| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
TREASURY
Child Benefit
Ms Buck: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will estimate the average increase in the income of (a) lone parent families and (b) couples with children in each income decile, resulting from an increase of (i) £10, (ii) £20 and (iii) £30 in child benefit and the family premium in income support, income-based jobseeker's allowance, housing benefit and council tax benefit for each family in which there is at least one child aged three or under. [1567]
Malcolm Wicks: I have been asked to reply.
The information requested is not available.
Ms Buck: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will estimate the impact on the numbers of children in poverty in (a) lone parent families and (b) couples with children in each income decile, resulting from an increase of (i) £10, (ii) £15 and (iii) £20 in the rate of child benefit and the child allowances in income support, income-based jobseeker's allowance, housing benefit and council tax benefit for each child aged three or under. [1571]
Malcolm Wicks: I have been asked to reply.
It is not possible to measure accurately the impact on child poverty of individual changes to the tax and benefit system. The margins of error surrounding these estimates are too large. Taken as a whole, the personal tax and benefit measures introduced over the last parliament are estimated to lift over 1.2 million children out of relative income poverty.
Ms Buck: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will estimate the average increase in the income of (a) lone parent families and (b) couples with children in each income decile, resulting from an increase of (i) £10,
10 Jul 2001 : Column: 498W
(ii) £15 and (iii) £20 in the rate of child benefit and the child allowances in income support, income-based jobseeker's allowance, housing benefit and council tax benefit, for each child aged three or under. [1570]
Malcolm Wicks: I have been asked to reply.
The information requested is not available.
Ms Buck: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the impact on the numbers of children in poverty in (a) lone parent families and (b) couples with children in each income decile, resulting from an increase of (i) £10, (ii) £20 and (iii) £30 in child benefit and the family premium in income support, income-based jobseeker's allowance, housing benefit and council tax benefit, for each family in which there is at least one child aged three or under. [1568]
Malcolm Wicks: I have been asked to reply.
It is not possible to measure accurately the impact on child poverty of individual changes to the tax and benefit system. The margins of error surrounding these estimates are too large. Taken as a whole, the personal tax and benefit measures introduced over the last parliament are estimated to lift over 1.2 million children out of relative income poverty.
Landfill Tax Credit Scheme
Mr. Todd: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received from organisations in Derbyshire concerning the proposed changes to the landfill tax credit scheme; and if he will make a statement. [2511]
Mr. Boateng: I have received representations from at least one organisation in Derbyshire about the proposed changes to the landfill tax credit scheme. The Government intend to consult interested parties on how the transition from the current scheme to any replacement regime can be managed to ensure that worthwhile projects continue to receive funding.
Mortality Rates
Mr. Flight: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the mortality rates are at age 55 to 60 years, broken down by (a) class, (b) sex and (c) socio-economic ranking. [2797]
Ruth Kelly: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician. I have asked him to reply.
Letter from John Pullinger to Mr. Howard Flight, dated 10 July 2001:
- The National Statistician has asked me to reply to your recent question asking for the mortality rates at age 55 to 60 years broken down by (a) class, (b) sex and (c) socio-economic ranking. I am replying in his absence. (2797)
- I refer you to the answer given to Parliamentary Question 161050, which as indicated by the Economic Secretary to the Treasury on 11 May in Official Report, column 435, was given in private correspondence. A copy of this letter was placed in the House of Commons library. The table below repeats this information.
- (a) The table shows age-specific mortality rates for the three year period 1991–93 for men in England and Wales aged 55–59, by social class. Similar data are not available for women, because the occupation of women recorded at death is less reliable than for men. More recent figures by social class are not available,
10 Jul 2001 : Column: 499W
- because calculation of rates depends on knowing the size of the relevant population groups, which is currently only available from the 1991 Census.
| Social class | Deaths per 100,000 male population |
|---|---|
| I (Professional) | 2,057 |
| II (Managerial and Technical) | 2,148 |
| IIIN (Skilled Non-Manual) | 2,975 |
| IIIM (Skilled Manual) | 3,521 |
| IV (Partly Skilled) | 3,491 |
| V (Unskilled) | 5,534 |
| All classes | 2,966 |
Source:
Drever F, Whitehead M (eds). Health Inequalities. Decennial Supplement 15. London: The Stationery Office 1997
The annual age specific mortality rate for all classes in 1999 for males aged 55–59 was 828 and for females, 407.
(b) Social class based on occupation is the only socio-economic classification routinely used for the analysis of mortality.
Mr. Flight: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the average life expectancy is for those aged 60 years, broken down by (a) class, (b) sex and (c) socio- economic classification. [2798]
Ruth Kelly: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician. I have asked him to reply.
Letter from John Pullinger to Mr. Howard Flight, dated 10 July 2001:
- The National Statistician has asked me to reply to your recent question asking for the average life expectancy of those aged 60 by (a) class, (b) sex and (c) socio-economic classification. (2798)
10 Jul 2001 : Column: 500W
- These figures are not available by social class for those aged 60. The table below shows the life expectancy at age 65 for men and women in England and Wales based on data from the ONS Longitudinal Study (LS) for the five years 1992–96. The ONS Longitudinal Study is a one per cent sample of the population of England and Wales.
| Life expectancy at age 65 (years) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Social Class | Males | Females |
| I (Professional) | 16.8 | 20.8 |
| II (Managerial and Technical) | 15.5 | 19.5 |
| IIIN (Skilled Non-Manual | 15.1 | 18.9 |
| IIIM (Skilled Manual) | 14.2 | 17.9 |
| IV (Partly Skilled) | 13.8 | 17.1 |
| V (Unskilled) | 12.6 | 16.4 |
| All LS sample | 14.6 | 18.0 |
Source:
Hattersley L. Trends in life expectancy by social class—an update. Health Statistics Quarterly No. 2. London: The Stationery Office 1999.
Figures on life expectancy by gender for the years 1997–99 have been produced by the Government Actuary's Department. Life expectancy in England and Wales for men aged 60 was 19.1 years and for women aged 60 it was 22.8 years.
Social class based on occupation is the only socio-economic classification currently used for the analysis of life expectancy.
Treasury Costs
Barbara Follett: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on Departments' final running costs outturn against their final running costs limit for 1999–2000. [3531]
Mr. Andrew Smith: The departmental final running costs limit under gross control area for 1999–2000 was set at £14,011,463,000 and Departments reported £13,614,958,000 as their final RC outturn, an underspend of £396,505,000 (2.8 per cent.). More information is given in the table.
10 Jul 2001 : Column: 501W
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |