| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Pensions
Mr. Quentin Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what would have been the estimated cost to public funds in each of the financial years (a) 1998-99, (b) 1999-2000, (c) 2000-2001 and (d) 2001-2002 if contracted-out salary-related pension scheme and contracted-out money purchase pension schemes had been compensated for the abolition of the dividend tax credit at the same rate as appropriate personal pensions. [34696]
Mr. Denham: The information is not available in the format requested. Such information as is available is set out in the tables.
| Year | £ million |
|---|---|
| 1999-2000 | 225 |
| 2000-2001 | 250 |
| 2001-2002 | 250 |
Note:
This assumes an annual real rate of investment return in excess of earnings of 2 per cent., the same as that used for calculating the rebate levels for appropriate personal pensions from April 1999.
| Year | £ million |
|---|---|
| 1999-2000 | 5 |
| 2000-2001 | 5 |
| 2001-2002 | 5 |
Note:
This assumes an annual real rate of investment return in excess of earnings of 2 per cent.
No estimates have been carried out for the tax year 1998-99 as the rebates could not be altered before April 1999.
Parliamentary Questions
Mr. Burns:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when he plans to reply to the three questions tabled by the hon. Member for West Chelmsford for named day answer on 2 March on the New Deal for Lone Parents. [35226]
19 Mar 1998 : Column: 738
Mr. Field:
I refer the hon. Member to my written answer on Thursday 19 March 1998.
Sir Brian Mawhinney:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) when she expects to reply to the letter from the right hon. Member for North-West Cambridgeshire of 22 December 1997 on behalf of Mrs. Baldock; [35322]
(3) when she expects to reply to the letter from the right hon. Member for North-West Cambridgeshire of 26 January on behalf of Mrs. Brooks; [35323]
(4) when she expects to reply to the letter from the right hon. Member for North-West Cambridgeshire of 21 January on behalf of Mrs. Lindgren. [35321]
Ms Harman:
Replies were sent to the right hon. Member's letters on behalf of Mrs. Baldock, Mrs. Brooks and Mrs. Lindgren on 16 March 1998. A reply to the right hon. Member's letter on behalf of Mrs. Ebbage was sent on 18 March 1998.
Mr. Burns:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) how many of the 431 lone parents who gained employment through the New Deal between 23 October and 30 November 1997 are now in receipt of income support and have no earnings; [33349]
(3) how many of the 98 lone parents who gained employment through the New Deal between 1 and 31 January are now in receipt of income support and have no earnings. [33351]
Mr. Field
[holding answer 9 March 1998]: It is not possible to use the data from the New Deal for Lone Parents to draw conclusions about the lone parents' exit rate from employment because the data sample is small, and provides only a snapshot of lone parents in short-term work. It is also not possible to draw comparisons between the exit rates of these lone parents and that of different groups in society based on this information. However, analysis and comparison of exit rates will be made when the New Deal for Lone Parents is evaluated by the independent Social and Community Planning Research, which will report in 1999.
The number of lone parents who gained employment through the New Deal for Lone Parents between 23 October and 30 November 1997 was 391. Of that number, 66 have reclaimed Income Support and have no earnings.
The number of lone parents who gained employment through the New Deal for Lone Parents between 1 and 31 December 1997 was 141. Of that number, 19 have reclaimed Income Support and have no earnings.
19 Mar 1998 : Column: 739
The number of lone parents who gained employment through the New Deal for Lone Parents between 1 and 31 January 1998 was 228. Of that number, 26 have reclaimed Income Support and have no earnings.
Mr. Rendel:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what percentage and number of people aged over 60 years received income support by each Benefit Agency district for the latest year for which figures are available. [35200]
Mr. Field:
The information has been placed in the Library.
Mr. Love:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many cases of (a) fraud, (b) customer error and (c) departmental error have been identified by the Benefit Integrity Project; of those cases in which fraud is suspected how many have been referred to the Benefit Fraud Investigation Service; and what estimate her Department has made of the number in which there is a realistic prospect of a conviction. [35109]
Mr. Denham:
The Benefit Integrity Project aims to ensure that those in receipt of Disability Living Allowance are entitled to it. While it is right to check that
19 Mar 1998 : Column: 740
people are receiving the correct amount of benefit, we are determined that those checks should be undertaken as sensitively as possible. Also, we should ensure all decisions taken as a result of the project are right. We have, therefore, acted to introduce an extra safeguard to improve the quality of, and confidence in, benefit decisions made by the Project.
The administration of this programme is a matter for Peter Mathison, Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to my hon. Friend.
Letter from David Riggs to Mr. Andrew Love, dated 18 March 1998:
19 Mar 1998 : Column: 739
(2) when she expects to reply to the letter from the right hon. Member for North-West Cambridgeshire of 19 January on behalf of Mrs. Ebbage; [35320]
(2) how many of the 151 lone parents who gained employment through the New Deal between 1 and 31 December 1997 are now in receipt of income support and have no earnings; [33350]
Note:
The discrepancy between the figures quoted in the hon. Member's question results from a change in the method of counting: up to 31 December 1997 results on the New Deal for Lone Parents were obtained clerically, but from 1 January 1998, results on the New Deal for Lone Parents have been obtained directly from the Lone Parent Adviser (LPA) Database. Due to certain anomalies in the clerical records it is not possible to reconcile the numbers obtained clerically with the number obtained through the LPA system. The source of the figure quoted in the last question is not clear.
The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked Peter Mathison to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question concerning how many cases of (a) fraud; (b) customer error and (c) departmental error have been identified by the Benefit Integrity Project (BIP); of those cases in which fraud is suspected, how many have been referred to the Benefit Fraud Investigation Service; and what estimate her Department has made of the number in which there is a realistic prospect of a conviction. As Mr. Mathison is away from the office on leave, I am replying.
The BIP aims to ensure that those people in receipt of Disability Living Allowance are entitled to it and are receiving the correct amount. While the Project has, broadly, sustained the estimated level of incorrectness, it has not sustained the level of fraud estimated by the Benefit Review.
The information is not available in the format requested. As at 31 January 1998, the BIP had identified 157 cases in which fraud was suspected, of which 49 have been referred to the Benefit Fraud Investigation Service for further investigation. These investigations are still ongoing. In the remaining 108 cases, fraud staff in the Disability Benefits Directorate decided that there was no realistic prospect of determining whether fraud had occurred and the files were closed without further action.
Information in respect of customer and Departmental error is not routinely available.
A monthly report covering a range of statistics can be found in the House of Commons Library.
I hope you find this reply helpful.