HC Deb 14 February 1986 vol 91 c601W
Mr. Gordon Brown

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish a table in the Official Report showing the changes in disposable income after meeting housing costs as a result of the changes proposed in housing benefit in Cmnd. 9691, by client group, on the

Housing Benefit: Changes in disposable income after meeting housing costs by client group
Effect of structural reform of housing benefit
Thousands
Client group Increases Total increased No change Total decreased Decreases
£5+ £4 to £5 £3 to £4 £2 to £3 £1 to £2 £1 £1 £1 to £2 £2 to £3 £3 to £4 £4 to £5 £5+
Pensioners age 80+ * * 10 10 30 30 90 170 440 220 190 40 * * *
Pensioners age 60 to 79 10 * 20 30 70 90 220 630 2,300 930 950 230 100 40 30
Sick or disabled 10 * 10 20 10 20 70 30 110 40 60 10 * * *
Lone parents * * * * * 10 10 30 530 150 280 20 20 10 60
Couples with children
in full time work 10 * 10 10 10 10 50 30 320 60 90 70 30 30 50
not in full time work 10 * * * 10 * 20 10 540 200 290 30 * * 10
Others
in full time work 10 * * * 10 * 10 10 210 30 60 40 20 20 60
not in full time work * * * 10 10 * 20 110 670 200 300 50 10 10 90
TOTAL 40 10 50 80 150 160 490 1,020 5,110 1,830 2,210 490 180 110 300

Notes:

(1) These estimates are based entirely on the Family Expenditure Survey (FES) simulation model. As explained in pargaraph 2.8 of the Technical Annex, estimates of the combined effects of the income support and housing benefit changes on claimants currently claiming supplementary benefit were based on a model which imputed levels of general rates using 1982 (ie pre-housing benefit) data. This was done because there is no single source which includes information on both general rates and details of supplementary benefits requirements. When the effect of the horsing benefit changes alone is required, more accurate results are obtained from the FES model. The certificated caseload derived from the FES has been adjusted to match the caseload implicit in the Technical Annex; this is somewhat different from that derived from local authority subsidy claims (as published in the Public Expenditure White Paper).

(2) The estimates exclude the effects of the family credit proposals.

(3) The estimates are not adjusted for differential take-up.

(4) Some totals may not be equal to the sum of the component parts because of rounding.