§ Mr. WillettsTo ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the final cost of each of his Department's advertising campaigns was in 2000–01, broken down into(a) advertising media and production and (b) other costs. [7899]
§ Mr. Nicholas Brown[pursuant to the reply, 29 October 2001, c. 525W]: The information is in the table:
£ Advertising and media Other costs Targeting benefit fraud 5,747,000 402,252 National Benefit Fraud Hotline advertising 425,178 — Minimum Income Guarantee 3,365,000 1176,000 Inherited SERPS 340,000 345,000 Winter Fuel Payments 616,000 294,000 Pensions Education2 35,232,000 1,297,000 Bereavement Benefits 155,000 90,000 New Deal for Young People 558,201 951,728 New Deal 50+ 2,175,367 63,793 New Deal Partners 99,445 67,310 Action Teams for Jobs 58,504 440 New Deal for Disabled People 31,372 240,387 New Deal for Lone Parents 2,292,000 295,000 1 This includes £30,985 customer research into a new MIG claim form which straddled two financial years. 2 In addition to the total of £6,529,062 (which was rounded to £6,530,000) £103,370 was spent on completing our previous pensions education activity (with a Monopoly theme) that preceded the new "Working Dogs" campaign, as well as some developmental work that was undertaken before the new working Dogs Campaign was launched. 3 The overall Pensions Education marketing budget figure remains unchanged at £6,529,062 (which was rounded to £6,530,000). Within this total, the advertising media and production cost given previously has changed from £5,212,000 to £5,232,000. This takes account of some photography costs that were previously included as part of "other costs", but can be directly attributed to advertising.
§ Mr. WillettsTo ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to his answers of 29 October 2001,Official Report, column 525W, on departmental advertising and 31 October 2001, Official Report, column 749W, on the Disability Discrimination Act, for what reason the 'What Have You Got to Offer?' advertising campaign was not included in the table of departmental advertising campaigns for 2000–01. [15176]
§ Mr. Nicholas BrownI refer to the pursuant answer given to the hon. Member today.
I regret that due to an oversight the information was omitted from the previous answer.