — |
| July 2003-June 2004 | 22,620 | — |
Notes:
1. Data is for the following Buckinghamshire constituencies: Aylesbury, Buckingham, Chesham and Amersham, Milton Keynes South West, North East Milton Keynes and Wycombe.
2. A measure of sustainability is not available for New Deal 50 plus.
3. Figures up to the end of March 2003 relate to the number of individual starts to the New Deal 50 Plus employment credit.
4. Figures provided from April 2003-June 2004 relate to the number of recorded job entries through the New Deal 50 plus programme.
5. Information is not available at constituency level after March 2003.
6. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
Source:
DWP Information and Analysis Directorate
Mr. Grogan: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people have gained work through the New Deal for Lone Parents in (a) Selby constituency and (b) North Yorkshire. [198789]
Jane Kennedy:
340 lone parents in the Selby constituency, and 2,930 lone parents in the Jobcentre Plus district of North Yorkshire, have gained work through the New Deal for Lone Parents since the start of the programme in October 1998.
17 Nov 2004 : Column 1662W
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |