| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
2 Oct 2006 : Column 2578W—continued
TUPE Obligations
John Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will suspend (a) the round of redundancies at the Defence Aviation Repair Agency and (b) the transfer of Tornado work to RAF Marham until the implications of compliance with TUPE regulations have been assessed. [91233]
Mr. Ingram
[holding answer 18 September 2006]: In my letter of 25 July 2006 I explained to you that CE DARA had temporarily suspended the current redundancy programme pending clarity on the TUPE
issues, and that the drawdown of DARA’s Fast jet business at St. Athan would continue as planned. This remains the position. I have now placed a copy of that letter in the Library of the House.
VC Programme
John Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress there has been on the market testing of the VC10 programme at St. Athan; and whether this took into account the full application of the Two Tier Workforce Regulations. [91231]
Mr. Ingram [holding answer 18 September 2006]: Good progress has been made in work to market test the VC10 operating unit at St. Athan; MOD's intentions, in line with legal requirements and the Government's policy, are that industry will need to consider the implications of the TUPE Regulations and the Code of Practice on Workforce Matters (the Cabinet Office document setting out the policy for addressing the so called “two tier workforce issues”) in their purchase proposals.
Constitutional Affairs
Judicial Review
Mr. Amess:
To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs pursuant to the answer of 6 July 2006, Official Report, column 1345W, on judicial review, where information is held indicating
on what occasions individuals and organisations have applied for a judicial review of decisions of her Department; and how (a) hon. Members and (b) members of the public may have access to that information. [85466]
Ms Harman: The Department does not hold the information referred to centrally. It is contained on individual case files. Those files pre-dating 2000 are likely to have been destroyed in accordance with the Department’s policy. The costs of locating and retrieving files would be disproportionate.
The Administrative Court maintains an electronic database of all applications made for judicial review. This may be searched against the name of any party to the proceedings.
Any person may request such information from the Administrative Court and the request will be considered under the Freedom of Information Act.
Work and Pensions
Benefit Payments
Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much (a) pension credit, (b) disability living allowance and (c) carer’s allowance was underpaid due to (a) fraud, (b) customer error and (c) official error in each year for which figures are available. [77990]
Mr. Plaskitt: Information is not available for carer's allowance. The available information is in the following table.
| Estimates of underpayments of pension credit and disability living allowance 2004-05 | ||||||||
| Fraud | Customer error | Official error | Total fraud and error | |||||
| £ million | Percentage | £ million | Percentage | £ million | Percentage | £ million | Percentage | |
| Notes: 1. Figures in brackets are underpayments expressed as a proportion of expenditure for that benefit. They are rounded to the nearest 0.1 per cent. 2. Pension credit estimates are rounded to the nearest £1 million, and disability living allowance estimates are rounded to the nearest £10 million (to be consistent with how they were originally published). 3. Estimates are based on sampling exercises and so are subject to sampling and other uncertainties. Sampling uncertainty is expressed in the form of confidence intervals—these have not been provided in these tables. 4. The methodology used does not capture underpayments due to an incorrect decision being made that the claimant was not entitled to benefit. Expenditure that would be paid out to people who have not applied to benefit they would be entitled to is not included as underpayments. 5. Pension credit was introduced in October 2003, so 2004-05 is the only complete year for which pension credit figures are currently available. 6. The most recent review for disability living allowance was carried out for 2004-05—estimates from this review are provided in this table. Results from the previous review in 1996 were carried out under a different methodology so are not considered comparable. | ||||||||
Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much benefit was underpaid in income support to (a) lone parents and (b) disabled people in each year for which figures are available; and what amount was underpaid due to (i) fraud, (ii) customer error and (iii) official error in each year. [77992]
Mr. Plaskitt: The available information is in the following tables.
| Estimates of underpayments for income support lone parents | ||||||||
| Fraud | Customer error | Official error | Total fraud and error | |||||
| £ million | Percentage | £ million | Percentage | £ million | Percentage | £ million | Percentage | |
| Notes: 1. All figures are underpayments rounded to the nearest £1 million or nearest 0.1 per cent. of expenditure. They are based on sampling exercises and so are subject to sampling and other uncertainties. Sampling uncertainty is expressed in the form of confidence intervals—these have not been provided in these tables. 2. The methodology used does not capture underpayments due to an incorrect decision being made that the claimant was not entitled to benefit. Expenditure that would be paid out to people who have not applied to benefit they would be entitled to is not included as underpayments. 3. Figures are unavailable for disabled people in income support on their own. Figures presented here cover all income support claimants who are not lone parents (mostly disabled and sick claimants). 4. Figures earlier than 2001-02 were not published in the same format as they were produced from two separate samples—one for official error checks, and one for fraud and customer error checks. These have not been provided. | ||||||||
Child Support
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many staff are employed by the Child Support Agency; and how many were employed as of 1 July (a) 1997, (b) 2000 and (c) 2005. [83427]
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.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many staff are employed by the Child Support Agency; and how many were employed as of 1st July (a) 1997 (b) 2000 and (c) 2005.
The information requested can be seen in the attached table.
I hope this information is helpful.
| Number of people employed by the Child Support Agency | |
| Date | Number of people in post( 1) |
| (1) The figures provided show the actual number of people in post, some of whom may be part-time. (2) Data is not held for 1 July 1997. The figure provided is taken from the 1997-98 Annual Report and Accounts, which shows the average number of employees over the financial year using DATAVIEW method of counting. This method shows the actual numbers of people in post but excludes those on special leave without pay (including career break, maternity leave and other reasons). | |
Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in what proportion of Child Support Agency cases (a) the non-resident parent is not paying maintenance and has no know current address and (b) a maintenance decision has not been made as the non-resident has not been traced. [87546]
Mr. Plaskitt: The information requested is not available.
Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what conditions and requirements apply to existing (a) Child Support Agency (CSA) claimants and (b) parents making payments migrating to the new rules for CSA payments. [86569]
Mr. Plaskitt: Child Support legislation allows an old scheme case to transfer to the new scheme where there are prescribed links to a new scheme application. A prescribed link is one in which:
the non-resident parent or parent with care in a new scheme application is the non-resident parent or parent with care in an old scheme maintenance assessment; or
in benefit cases: where the partner of a non-resident parent in a new scheme application is a non-resident parent in an old scheme maintenance assessment; or
the partner of a parent with care in a new scheme application is a parent with care in an old scheme maintenance assessment.
Correspondence
Mr. Winnick: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will arrange for a reply to the letter dated 5 July 2006 to the Child Support Agency from the hon. Member for Walsall North, reference 1002609585. [90635]
Mr. Plaskitt [holding answer 11 September 2006]: 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 Questions 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 if he would arrange for a reply to the letter dated 5(th) July 2006 to the Child Support Agency from the hon. Member for Walsall North, reference 1002609585.
Jackie Laughton, Head of Client Relations for the Child Support Agency replied to your letter dated 5 July 2006 on 31 August 2006. For ease of reference I have sent copy of her recent letter to you separately and hope you found this response helpful.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |