House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 14 Jun 2005 (pt 8)

Housing Benefit

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average housing benefit payment in (a) the London borough of Haringey and (b) Greater London has been in each of the last eight years; and if he will make a statement. [4110]

Mr. Plaskitt [holding answer 13 June 2005]: The information is in the table.
Average weekly housing benefit payments in London borough of Haringey and the Government Office Region of London

£ per week
As at November: Haringey London

1997 70.50 60.94

1998 72.13 62.45

1999 73.59 65.59

2000 77.97 68.78

2001 84.23 73.55

2002 93.73 81.69

2003 99.23 84.42

2004 108.51 92.42

Notes:
1. The data refer to benefit units, which may be a single person or a couple.
2. The average amounts have been rounded to the nearest penny.
3. Figures for any non-responding authorities have been estimated.
4. Housing benefit figures exclude any Extended Payment cases.
Source:
Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit Management Information System Quarterly 100 per cent. caseload stock-count taken in November 1997 to 2004.

14 Jun 2005 : Column 261W

£ per week
As at November:	Haringey	London
1997	70.50	60.94
1998	72.13	62.45
1999	73.59	65.59
2000	77.97	68.78
2001	84.23	73.55
2002	93.73	81.69
2003	99.23	84.42
2004	108.51	92.42

Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average housing benefit payment in each London borough has been in each of the past five years. [2249]

14 Jun 2005 : Column 262W

Mr. Plaskitt: The information is in the following table:
Average weekly amount of housing benefit in London by local authority: November 2000 to 2004

£
November

Local authority 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Barking 53.29 55.94 58.73 64.26 70.29

Barnet 80.93 85.58 93.04 101.49 112.09

Bexley 64.73 68.29 73.16 74.92 82.13

Brent 86.20 92.40 103.40 103.83 113.25

Bromley 68.23 70.94 78.23 79.63 83.98

Camden 73.83 77.81 88.48 85.19 92.05

City of London 66.54 67.44 78.53 73.15 79.44

Croydon 71.02 75.37 82.50 84.97 91.67

Ealing 73.98 78.74 86.20 93.65 103.31

Enfield 73.35 82.99 97.97 99.92 108.85

Greenwich 57.96 60.87 63.96 66.12 70.33

Hackney 65.98 71.00 79.71 75.88 87.02

Hammersmith and Fulham 67.82 74.11 81.92 82.66 90.40

Haringey 77.97 84.23 93.73 99.23 108.51

Harrow 82.15 92.28 105.66 109.49 117.34

Havering 54.44 58.25 61.02 60.68 67.11

Hillingdon 72.21 77.60 83.41 94.76 98.98

Hounslow 62.44 65.13 71.93 78.21 84.20

Islington 62.31 66.45 71.52 73.61 80.54

Kensington and Chelsea 79.88 83.02 95.50 91.36 104.41

Kingston upon Thames 73.46 78.94 87.17 91.04 97.08

Lambeth 62.00 65.68 74.60 74.53 82.67

Lewisham 57.98 62.16 67.38 67.41 69.55

Merton 63.75 67.30 72.54 76.14 83.13

Newham 68.88 74.82 87.34 96.18 109.20

Redbridge 86.37 90.67 98.13 104.82 119.18

Richmond upon Thames 70.03 74.11 82.46 86.28 91.96

Southwark 57.79 60.83 67.88 68.29 73.05

Sutton 61.55 63.36 69.98 72.91 77.92

Tower Hamlets 63.38 68.12 74.82 79.15 87.10

Waltham Forest 65.86 70.28 78.22 78.71 88.53

Wandsworth 72.46 76.70 82.81 86.46 93.41

Westminster 90.78 97.50 114.58 115.51 126.83

Notes:
1. The data refer to benefit units, which may be a single person or a couple.
2. The figures are weekly amounts expressed in pounds and have been rounded to the nearest penny.
3. Figures for any non-responding authorities have been estimated.
4. Housing benefit figures exclude any extended payment cases.
5. From April 2003 support costs were removed from housing benefit eligible rents, resulting in a decrease in the amount of housing benefit awarded. This accounts for the decrease in some of the figures at November 2003.
Source:
Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit Management Information System Quarterly 100 per cent. caseload stock-count taken in November 2000 to 2004.

