| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
16 Jul 2003 : Column 429W—continued
Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what recent discussions his Department has had with the Home Office about (a) the possible introduction of an entitlement card scheme, (b) the use to which such a card would be put on the matters for which he is responsible and (c) the costs and funding of the scheme; and if he will make a statement. [124918]
Mr. Pond: Along with other Government Departments, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has consulted with the Home Office in respect of the possible introduction of an entitlement card scheme. A very high-level consideration of impacts upon the Departments business, should the entitlement card scheme be introduced, has been made. Our initial considerations have focused upon the potential application of the National Insurance number (NINO) to the scheme, and to impacts upon our current and future business processes. However, at this stage, it is not possible to respond in any greater detail.
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many officials in the Department serve on EU committees or working parties. [116093]
Mr. Pond: Membership of EU committees and working parties is not fixed, and depending on the subject matter under consideration, the most appropriate policy officials attend these meetings. 141 officials currently serve on 158 EU committees and working parties.
Of these, 82 officials serve on 116 Health and Safety groups, and 16 officials (serving 14 education committees and working parties) work for the Joint International Unit (Department for Education and Skills and Department for Work and Pensions), which, for administrative purposes, is located in the Department for Work and Pensions.
Mr. Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) if he will estimate the savings his Department has made from the investigation of fraud in each of the last six years; [124499]
16 Jul 2003 : Column 430W
Mr. Pond: The investigation of fraud leads to savings in two ways. The detection of fraud already in the system prevents further losses in those cases and secondly our work to tackle fraud acts as a deterrent to prevent potential fraud happening in the first place. It is therefore not possible to provide an estimate of the total savings resulting from our anti-fraud work.
However, we know from our continuous measurement of the level of fraud and error in income support and jobseeker's allowance that between 1997–98 and 2001–02 we had achieved a reduction of 24 per cent. We are committed to achieving our target of a 33 per cent. reduction for working age customers by 2004, and a 50 per cent. reduction by 2006.
Mr. Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many calls have been made to the national benefit fraud hotline in each of the last six years; and how many have resulted in successful prosecutions. [124500]
Mr. Pond: The available information is in the table.
| April-March | Number of calls received | Successful prosecutions |
|---|---|---|
| 1997–98 | 188,038 | n/a(45) |
| 1998–99 | 170,032 | n/a(45) |
| 1999–2000 | 162,067 | 335 |
| 2000–01 | (46)208,201 | 492 |
| 2001–02 | (46)205,999 | 703 |
| 2002–03 | (46)159,290 | 706 |
(45) Full information on the number of successful prosecutions resulting from calls to the national benefit fraud hotline is available only from April 1999.
(46) Figures include calls received by the Call Centre Bureau, which since May 2000 has been contracted to answer calls outside normal working hours when the main hotline is closed.
Source:
National benefit fraud hotline and fraud information by sector.
Mr. Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the cost was of administering the (a) national benefit fraud hotline and (b) report-a-cheat-online claim form in each of the last six years. [124503]
Mr. Pond: The available information is in the table.
| Year(48) | Staffing(49) | Goods and services | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2000–01 | 494,457 | 133,347 | 627,804 |
| 2001–02 | 529,026 | 556,974 | 1,086,000 |
| 2002–03 | 597,807 | 361,470 | 959,277 |
(47)The cost of administering the NBFH and report-a-cheat-online cannot be separated.
(48)Cost figures are not available prior to 2000–01.
(49)Staffing costs are based on the employment of telephone operators and the admin support needed to assist the operation.
Source:
National benefit fraud hotline (NBFH)
16 Jul 2003 : Column 431W
Mr. Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many cases of benefit fraud have been detected in each of the last six years; and how many resulted in successful prosecution. [124505]
16 Jul 2003 : Column 432W
Mr. Pond: The number of cases of benefit fraud detected is not available. The number of cases resulting in a successful prosecution, caution or administrative penalty is in the table.
| Successful prosecutions | Cautions and administrative penalties as an alternative to prosecution | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DWP | Local authorities | DWP | Local authorities | Total | ||
| 1997–98 | 11,380 | 700 | — | — | 12,080 | |
| 1998–99 | 9,970 | 800 | — | — | 10,770 | |
| 1999–2000 | 9,130 | 860 | 11,030 | 390 | 21,410 | |
| 2000–01 | 11,400 | 1,100 | 15,560 | 550 | 28,610 | |
| 2001–02 | 11,180 | 1,700 | 13,550 | 2,600 | 29,030 | |
| 2002–03 | 9,270 | 2,500 | 14,270 | 6,000 | 32,040 | |
Notes:
1. Administrative penalties, as an alternative to prosecution, were introduced by the Social Security Administration (Fraud) Act (1997) with effect from December 1998. Cautions were made available to local authorities as a sanction from the start of 2001–02.
2. Figures for financial years 1997–98 to 2000–01 are taken from local authority management information returns. It is possible that there could be some double counting with DWP data if there were cases which involved a joint prosecution.
3. Management information data for financial years 1997–98 to 2000–01 is not available for all local authorities. The total for Great Britain includes estimates for local authorities that have not responded. These estimates are based on historical and regional data. This type of estimate is standard practice in reporting totals where there have been non-respondents. The figures for financial years 1997–98 to 2000–01 have been rounded to two significant figures.
4. Information for 2001–02 is from a count of prosecutions and sanctions completed by all local authorities; this data is collected from local authority subsidy returns. Subsidy data may differ from management information data (shown for financial years 1997–98 to 2000–01) at local authority level; however, analysis shows a high level of consistency between the two data sources at national level.
5. The DWP figures are from the Fraud Information By Sector database, which shows completed cases commenced in the relevant period. Due to the elapsed time between commencement of an investigation and completion of a prosecution there are cases that are inserted into previously completed data for earlier periods. All DWP totals are therefore correct at the time when quoted but subject to adjustment at a later date.
6. In accordance with National Statistics Guidelines all DWP figures are rounded to the nearest 10. Due to rounding process totals may not agree.
John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to his answer of 4 July 2003, Official Report, columns 522–23W, on fraud (Scotland), by what means his Department tracks trends in council tax benefit fraud (a) at national and (b) local authority level. [124858]
Mr. Pond: The measurement of fraud and error is complex and expensive and as such it is concentrated on benefits with the highest expenditure and risk of loss, such as housing benefit. Information on the cost of fraud and error is not available for council tax benefit. However, the measures that we are taking to fight fraud and error in housing benefit will also serve to improve the accuracy of council tax benefit.
Mr. Paul Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what benefits are available to homeless families in priority need. [124685]
Mr. Pond: Homeless people, including homeless families in priority need, have access to the same benefits as anyone else, providing they meet the conditions of entitlement.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |