Namibia (Hansard, 5 April 1982)

§ Mr. Beith
asked the Lord Privy Seal which system of proportional representation is proposed for the Namibia Constituent Assembly under the revised proposals supported by Her Majesty's Government.

§ Mr. Hooley
asked the Lord Privy Seal what are the revised arrangements proposed by the Contact Group for elections in Namibia involving a dual system of voting.

§ Mr. Hurd
Details of the proposals are confidential between the parties. On 1 April the Five put forward a modification of the way in which our proposals could be

Estimates of take-up of supplementary benefit for 1979

Total likely to be entitled (000's) Proportion receiving benefit per cent. Number eligible but not receiving benefit (000's) £ million per annum Estimated Benefit unclaimed Average weekly amount unclaimed £

(i) Pensioners 2,590 65 900 145 03.10

(ii) Non-pensioners^* —total 1,420 78 320 210 12.70

(iii) Sick and Disabled 300 63 110 90 15.40

(iv) Unemployed 700 81 130 70 10.50

(v) One-parent families not included in (iii) and (iv) 370 85 60 30 10.20

Total for all groups 4,010 70 1,210 355 5.60

Original and revised estimates of take-up for 1977:

(O = Original estimate, R = Revised estimate)

Total likely to be entitled (000's) Proportion receiving benefit Numbers(000's) eligible but not receiving benefit Estimated benefit (£ million per annum) unclaimed Average Weekly amount unclaimed

O per cent. R† per cent. O R† O R† O £ R† £

(i) Pensioners 2,320 73 72 610 650 100 100 03.10 2.90

(ii) Non-Pensioners^*—total 1,680 76 79 420 350 245 165 11.00 9.10

(iii) Sick and Disabled 290 87 73 30 80 15 40 8.00 9.80

(iv) Unemployed 950 81 79 170 200 90 90 10.10 8.70

(v) One-parent families not included in (iii) and (iv) 380 89 87 40 50 20 25 10.50 9.30

Total—all groups 4,000 74 75 1,030 1,000 340 265 6.30 5.10

^* This total is slightly greater than the sum of lines (iii), (iv) and (v), since they include a small residual group of miscellaneous cases.

† The original 1977 estimates included provision for an unanalysed residual group whose take-up rate was estimated to be 19 per cent. The Supplementary Benefits Commission expressed doubts about this group, and in its 1978 annual report indicated that the 1979 FES analysis ought to provide more information.

The work has suggested that two-thirds of the group should be excluded because there were no grounds on which to base an assumption that they might have made a successful claim for benefit; and that the remaining third should be re-classified to the sick and disabled group, though all had jobs to return to, and, at interview, 66 per cent had been absent from work for two weeks or less. Thus the main difference between the original and

248W
implemented, which we hope will meet the main reservations that have been expressed, so that phase one of the negotiations can be completed without further delay.

Estimates of take-up of supplementary benefit for 1979
	Total likely to be entitled (000's)	Proportion receiving benefit per cent.	Number eligible but not receiving benefit (000's)	£ million per annum Estimated Benefit unclaimed	Average weekly amount unclaimed £
(i) Pensioners	2,590		65		900		145		03.10
(ii) Non-pensioners^* —total	1,420		78		320		210		12.70
(iii) Sick and Disabled		300		63		110		90		15.40
(iv) Unemployed		700		81		130		70		10.50
(v) One-parent families not included in (iii) and (iv)		370		85		60		30		10.20
Total for all groups	4,010		70		1,210		355		5.60

Original and revised estimates of take-up for 1977:
(O = Original estimate, R = Revised estimate)
	Total likely to be entitled (000's)	Proportion receiving benefit	Numbers(000's) eligible but not receiving benefit	Estimated benefit (£ million per annum) unclaimed	Average Weekly amount unclaimed
		O per cent.	R† per cent.	O	R†	O	R†	O £	R† £
(i) Pensioners	2,320	73	72	610	650	100	100	03.10	2.90
(ii) Non-Pensioners^*—total	1,680	76	79	420	350	245	165	11.00	9.10
(iii) Sick and Disabled	290	87	73	30	80	15	40	8.00	9.80
(iv) Unemployed	950	81	79	170	200	90	90	10.10	8.70
(v) One-parent families not included in (iii) and (iv)	380	89	87	40	50	20	25	10.50	9.30
Total—all groups	4,000	74	75	1,030	1,000	340	265	6.30	5.10
^* This total is slightly greater than the sum of lines (iii), (iv) and (v), since they include a small residual group of miscellaneous cases.
† The original 1977 estimates included provision for an unanalysed residual group whose take-up rate was estimated to be 19 per cent. The Supplementary Benefits Commission expressed doubts about this group, and in its 1978 annual report indicated that the 1979 FES analysis ought to provide more information.
The work has suggested that two-thirds of the group should be excluded because there were no grounds on which to base an assumption that they might have made a successful claim for benefit; and that the remaining third should be re-classified to the sick and disabled group, though all had jobs to return to, and, at interview, 66 per cent had been absent from work for two weeks or less. Thus the main difference between the original and