| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
19 Apr 2006 : Column 714W—continued
Travel to School
Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to his Answer of 10 March 2006, Official Report, column 1788W, on travel to school, what percentage of (a) primary and (b) secondary school children travelled to school by (i) walking, (ii) cycling, (iii) bus, (iv) car and (v) another method in each year since 1997. [62629]
Dr. Ladyman: Data from the National Travel Survey on the percentage of trips in 1996–98 to 2004 made by children travelling to and from school by mode and age are given in the tables.
| Age 11–16 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996–98 | 1997–99 | 1998–2000 | 1999–01 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | |
| Walk(31) | 43 | 42 | 43 | 43 | 38 | 41 | 44 |
| Bicycle | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 |
| Local/private bus | 32 | 32 | 32 | 32 | 33 | 32 | 29 |
| Car/van | 21 | 21 | 19 | 19 | 24 | 23 | 22 |
| Other | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| All modes | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
(30) Trips of under 50 miles only.
(31) Short walks believed to be under-recorded in 2002 and 2003 compared with earlier years.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what percentage of (a) primary and (b) secondary school children in (i) Southend, (ii) Essex, (iii) the Metropolitan police area of London and (iv) Hertfordshire travel to school by (A) foot, (b) bicycle (C) bus, (D) car and (E) other forms of transport. [64243]
Dr. Ladyman: Data from the National Travel Survey on the percentage of trips in 2002–04 made by children travelling to and from school by mode and age in Greater London (including City of London) are given in the table.
| 5 to 10 years | 11 to 16 years | |
|---|---|---|
| Walk | 48 | 30 |
| Bicycle | 0 | 1 |
| Car/van | 41 | 20 |
| Bus | 8 | 39 |
| Other | 1 | 10 |
| All modes | 100 | 100 |
(32) Trips of less than 50 miles only.
Sample sizes are too small to give results for Essex, Hertfordshire or Southend-on-Sea, and are not available for the Metropolitan police area.
World Cup (Complimentary Tickets)
Mr. Hands: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many complimentary tickets his Department has received for games taking place at the FIFA World Cup 2006 in Germany. [63897]
Derek Twigg: The Department and its Agencies have not received any tickets for the forth-coming FIFA World Cup in Germany.
World Heritage Sites
David Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which Minister in his Department has responsibility for issues relating to World Heritage sites. [63480]
Derek Twigg:
Lead responsibility for policy on World Heritage sites rests with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport works closely with relevant Government Departments on all issues affecting World Heritage sites. My right hon. Friend the
19 Apr 2006 : Column 715W
Secretary of State for Transport has responsibility for all forms of transport policy including issues concerning World Heritage sites which fall within the Department's policy remit, with the support of his ministerial team.
WORK AND PENSIONS
16 Hour Rule
Richard Burden: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) what recent representations he has received on the 16 hour rule; [62482]
(2) whether he plans to reform the 16 hour rule. [63278]
Mr. Plaskitt: I have received numerous representations in response to the Foyer Federation's 'Give us a chance' campaign. I have also received other correspondence and parliamentary questions about the 16 hour rule. In addition, I have accepted an invitation from the joint chairs of the all parliamentary group on foyers and on youth affairs to attend a meeting to discuss the 16 hour housing benefit rule. This provides both an opportunity to listen and advise what work is already in progress to identify how DWP and Jobcentre Plus can positively support people to study in order to improve their current educational attainment, leading to enhanced employment and career prospects.
Work to review the interaction between study rules and benefits is ongoing. One of the outcomes of the recent Social Exclusion report "Review of Financial Support, Supporting Young People to Achieve" is that from April 2006, if someone is in non-advanced education when they turn 19 they can continue to receive certain benefits, including income support, and therefore housing benefit, and education maintenance allowance until they have completed their current course of study or reach age 20.
This is clearly an improvement on the previous situation, but it is likely that there will still be some young people who have had to abandon their attempts to catch up on learning because they reach 20 before they have finished their course. Because of this, the Government are committed to keeping this new age limit under review. Additionally, we recognise that for some a different approach may be needed.
Consequently, from September as part of the new deal for skills we will be piloting in some Jobcentre Plus districts the effect of allowing low skilled jobseekers to take up full-time further education courses as a route into work when a lack of skills is considered to be a significant barrier.
Benefits
John Cummings: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in Easington constituency in receipt of benefits have access to a bank account. [62958]
Mr. Plaskitt: Information is not available in the format requested.
John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many recipients of retirement pension in Edinburgh West constituency use Post Office card accounts. [64472]
19 Apr 2006 : Column 716W
Mr. Plaskitt: Information showing the number of DWP benefit and pension payment accounts paid by direct payment into a Post Office card account for each parliamentary constituency has been placed in the Library.
John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in Edinburgh West constituency in receipt of benefits have access to a bank account. [64473]
Mr. Plaskitt: Information is not available in the format requested.
Child Support
Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many parents with care who have (a) received and (b) applied for a Child Support Agency assessment are (i) not receiving maintenance and (ii) receiving less than £130 per week in benefit. [56979]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is the matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
In reply to your Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive. As the Chief Executive is unavailable, I am responding on his behalf.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many parents with care who have (a) received and (b) applied for a Child Support Agency assessment are (i) not receiving maintenance and (ii) receiving less than £130 per week in benefit.
