§ Dr. McDonaldasked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will give a breakdown of wage earners currently in receipt of housing benefit by the following earnings groups: below £25 per week, £26 to £50 per week, £51 to £75 per week, £76 to £100 per week, £101 to £125 per week, and so on up to £200 and above; whether he will indicate as far as possible the proportion of recipients with children in each of these bands; and, if information on earning bands is not available, if he will provide the same information based on income groups.
§ Dr. BoysonThe information is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
§ Dr. McDonaldasked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether, in the light of the statement made to the House on 6 February, Official Report, c. 612 onwards, he will publish a breakdown showing the numbers of households losing benefit and a breakdown of these households as between pensioners, wage earners and others, as a result of the proposed changes in April and November to (a) the increased tapers, above the needs allowance, (b) the increases in the non-dependant deductions, (c) the higher minimum rebate allowance limit and (d) the higher threshold for high rent schemes authorisations, or any combination of these elements; and, from amongst these, how many households will lose benefit altogether.
§ Dr. BoysonEstimates of the number of households losing benefit from the taper changes in April 1984 are as follows:
Number Pensioners l,30O,000 Wage earners 550,000 Others 300,000 2,150,000 In 580,000 households, non-dependants will be expected to make a larger contribution to housing costs in April 1984. I regret that a breakdown of this total into household types is not available.
On current assumptions, about 1,130,000 households will be affected by the taper changes, about 115,000 by the non-dependant deduction changes and about 90,000 by the high rent changes in November 1984. These estimates are subject to changes in income levels and rent and rate levels between now and then.
§ Dr. McDonaldasked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether, further to his answer on 19 December 99W 1983, Official Report, c. 59, and in the light of the statement on 6 February, Official Report, c. 612, he will publish revised estimates of the effect of the proposed housing benefit taper changes and changes in the minima in certain cases on (a) pensioner householders and (b) wage earning householders; and if he will separate out, in his answer, the effect of the April and November changes.
§ Dr. BoysonEstimates of the numbers affected by taper changes in April 1984 are as follows:
(000s Great Britain) Size of weekly loss Pensioners Earners £0.01 to £1.00 1,100 350 £1.01 to £2.00 160 140 £2.01 to £3.00 50 50 £3.01 to £4.00 * 10 TOTAL 1,300 550 * Indicates less than 5,000. There are no changes to the minima in April 1984.
Regarding November changes, it is not feasible to provide reliable estimates. This would require a number of assumptions about increases in earnings, rent and rates, and about possible limits on losses which we are only now discussing with the local authority associations.
§ Mr. Meacherasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will estimate how many pensioner households in April 1984 and in November 1984 will lose (a) less than £1 per week, (b) between £1 and £1.25 a week, (c) between £1.25 and 1.50 a week and (d) more than £1.50 a week, as a result of the changes in housing benefit expenditure announced on 6 February.
§ Dr. BoysonBroad estimates of the number of pensioners affected by the changes in taper in April 1984 are as follows:
Households affected by April 1984 taper changes Distribution by distance from the needs allowance and size of loss (000' s, Great Britain) i. Local Authority tenants:
Size of weekly loss (£'s) Distance above needs allowance (£'s) Total 0–5.0 5.01–10.0 10.01–15.0 15.01–20.01 20.0–25.01 25.01–30.0 30.01–35.0 35.01–40.0 40.01+ 0.01–0.75 170 130 40 10 10 10 20 10 40 440 0.76–1.00 0 0 80 10 * * * * 10 110 1.01–1.50 0 0 * 100 40 10 10 10 10 190 1.51–2.00 0 0 0 0 30 40 10 10 10 110 2.01+ 0 0 0 0 0 10 40 20 30 110 Total 170 130 120 120 80 70 80 60 120 960 * Numbers less than 5,000. Discrepancies in totals due to rounding. 100W
ii Private tenants: Size of weekly loss (£'s) Distance above needs allowance (£'s) Total 0–5.0 5.01–10.0 10.01–15.0 15.01–20.01 20.0–25.01 25.01–30.0 30.01–35.0 35.01–40.0 40.01+ 0.01–0.75 30 40 10 * 10 10 * * 10 130 0.76–1.00 0 0 10 0 * 0 0 0 * 20 1.01–1.50 0 0 0 10 * * 0 0 * 20 1.51–2.00 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 * * 2.01+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 * * 10 Total 30 40 20 10 10 10 10 10 20 170 * Numbers less than 5,000. Discrepancies in totals due to rounding.
Size of weekly loss Number Up to £1 1,100 £1.01 to £1.25 80 £1.26 to £1.50 40 Over £1.50 90 It is not feasible to give a reliable estimate of losses from the November 1984 changes for the reasons outlined in my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Mr. Bowden) and the hon. Members for Thurrock (Dr. McDonald) and Oldham, West, today.
