§ 1. Mr. Simon HughesTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what steps have been taken by his Department to ensure that up-to-date information is supplied by his Department's local offices to local authorities and to claimants, with particular respect to housing benefit claimants. [12988]
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Social Security (Mr. Roger Evans)We have introduced agreements between local authorities and Benefits Agency offices setting out the service to be delivered. Such agreements now exist in all Benefits Agency offices. Additionally, as part of a special exercise, seven local authorities now have direct computer access to income support information via a Benefits Agency operator. The results of this have been very encouraging.
§ Mr. HughesI am sure that that is helpful progress. Does the Minister agree that it is unhelpful when inaccurate or outdated information is either held by the DSS or sent by it to local authorities because such information often prejudices the rights of tenants who may be shown as being in arrears and thus prevented from 2 having a transfer or disadvantaged in other ways? Will the Minister look at that to make sure that the incidence of such happenings is reduced as far as possible or eliminated altogether?
§ Mr. EvansClearly, the issuing of outdated or otherwise inaccurate information is a serious matter which can indeed prejudice claimants and we always bear in mind the need to prevent it as far as possible.
§ Mr. John MarshallWill my hon. Friend confirm that housing benefit currently costs the taxpayer £10 billion and that it is one of the most rapidly growing social security benefits? Will he also confirm that in the London borough of Barnet people can receive £250 a week or £13,000 a year in housing benefit? That distorts the housing market, is a disincentive for people to work and may well be given to tenants who pay no rent at all, thus denying the landlord that benefit.
§ Mr. EvansThe answer to my hon. Friend's first proposition is yes. He gives the example of rents in Barnet being met by the taxpayer at the rate of £250 per week in housing benefit. That is why we seek to introduce a reasonable limit in the case of above-average rents.
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursDoes the Minister not realise that it is the landlord and not the tenant who gets all this money? The Minister might ask himself why rents have gone up to such an extent that we have to pay so much housing benefit.
§ Mr. EvansOf course it is the landlord who gets the money. No doubt the hon. Gentleman would agree that the right to what is, in effect, an open-ended commitment to private landlords—
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursYou did it
§ Mr. EvansThe system has been extremely successful in promoting the private sector, but there must be some limit to it. That is why we are introducing these proposals.
§ 3. Mr. Jim CunninghamTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many people are eligible for housing benefit. [12990]
§ The Secretary of State for Social Security (Mr. Peter Lilley)Some 4,667,000 people were receiving housing benefit in August 1994. The latest estimate of take-up was in 1992 when, of those who from the family expenditure survey data appeared to be entitled to claim housing benefit, between 88 and 93 per cent. were doing so.
§ Mr. CunninghamIs the Minister aware that he has not given the most up-to-date estimate of people taking up housing benefit? Is he aware that in Coventry a combination of reductions in housing benefit and the jobseeker's allowance can cost many people up to £100 a week in lost income?
§ Mr. LilleyI am not quite sure what point the hon. Gentleman is making. I have given the most recent figure—the figure at the middle of last year—for the number of people receiving housing benefit. Large numbers receive it, but a few do not claim it although they appear to have entitlement and are able to do so if they wish. None of the changes that we are making would prevent them from doing that. We are ensuring that those who choose to occupy properties with above-average rents for such properties in a particular area make some contribution to the rent or, alternatively, occupy less expensive property or negotiate a lower rent with the landlord
§ Mr. BrazierWhat steps is my right hon. Friend taking to ensure that councils weed out illegal immigrants from among those to whom they pay housing benefit? Has he seen the recent story in Private Eye about Hackney council and the supposed allocation of many council properties to illegal immigrants to whom, if the story is true, the taxpayer is presumably paying housing benefit?
§ Mr. LilleyIllegal immigrants are not entitled to benefits, in or out of Private Eye. We expect local authorities to investigate and to pursue vigorously cases of fraud and not to facilitate it. As of last year, persons from abroad, as they are known in the lugubrious language of my Department—that is, those who enter this country legally, but on condition that they are not a burden on public funds—are no longer entitled to claim housing benefit.
§ Mr. CorbynDoes the Secretary of State agree that the best way to reduce the cost of housing benefit would be to bring back rent controls and to stop the millionaires making a killing out of housing benefit, misery and poverty?
§ Mr. LilleyThat would only transfer subsidy from people in need to bricks and mortar indiscriminately. At the same time, it would destroy the private rented sector because it costs money to have low rents in publicly funded housing. If one destroys the private rented sector, one does not have a private rented sector. One of the successes of our policy in recent years has been to reverse the long-term decline of the private rented sector, which was smaller in this country than in any of our European Community partner countries.