§ 7. Mr. Simon Burns (West Chelmsford)How many lone parents have been sent a letter about the new deal for lone parents since July 1997; and how many of these (a) have received a job and (b) remain in that job under the scheme. [68012]
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Social Security (Angela Eagle)Up to 25 December 1998, 88,662 initial letters had been sent to lone parents. Information on the number of lone parents who have been sent letters and who have subsequently found a job and on the proportion remaining in work will not be available until the full evaluation of the prototype phase, which is due to be published in the autumn.
What we do know is that the new deal is helping lone parents into work. By 25 December 1998, 27,231 lone parents had decided to join the programme, of whom 5,881 had found jobs.
§ Mr. BurnsDoes the Minister accept that I find her answer rather lame and surprising, given that the 11 Government—certainly until last summer—have always answered this question in written form, month on month? Did the Minister sidestep this issue because the figures show that almost 66 per cent. of people who receive a letter throw it away, and only about 7 per cent. of people find jobs, at a cost of £15,000 per job? The number of people who stay in a job long term is less than the 5,881 figure that the Minister gave, which shows a success rate of slightly less than 5 per cent.
§ Angela EagleI have answered the hon. Gentleman's question. We do not know how many people who now have jobs took advantage of the new deal because they received the letter, and how many did so because—[Interruption.] That is the way in which the hon. Gentleman phrased his question. He will find that I have answered the question accurately, as you require us to do, Madam Speaker. Until the end of the pilot scheme, we shall not be able to distinguish between those who took advantage of the new deal following receipt of the letter, and those who went along to the office because, for instance, they had seen advertisements. The hon. Gentleman will have a final answer then; meanwhile, I can confirm that we shall continue to publish results for him monthly.
I do not share the hon. Gentleman's rather pessimistic view of the results so far. Indeed, given that he was a member of a Government who did nothing but abuse lone parents for 18 years, I find his attitude incomprehensible.
§ Mr. Gerry Sutcliffe (Bradford, South)The success of the new deal for lone parents is shown not just by the number of lone parents who have returned to work, but by the cultural change that has taken place in the attitude to people on benefits. Personal advisers have advised lone parents on whether to stay on benefit or take up work, depending on which pays. Does that not constitute a dramatic change from the attitude of the Conservatives, who, when they were in power, described lone parents as scroungers?
§ Angela EagleI could not agree more. We should remember that some lone parents have been out of the work force for a long time. If we can get such people into training, or make it possible for them to contemplate looking for a job when their children reach a certain age, that will be a positive outcome of the new deal. It is not simply aimed at people who can go into jobs immediately.
§ Mr. Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford Green)Did not the Minister's reply to my hon. Friend the Member for West Chelmsford (Mr. Burns) show that the whole scheme has now failed? She has told us that, in fact, the Government have a strike rate of marginally above 5 per cent. in terms of people returning to work, and that the cost is £15,000 a job. Is it not the case that over the past two years, instead of looking properly at the programme and realising the direction in which it was heading, the Government have failed to take account of the problems?
Most important, will the Minister now undertake to reply to the last part of my hon. Friend's question: what is the fall-out rate after six months? The results have been published month on month, and the rate has risen to as high as 23 per cent. Now the Department has written to 12 us saying that it will not answer the question, because the cost would be disproportionate. What has the Department got to hide?
§ Angela EagleI find it surprising that the hon. Gentleman can dismiss the fact that nearly 6,000 lone parents now have jobs and are able to support children in poverty. Part of the Conservative Government's legacy was the fact that almost one child in three was born into poverty. We are determined to do something about that, and this is a way of doing it.