HC Deb 15 May 2000 vol 350 cc10-1
6. Mr. Graham Brady (Altrincham and Sale, West)

If he will make a statement on the progress of the new deal for lone parents. [120941]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Social Security (Angela Eagle)

The new deal for lone parents is at the heart of our drive to end child poverty. More than 118,000 lone parents have participated in the new deal national programme and a further 20,000 took part in the earlier phases. One in three participants have obtained jobs—that is more than 46,000 since the new deal for lone parents started.

As announced in the Budget, from April 2001 we will be asking lone parents with a youngest child of five or over to have a work-focused interview. We want to ensure that all lone parents find out about the choices and support available to help them to move into work.

Mr. Brady

Was it not bad enough that each job created under the new deal for lone parents cost nearly £20,000—but is the Minister not especially embarrassed that the Government's own evaluation exercise has shown that lone parents living in the control areas were more likely to get back into work than those living in the new deal pilot areas?

Angela Eagle

The hon. Gentleman has just shown considerable ignorance about the evaluation that has been published. He quotes the figure of £20,000 per job. If he had read the whole evaluation, he would have seen that the estimate was £1,388 per job. It is no good him selectively quoting—and drawing wrong conclusions from—a published estimate but not acknowledging another aspect of it—the £1,388.

We have been completely surrounded by different estimates from Opposition Members of the cost per job of the new deal for lone parents—there has been a wide range of incorrect estimates. The hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr. Duncan Smith) said in June 1998 that the cost was £30,000. A couple of months later, he said that it was £22,000. The hon. Member for West Chelmsford (Mr. Burns) said the next day that it was actually £24,000. Following that, in February 1999, he said that it was £15,000. A couple of days later, the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Mr. Pickles) also said that it was £15,000.

Then, the hon. Member for Havant (Mr. Willetts) said that it was £24,000—but, in April 2000, he said that it was £19,000. Actually, the figure is £1,388.

Mr. Ernie Ross (Dundee, West)

rose—

Mr. Brady

On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I should just like to give you notice that, after that utterly inadequate answer to my question, I shall seek leave to raise the issue in a debate on the Adjournment.

Madam Speaker

In that case, I must move on to the next question.