£
	November
Local authority	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004
Barking	53.29	55.94	58.73	64.26	70.29
Barnet	80.93	85.58	93.04	101.49	112.09
Bexley	64.73	68.29	73.16	74.92	82.13
Brent	86.20	92.40	103.40	103.83	113.25
Bromley	68.23	70.94	78.23	79.63	83.98
Camden	73.83	77.81	88.48	85.19	92.05
City of London	66.54	67.44	78.53	73.15	79.44
Croydon	71.02	75.37	82.50	84.97	91.67
Ealing	73.98	78.74	86.20	93.65	103.31
Enfield	73.35	82.99	97.97	99.92	108.85
Greenwich	57.96	60.87	63.96	66.12	70.33
Hackney	65.98	71.00	79.71	75.88	87.02
Hammersmith and Fulham	67.82	74.11	81.92	82.66	90.40
Haringey	77.97	84.23	93.73	99.23	108.51
Harrow	82.15	92.28	105.66	109.49	117.34
Havering	54.44	58.25	61.02	60.68	67.11
Hillingdon	72.21	77.60	83.41	94.76	98.98
Hounslow	62.44	65.13	71.93	78.21	84.20
Islington	62.31	66.45	71.52	73.61	80.54
Kensington and Chelsea	79.88	83.02	95.50	91.36	104.41
Kingston upon Thames	73.46	78.94	87.17	91.04	97.08
Lambeth	62.00	65.68	74.60	74.53	82.67
Lewisham	57.98	62.16	67.38	67.41	69.55
Merton	63.75	67.30	72.54	76.14	83.13
Newham	68.88	74.82	87.34	96.18	109.20
Redbridge	86.37	90.67	98.13	104.82	119.18
Richmond upon Thames	70.03	74.11	82.46	86.28	91.96
Southwark	57.79	60.83	67.88	68.29	73.05
Sutton	61.55	63.36	69.98	72.91	77.92
Tower Hamlets	63.38	68.12	74.82	79.15	87.10
Waltham Forest	65.86	70.28	78.22	78.71	88.53
Wandsworth	72.46	76.70	82.81	86.46	93.41
Westminster	90.78	97.50	114.58	115.51	126.83

Job Centre (High Wycombe)

Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how long it took for payments of (a) income support, (b) jobseeker's allowance and (c) incapacity benefit to be made to recipients who claimed those benefits at the Job Centre in High Wycombe in (i) 2001, (ii) 2002, (iii) 2003 and (iv) 2004. [1518]

Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of Jobcentre Plus is a matter for the Acting Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus, Lesley Strathie. She will write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Lesley Strathie to Mr. Paul Goodman, dated 14 June 2005:

The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question asking how long it took for payments of Income Support, Jobseekers Allowance and Incapacity Benefit to be made to customers who claimed those benefits at the jobcentre in High Wycombe in 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004. This is something which falls within the responsibilities delegated to me as Acting Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus.

The available information is in the table.

Clearance times⁽⁵⁾ for High Wycombe new claims

Days
Benefit 2000–01
2001–02
2002–03 2003–04 2004–05

IS⁽⁶⁾WA
14.4
14.8
19.4 23.3 15.63

IS⁽⁶⁾ MIG
⁽⁷⁾30.2 — —

JSA 13.9
14.7
25.8 28 20.40

IB 20.7
28.7
⁽⁸⁾34.6 ⁽⁸⁾26.42 ⁽⁸⁾14.43

⁽⁵⁾ The clearance times figures in the table are mean figures taken over a 12 month period.
⁽⁶⁾ Income support 2001–02 includes Aylesbury claims and from 2002–03 includes all Bucks claims.
⁽⁷⁾ In 2002–03 claims for income support were processed separately according to whether they were from customers of working age or pension age (minimum income guarantee).
⁽⁸⁾ IB processed at Aylesbury so these figures relate to the district.
Source:
Bucks and Oxon District Jobcentre Plus

14 Jun 2005 : Column 263W

Days
Benefit	2000–01	2001–02	2002–03	2003–04	2004–05
IS⁽⁶⁾WA	14.4	14.8	19.4	23.3	15.63
IS⁽⁶⁾ MIG			⁽⁷⁾30.2	—	—
JSA	13.9	14.7	25.8	28	20.40
IB	20.7	28.7	⁽⁸⁾34.6	⁽⁸⁾26.42	⁽⁸⁾14.43

The mean clearance times in the table show how long it took for a claim to be decided. Where payment is due to the customer at the time the claim is decided, it is made on the same day. If the claim is decided before the first payment is due, then payment is made on the following payday.

I hope this is helpful.

Jobseeker's allowance

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many UK citizens living abroad are in receipt of jobseekers allowance. [2037]

Mr. Plaskitt: None; one of the conditions of entitlement to jobseekers allowance is that the claimant be in Great Britain.

In certain very limited circumstances jobseekers allowance can remain in payment during a temporary absence abroad.

Pensions

Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what discussions he has had with the pensions industry about the number of people aged 53 years and over who remain contracted into the state second pension. [3576]

Mr. Timms: My colleagues and I have had wide ranging discussions with representatives of the pensions industry and these have included issues that relate to the current contracting-out arrangements.

It is for individuals to decide and keep under review whether it is in their best interest to contract out, taking into account their attitude to risk and their personal circumstances. The Department is however committed to ensuring that people are properly informed of the issues involved so that they can make a decision that best suits their needs. This includes the fact that when they reach the age at which the age-related rebate is capped, currently age 54, most personal pension holders would be better off contracting back in.

Tax Credits

Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the number of housing benefit and council tax benefit claims that will need to be reassessed as a result of overpayments of tax credits in the last 12 months; what assessment he has made of the cost implications for local authorities; and if he will make a statement. [2856]

Mr. Plaskitt [holding answer 13 June 2005]: No housing benefit or council tax benefit assessments need to be revisited solely because of an incorrect tax credit award. Both housing benefit and council tax benefit take into account the actual amount of tax credit in payment at the time. This means that when someone is getting a higher amount of tax credit than they are due, they will receive less housing benefit or council tax benefit. However, when the tax credit is reduced on account of an earlier overpayment, the individual will receive a higher amount of housing benefit or council tax benefit.

14 Jun 2005 : Column 264W

This is easier for local authorities to administer and means that individuals receive, overall, the right amount of money. There should be no cost implications to local authorities.

Next Section

Index

Home Page