Of these, in 408,000 cases, the non resident parent had either made a payment via the Agency's collection service in the three months ending 31 December 2005, or a maintenance direct arrangement was in place.
In 472,000 cases the calculation/assessment resulted in a nil liability, meaning that no maintenance was due;
In 130,000 cases payment was due via the Agency's collection service in the previous 3 months, but the non resident parent had not complied with this request;
In 136,000 cases a calculation or assessment that resulted in a positive maintenance liability (i.e they were due to pay maintenance) had been made, but the Agency had not yet requested payment from the non-resident parent in the 3 months ending 31 December 2005. Of these, 27,000 were new scheme applications still in the course of being processed.
At 31 December 2005 there were 300,000 applications still in the course of being processed, and had yet to receive a maintenance calculation or assessment. It should be noted that many of these cases will not progress to this latter stage of the process, as they may be closed, usually at the request of the parent with care, with the remainder being identified as being subject to a Reduced Benefit Decision; had Good Cause accepted; or actually being a change of circumstance in relation to an existing case rather than a new application.
In the 3 months ending 31 December 2005, in 61 per cent. of the 674,000 cases where a positive maintenance liability had been established, the non resident parent had either made a payment via the Agency's collection service, or a maintenance direct arrangement was in place.
Where the parent with care is on the old scheme and in receipt of Income Support or Jobseeker's Allowance (income based) the parent with care does not receive any of the maintenance paid, as it is retained by the State, and offset against expenditure on means tested benefits. We are not able to give a precise figure as to the number of the above cases in which this applies, due to limitations with currently available management information. We do know that around 80 per cent. of the total amount of maintenance collected by the Agency goes to the parent with care.
You also asked how many parents with care were receiving less than £130 per week in benefits. Information relating to the overall amount of social security benefits being received by CSA clients is not available.
Volumes of cases given in this response are rounded to the nearest thousand, which might mean that, due to rounding, components of the caseload might not sum to their respective totals.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his target is of the proportion of resident parents who should be receiving maintenance after applying to the Child Support Agency. [61856]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
In reply to your Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive. As the Chief Executive is unavailable, I am responding on his behalf.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what his target is of the proportion of resident parents who should be receiving maintenance after applying to the Child Support Agency.
The Agency has no target for the proportion of applications that should result in receipt of maintenance as described above. This is because, whether or not an application results in a positive maintenance liabilty being established is not an outcome which is wholly within Agency's control. In particular, prior to this point in the process, cases could either be closed at the request of the Parent with Care, be subject to a Reduced Benefit Decision, have had Good Cause accepted or be identified as being a change of circumstance in relation to an exisiting case.
Where a positive maintenance liability does exist, the Agency has a target that, by the 31st March 2007, 65 per cent. of such cases will either be in receipt of maintenance via the CSA collection service, or have a maintenance direct arrangement in place.
Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many cases of maladministration the Parliamentary Ombudsman found in respect of the Child Support Agency in each year of the last five years; and in respect of how many of those she recommended that compensation be paid. [44233]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive. The Chief Executive is unavailable, I am responding on his behalf.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many cases of maladministration the Parliamentary Ombudsman found in respect of the Child Support Agency in each year of the last five years; and in respect of how many of those she recommended that compensation be paid.
The information on special payments is not broken down in a way which identifies which were made as a result of a Parliamentary Ombudsman recommendation. To provide the precise information requested requires clerical examination of individual cases. The Agency is currently working with the Parliamentary Ombudsman to provide this information and will write to you separately as soon as it is available.
| Number of complaints of maladministration upheld | |
|---|---|
| 2000/01 | 67 |
| 2001/02 | 42 |
| 2002/03 | 35 |
| 2003/04 | 20 |
| 2004/05 | 14 |
Note:
Figures for the years 2000/01 to 2003/04 are based on data published in the Parliamentary Ombudsman's annual reports for those years. The figures for 2004/05 are based on information held by the Department for Work and Pensions.
Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in what proportion of cases assessed on the new system of child support maintenance which had previously been assessed under a default maintenance decision the amount of child maintenance deemed to be owed in the final assessment was (a) higher and (b) lower. [52727]
Mr. Plaskitt [holding answer 27 February 2006]: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the right hon. Member with the information requested.
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive. The Chief Executive is unavailable as he is communicating the Operational Improvement Plan to all Agency staff. I am responding on his behalf.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, in what proportion of cases calculated on the new system of child support maintenance which had previously been calculated under a default maintenance decision was the amount of child maintenance deemed to be owed in the final calculation (a) higher and (b) lower.
By December 2005, of those cases which had received a maintenance calculation following a previous calculation under a default maintenance decision (DMD):
In 7% of cases, a maintenance calculation was performed in the same month as the DMD. Due to limitations with currently available management information it is not possible to ascertain if the maintenance calculation was higher or lower than the DMD.
In 4% of cases, limitations with the currently available management information mean that it is not possible to compare the value of the maintenance calculation with that of the DMD.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether he will publish Sir David Henshaw's report on the redesign of the Child Support Agency before the summer 2006 recess; and if he will make a statement. [61859]
Mr. Plaskitt: Sir David Henshaw will deliver his findings to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions before the summer recess. It is the intention to publish Sir David Henshaw's report when a statement is made to the House.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |