HC Deb 01 December 1998 vol 321 cc145-7W
Mrs. May

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) if the actual and estimated savings quoted by his Department for the Benefit Integrity Project are savings that incorporate the full costs of the investment and running costs of the Project; [60982]

(2) if he will make a statement on the accounting procedures used by his Department in calculating the savings generated by the Benefit Integrity Project. [60981]

Mr. Timms

The administration of the Benefit Integrity Project is a matter for Peter Mathison, the Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Peter Mathison to Mrs. Theresa May, dated 30 November 1998:

The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Questions asking if the actual and estimated savings quoted by his Department for the Benefit Integrity Project (BIP) are savings that incorporate the full costs of the investment and running costs of the Project, and if he will make a statement on the accounting procedures used by his Department in calculating the savings generated by BIP.

Estimates of benefit savings from BIP assume that cases with a changed award would have remained on their original level of benefit for 32 weeks. This is an assumption common to Benefits Agency activity. A proportion of total savings for cases reviewed in any particular year are allocated to the two subsequent years. This takes account of some benefit recipients being reviewed towards the end of the financial year, and the variation in the length of time recipients with a changed award would have remained on their original level of benefit. Estimated benefit savings relate solely to programme expenditure and is accounted for in the annual Vote 1 Appropriation Accounts.

The estimate includes the cost of reviews and appeals. It also takes account of additional savings from some cases losing premiums in the income related benefits, some carers losing Invalid Care Allowance, and losing access to free road tax through the loss of entitlement to the Disability Living Allowance Higher Rate Mobility Component. The cost of investment and the running costs for the project are not included in the estimate of benefit savings but form part of the Agency's overall running costs, set out in the Vote 3 Appropriation Accounts.

I hope you find this reply useful.

Mrs. May

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what(a) the original assumptions were and (b) the current savings assumptions are for the Benefit Integrity Project in (i) 1997–98 and (ii) 1998–99; what factors were taken into account in the revision of savings assumptions for the Benefit Integrity Project for 1997–98 and 1998–99; and if the costs of the Benefit Integrity Project include the costs of appeals following decisions made under the scheme. [60983]

Mr. Timms

The administration of the Benefit Integrity Project is a matter for Peter Mathison, the Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Peter Mathison to Mrs. Theresa May, dated 27 November 1998:

The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking what (a) the original assumptions were and (b) the current savings assumptions are for the Benefit Integrity Project (BIP) in (i) 1997–98 and (ii) 1998–99; what factors were taken into account in the revision of savings assumptions for BIP for 1997–98 and 1998–99; and if the costs of BIP for 1997–98 and 1998–99 include the costs of appeals following decisions made under the scheme.

The original estimate of benefit expenditure savings from BIP was £20m in 1997–98 and £30m in 1998–99. It was based on the results of the Disability Living Allowance Benefit Review, published February 1997. The current estimate of savings are £8m in 1997–98 and £30m in 1998–99. It is based on monitoring information from BIP and reflects the delayed start of the project in 1997 and subsequent changes to the range of people included in the exercise. The estimate takes account of the cost of reviews and appeals. It also takes account of additional savings from some cases losing premiums in the income related benefits, some carers losing Invalid Care Allowance, and losing access to free road tax through the loss of entitlement to the Disability Living Allowance Higher Rate Mobility Component.

Both estimates assume that cases with a changed award would have remained on their original level of benefit for 32 weeks. This is an assumption common to Benefits Agency activity. A proportion of total savings for cases reviewed in any particular year are allocated to the two subsequent years. This takes account of some benefit recipients being reviewed towards the end of the financial year, and the variation in the length of time recipients with a changed award would have remained on their original level of benefit.

I hope you find this reply useful.