§ Mr. Meacherasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish a breakdown of the losses to claimants which will arise from the cuts in housing benefit expenditure announced on 6 February, showing for (a) April and (b) November 1984 the total number of households suffering financial loss and a breakdown of these by (i) tenure groups (council tenants, private tenants and owner occupiers), (ii) household type (pensioners, families with children and others), (iii) income brackets and (iv) the amount of benefit which will be lost each week per household, showing the number of households losing up to 75p per week, between 75p and £1 per week, between £1 and £1.50 per week, between £1.50 and £2 per week, and more than £2 per week.
§ Dr. BoysonThe estimated total number of households receiving less benefit as a result of the taper changes in April will be 2,150,000. The requested breakdowns are given below, except that:
101W
- (i) figures by income bracket are not available. However, the hon. Member may find it helpful to have the breakdown by distance from needs allowance, since these do indicate relative levels of income;
- (ii) regarding November changes, I refer to my reply today to my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Mr. Bowden), and the hon. Members for Thurrock (Dr. McDonald) and Oldham, West.
iii. Owner-occupiers Size of weekly loss (£'s) Distance above needs allowance (£'s) Total 0–5.0 5.01–10.0 10.01–15.0 15.01–20.01 20.0–25.01 25.01–30.0 30.01–35.0 35.01–40.0 40.01+ 0.01–0.75 140 140 130 0 80 100 50 40 90 870 0.76–1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 80 90 1.01–1.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 50 1.51–2.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 2.01+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * * Total 140 140 130 110 80 90 50 50 220 1,020 * Numbers less than 5,000. Discrepancies in totals due to rounding.
iv. Pensioners: all tenures Size of weekly loss (£'s) Distance above needs allowance (£'s) Total 0–5.0 5.01–10.0 10.01–15.0 15.01–20.01 20.0–25.01 25.01–30.0 30.01–35.0 35.01–40.0 40.01+ 0.01–0.75 260 250 130 80 60 90 30 30 40 980 0.76–1.00 0 0 50 * * 0 0 10 50 120 1.01–1.50 0 0 0 70 20 10 * * 20 120 1.51–2.00 0 0 0 0 10 20 10 0 * 40 2.01+ 0 0 0 0 0 * 20 10 10 50 Total 260 250 190 150 100 120 60 50 120 1,300 * Numbers less than 5,000. Discrepancies in totals due to rounding.
v. Non pensioners: all tenures Size of weekly loss (£'s) Distance above needs allowance (£'s) Total 0–5.0 5.01–10.0 10.01–15.0 15.01–20.01 20.0–25.01 25.01–30.0 30.01–35.0 35.01–40.0 40.01+ 0.01–0.75 80 60 50 40 40 30 40 30 90 460 0.76–1.00 0 0 30 * 0 * * 10 50 100 1.01–1.50 0 0 * 40 20 * * 10 40 130 1.51–2.00 0 0 0 0 20 20 10 10 20 80 2.01+ 0 0 0 0 0 10 30 10 30 80 Total 80 60 90 90 80 70 80 70 230 850 * Numbers less than 5,000. Discrepancies in totals due to rounding.
vi. Households with children: all tenures Size of weekly loss (£'s) Distance above needs allowance (£'s) Total 0–5.0 5.01–10.0 10.01–15.0 15.01–20.01 20.0–25.01 25.01–30.0 30.01–35.0 35.01–40.0 40.01+ 0.01–0.75 40 40 20 20 20 10 20 20 50 240 0.76–1.00 0 0 20 * * * * * 30 60 1.01–1.50 0 0 o 20 10 * * * 30 70 1.51–2.00 0 0 0 0 10 10 * 10 10 50 2.01+ 0 0 0 0 0 * 10 10 20 50 Total 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 140 460 * Numbers less than 5,000. Discrepancies in totals due to rounding.
§ Mr. Andrew Bowdenasked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many pensioners will now lose entitlement to housing benefit as a result of the proposals in his statement of 6 February in (a) April and (b) November.
§ Dr. McDonaldasked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether, in the light of the statement made to the House on 6 February, Official Report, c. 612 onwards, he will give revised estimates of the total number of households who will lose altogether their entitlement to housing benefit in (a) April and (b) November as a result 102W of the combined effect of the proposed changes; and whether he will break these estimates down between pensioners, wage earners and others.
§ Mr. Meacherasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish his estimate of the total number of households losing all entitlement to housing benefit in (a) April 1984 and (b) November 1984, showing a breakdown of these by household type, as a result of the changes in housing benefit expenditure announced on 6 February.
§ Dr. Boyson[pursuant to his reply,9 February 1984, c. 754]: The following table provides the latest broad 103W estimates of the numbers losing entitlement to rent rebates/allowances and rate rebates in April 1984. Most claimants who lose entitlement to rent assistance will continue to receive rate rebates. The total losing entitlement to rate rebates can be taken as a general indication of the number losing entitlement to all housing benefit.
Household type Number losing entitlement Rent rebate/allowance (000's Great Britain) Rate rebate Pensioner 70,000 150,000 Earner 90,000 190,000 Others 30,000 60,000 Total 190,000 400,000 It is not feasible to provide reliable estimates for changes in November. This would require a number of assumptions about increases in earnings, rent and rates, and about possible limits on losses which we are only now discussing with local authority associations.