|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
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 DNA tests were carried out on behalf of the Child Support Agency in each of the last five years.
This information is provided in the following table:
|Number of DNA tests carried out on behalf of the Child Support Agency|
I hope this information is helpful.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) how many Child Support Agency cases were (a) outstanding and (b) unprocessed in (i) Yeovil and (ii) Somerset in each year since 1997; 
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 two related questions:
How many Child Support Agency cases were (a) outstanding and (b) unprocessed in (i) Yeovil and (ii) Somerset in each year since 1997.
How many Child Support Agency cases were (a) outstanding and (b) unprocessed in each year from 1997 to 2006 in (i) Somerset and (ii) Yeovil constituency.
The agency begins to process new applications as soon as they are received and continues until they have been cleared. Any
applications that have not yet been cleared can be regarded as outstanding. The amount of work required to achieve clearance and the elapsed time it involves varies considerably depending on, amongst other things, the circumstances of the parents and how readily they cooperate with the agency.
As such, the agency holds only a negligible number of completely unprocessed cases and it is not possible to allocate these to individual constituencies.
With regard to part (a), the agency can only provide the information requested for applications (both new and old scheme) operating on the new computer system (CS2). Therefore this is not representative of the overall trend and volumes of the total amount of uncleared applications at the geographical level requested. Please see the attached table.
It should be noted that there are always applications for which the agency cannot assign a county or a constituency, either because they had been received directly via Jobcentre Plus and had not reached the point in the process at which details on the constituency of the parent with care can be identified, or because the application is on the old computer system from which it is not possible to provide robust estimates at the geographical level requested. In September 2006, there were around 70,000 such applications.
For future reference, it should be noted that information relating to the number of uncleared applications on the new computer system in September 2006 in each parliamentary constituency is publicly available, and can be found in table 27 of the September 2006 Child Support Agency Quarterly Summary of Statistics, a copy of which is available in the House of Commons Library, or on the internet via the following link: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd1/child_ support/CSA_quarterly_sep06 .asp
Although the total volume of uncleared applications nationally across both schemes, 247,500 in September 2006, is the lowest since comparable records began, the agency recognises that this remains unacceptably high. The agency therefore has a 2006-07 target to ensure that, by march 2007, the volume of new scheme uncleared applications outstanding at March 2006 is reduced by 25 per cent. and our challenge, as set down in our operational improvement plan, is that the agency should not have a backlog in this area by March 2009. I hope you find this answer helpful.
|Number of uncleared applications in the parliamentary constituency of Yeovil from September 2003 to September 2006 (both new and old scheme applications on the new computer system only).|
|Number of uncleared applications from September 2003 to September 2006 in the county of Somerset and neighbouring unitary authorities (both new and old scheme applications on the new computer system only)|
|Local Authority||September 2003||September 2004||September 2005||September 2006|
Mr. Francois: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many of his Departments (a) computers and (b) laptops were stolen in each of the last nine years; and what the total value was of stolen computers and laptops in this period. 
Mrs. McGuire: The following table shows the number of (a) computers and (b) laptops that were recorded as stolen in each of the last nine years from April 1998 to date. Information prior to 1998 is not readily available.
|Number of computers stolen||Number of laptops stolen|
The total value is not available.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what assessment he has made of the impact of economic migration to the UK on the pay rates of low skilled workers; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Jim Murphy: There appears to be little evidence of any impact on wages as a result of migration. We have been unable to find any discernible effect of A8 migration upon changes in the unemployment claimant count or in the rate of growth of wages. Our overall assessment is that the effect on growth has been largely positive.
Mrs. Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) what assessment he has made of the additional costs to the Court Service arising from the increase in court settlements proposed in Sir David Henshaws report Recovering Child Support: Routes to Responsibility; 
(2) what discussions he has had with the (a) Department for Constitutional Affairs, (b) Home Office and (c) Treasury on additional costs arising
from the increased use of court settlements to resolve child support claims proposed in Sir David Henshaws report Recovering Child Support: Routes to Responsibility. 
Mr. Plaskitt: Officials have been involved in extensive discussions with the Department for Constitutional Affairs, the Scottish Executive and the Treasury in assessing the impact on the Court Service of all aspects of Sir David Henshaws recommendations and wider child support reform.
Having considered Sir David Henshaws recommendation that the 12-month rule be removed to prevent parents from being able to approach the new organisation to overturn consent orders, we have decided that the 12-month rule should remain. This rule has a positive impact on the level of child maintenance in consent orders as it ensures maintenance is generally set at a substantial level that broadly reflects the child maintenance formula. It also ensures that parents will avoid being locked into the Court system indefinitely however their circumstances change. However the removal of the requirement for parents with care to be treated as applying to the Child Support Agency if they make a claim for benefit will ensure that fewer maintenance agreements are unnecessarily overturned against the wishes of both parents.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many and what proportion of housing benefit claims were subject to a non-dependent deduction for which the claimant was (a) registered disabled, (b) over 60-years-old, (c) in receipt of income support or jobseekers allowance and (d) a lone parent in 2004-05. 
Colin Challen: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many inspectors were employed by the Health and Safety Executive in each year between 1996 and 2006; and how many are expected to be employed in the years (a) 2006-07, (b) 2007-08 and (c) 2008-09. 
|At 1 April||Number of inspectors( 1)|
|(1) All figures are for full-time equivalents, rounded to the nearest whole number.|
(2) The number excludes 95 inspectors (full-time equivalents) that moved from HSE to the Office of Rail Regulation when responsibility for rail regulation health and safety matters transferred on 1 April 2006.
3 Estimated number based on HSEs staffing plan at November 2006.
(4) HSEs staffing plan covers the period to March 2008. The Department for Work and Pensions will be discussing budget allocations for 2008-2011 with HSE over the coming weeks. An estimate of the number of inspectors at 1 April 2009 cannot therefore be provided at this time.
(5 )Not applicable.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|