| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
24 Apr 2006 : Column 907W—continued
Benefit Costs
Lynne Jones:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the cost was in current prices of (a) income support, (b) incapacity benefit, (c) disability living allowance, (d) attendance allowance, (e) the
24 Apr 2006 : Column 908W
social fund, (f) retirement pension, (g) the state second pension/state earnings-related pension scheme and (h) pension credit in each year since 1996–97; and what percentage of these costs was accounted for by administration in each year. [59338]
24 Apr 2006 : Column 909W
Mr. Plaskitt: The available information is in the following tables.
Notes:
1.Benefit expenditure figures are rounded to the nearest £ million. The figures do not include administration expenditure.
2.Administration percentages (of benefit expenditure only and not the sum of benefit expenditure and administration expenditure) been obtained from previously published departmental reports (see source). The social fund percentage is of expenditure and loan recoveries, whereas the social fund benefit expenditure figures shown in the tables are net of recoveries. The percentage of income support includes expenditure on the over 60's age group. The 1996–97 administration percentage of income support paid to the unemployed is shown separately. (Jobseeker's allowance-income based replaced income support paid to the unemployed in October 1996. Jobseeker's allowance-income based administration expenditure figures are not shown in the table).
3.Information on the costs (and therefore percentages) of administering benefits from 1999–2000 onwards is not currently available in the format requested. In accordance with the requirements of Resource Accounting and Budgeting the Department now accounts for its administration and benefit expenditure by Strategic Objective, as set out in its public service agreements (PSA), and by individual Requests for Resources (RfRs), as set out in the Departmental Estimates and Accounts.
Sources:
Table 3 DWP expenditure tables published on the internet at http://www.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd4/expenditure.asp. All figures are consistent with the pre-Budget report (5 December 2005).
Administration percentages are from Department for Social Security Departmental Reports, published in April 1998 (1996–97 figure), March 1999 (1997–98 figure) and April 2000 (1998–99 figure).
24 Apr 2006 : Column 911W
Capita Group
Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what meetings (a) he and (b) Ministers in his Department have held with directors and senior executives of (i) Capita Group plc. and (ii) its subsidiaries since 1 January 2004; and whether (A) Capita Group plc. and (B) its subsidiaries have provided input (1) in writing and (2) in person to policy discussions in his Department since 1 January 2004. [61140]
Margaret Hodge: Capita Group plc has a large number of trading subsidiaries and this information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Child Support
Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many parents have avoided paying the correct amount of child support in (a) West Lancashire, (b) Lancashire and (c) the UK in each year since 1980. [64293]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr.Stephen Geraghty. 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. As he is currently unavailable, Iam responding on his behalf.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many parents have avoided paying the correct amount of child support in (a) West Lancashire (b) Lancashire (c) the UK in each year since 1980.
We cannot provide the information at the requested constituency or county level. Data has therefore only been provided at GB level.
As the Agency only began to operate in 1993, information is not available prior to this point. Subsequent to 1993, data has been provided for the years in which it is available.
There are a variety of ways in which a non-resident parent could potentially avoid paying the correct amount of child support. For example, an NRP could:
By refusing to provide this information they are preventing the Agency from performing a maintenance calculation/assessment and could thus be said to be avoiding paying the correct amount of child support. Where a parent consistently refuses to provide this information, the Agency may impose an Interim Maintenance Assessment (IMA; old scheme) or a Default Maintenance Decision (DMD; new scheme). Information on the number of DMDs and IMAs imposed by the Agency is attached as Table 1.
Under-declare their income and assets. Doing this may result in the establishment of a lower liability for child maintenance than should otherwise have applied, had the non-resident parent's (NRP) true income and assets been declared. In this case the parent with care (PWC) may then apply for a departure or variation (old and new rules respectively) from the standard formula, on the basis that the non- resident parent's lifestyle is inconsistent with the income they are declaring to the Agency. Limitations with management information means that the number of variations applied for is not available. However, the number of departures applied for is attached as Table 2.
Failure to pay the full assessed amount of child maintenance. An NRP who does not pay the full maintenance liability due to them is clearly avoiding paying the correct amount of child support. The number of NRPs who do not pay the full liability for which they have been assessed is attached as Table 3.
Notes:
1.Robust data is not available prior to 1997.
2.Numbers are rounded to the nearest thousand and percentages to the
nearest whole percent.
2.'n/a' indicates the period is not applicable.
3.'u/a' indicates that data is unavailable due to limitations in management information.
Notes
1.A departure can be applied for by either parent where it is felt that a maintenance assessment does not adequately reflect the circumstances of the NRP or PWC. Departures apply to old scheme cases only. The numbers presented therefore cover any circumstance where a departure has been applied for (as opposed to granted), and not just those where departures were applied for by the PWC.
2.This table shows the number of departures applied for in each year since 1999/2000. Robust figures are not available for periods of time before 1999.
3.Numbers have been rounded to the nearest thousand.
24 Apr 2006 : Column 913W
Notes
1.To place these figures into context, it should be noted that, whilst only 42 per cent. of non resident parents paid their maintenance liability in full over the quarter ending December 2005, the Agency obtained some form of payment from 70 per cent. of cases in which maintenance was due via the collection service. Where any such payment was obtained, on average, 90 per cent. of the amount due was collected.
2.Data is not available prior to 1995.
3.'u/a' indicates that data is unavailable due to limitations in management information.
4.Numbers have been rounded to the nearest whole per cent.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |