HC Deb 24 July 1986 vol 102 cc404-32W
Mrs. Beckett

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how much was spent on supplementary benefit additional requirements in the latest year for which figures are available.

Mr. Newton

Some £500 million.

Source: Annual Statistical Enquiry. December 1984 (provisional)

Mrs. Beckett

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how much was spent on supplementary benefit paid on grounds of sickness or disability in the latest year for which figures are available.

Mr. Newton

In the financial year 1984–85, the latest year for which the information is available, the expenditure is estimated to have been approximately £325 million.

Mrs. Beckett

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people at the latest date for which information is available were receiving supplementary benefit because they were sick or disabled (i) with contributory benefit and (ii) without contributory benefit.

Mr. Newton

The information is as follows:

Number claimants (thousands)
With contributory benefit 98
Without contributory benefit 175

Source: Annual Statistical Enquiry: December 1984 (provisional)

Mrs. Beckett

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people at the latest date for which information is available were receiving supplementary benefit over pension age (i) with retirement pension and (ii) without retirement pension.

Mr. Newton

As many recipients of widows pension have an underlying entitlement to retirement pension, information is given in the table of numbers of supplementary pensioners with retirement pension, those with widows pension, and those without either pension.

Numbers of supplementary pensioners (thousands)
(a) With retirement pension 1,521
(b) With widows pension 8
(c) Without either retirement or widows pension 100

Source: Quarterly Statistical Enquiry, December 1985

Mrs. Beckett

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people at the latest date for which information is available were receiving supplementary benefit additional requirements for (i) disabled persons heating addition, (ii) laundry, (iii) diet, (iv) wear and tear on clothing, (v) special clothing, (vi) baths, (vii) blindness, (viii) domestic assistance, (ix) over 80 age addition, (x) attendance costs and (xi) hospital fares.

Mr. Newton

The information is as follows:

Additional requirement Number of claimants (Thousands)
(i) Disabled persons heating addition 136
(ii) Laundry 185
(iii) Diet 489
(iv) Wear and tear on clothing 35
(v) Special clothing or footwear
(vi) Baths 31
(vii) Blindness 42
(viii) Domestic assistance 3

1982–83 1983–84 1984–85 1985–86 Total
Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Princess Drive 10,863 9,615 8,572 8,159
Percentage change -11.5 -10.8 -4.8 (-24.9)
Parthenon Drive 6,619 6,296 5,472 5,574
Percentage change -4.9 -13.1 +1.9 (-15.8)
Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Princess Drive 10,321 10,188 10,556 10,643
Percentage change -1.3 +3.6 +0.8 (+3.1)
Parthenon Drive 8,172 8,661 8,686 8,488
Percentage change +60 +0.3 -2.3 (+3.9)
Percentages represent changes over the previous year but those in brackets represent the percentage change 1982.83 to 1985.86.
*Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

The percentage change in complement 1982–83 to 1985–86 is as follows:

Supplementary benefit staff per cent.
Princess Drive +4.2
Parthenon Drive +1.7

Both offices deal only with supplementary benefit so the change in all staff will be the same as above.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of

Additional requirement Number of claimants (Thousands)
(ix) Over 80 age addition 469
(x) Attendance needs Less than 1,000
(xi) Hospital fares 4

Source: Annual Statistical Enquiry. December 1984 (provisional).

Mr. Wareing

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) how many people claimed supplementary benefit at his Department's local office in Princess drive, Liverpool, in each of the years 1979 to 1985, inclusive; and what percentage change each represents;

(2) what was the percentage change in (a) staff handling supplementary benefit and (b) all staff at his Department's local office in Princess drive, Liverpool, between 1979 and 1985;

(3) how many people claimed supplementary benefit at his Department's local office in Parthenon drive, Liverpool, in each of the years 1979 to 1985 inclusive; and what percentage change each represents;

(4) what was the percentage change in (a) staff handling supplementary benefit and (b) all staff at his Department's local office in Parthenon drive, Liverpool, between 1979 and 1985.

Mr. Major

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available is as follows:

legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Wareing

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the Liverpool, West Derby, constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; and what percentage change that represents;

(2) what was the percentage change in (a) staff handling supplementary benefit and (b) all staff at his Department's local offices in Liverpool between 1979 and 1985, inclusive.

Mr. Major

Liverpool, West Derby is covered by four of the Department's offices, Norris Green, Huyton and the two offices at West Derby. Their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency. One of the West Derby offices is a national insurance office and does not deal with supplementary benefit.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested. Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Huyton Norris Green West Derby
1982–83 13,944 6,619 10,863
1985–86 11,913 5,574 8,159
Percentage change -14.6 -15.8 -24.9

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Huyton Norris Green West Derby
1982–83 14,959 8,172 10,321
1985–86 16,191 8,488 10,643
Percentage change +8.2 +3.9 +3.1
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

The percentage change in complement for Liverpool offices 1982–83—1985–86 is as follows:

Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Belle Vale -12.5 -19.6
Bootle* -11.3 -21.4
Breckfield +8.4 -4.7
City† -16.0 -23.8
Crosby +11.5 +1.0
Edgehin‡ +5.0 -8.2
Garston|| -15.9 -20.0
Huyton +10.5 -4.4
Kirkby* +22.2 +18.4
Norris Greens¶ +1.7 +1.7
Toxteth‡|| +29.6 +10.5
West Derby Area Officer‡ +4.2 +4.2
West Derby NIO n.a. -34.8
Notes:
* In January 1983 30 posts were transferred to Kirkby because of a boundary change. In 1983–84 two posts were transferred to Kirkby following re-location of work in respect of Walton prison.
† In 1984–85 nine posts were removed from the office following transfer of social security appeal tribunal work to the office of the President of the Tribunal.
‡ In April 1983 two posts were transferred to Toxteth following boundary changes.
|| In April 1983 12 posts were transferred to Toxteth following boundary changes.
Deals only with supplementary benefit.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of Housing Benefit and postal claim forms.

Miss Maynard

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services, how many people claimed supplementary benefit in Sheffield, Brightside in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at the local offices of his Department for the same period.

Mr. Major

Sheffield, Brightside is covered by two of the Department's offices, Sheffield, North-East and Sheffield, North-West, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Sheffield, North East Sheffield, North West
1982–83 17,472 23,784
1985–86 15,748 19,962
Percentage change -9.9 -16.1

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Sheffield, North East Sheffield, North West
1982–83 18,560 16,293
1985–86 19,806 18,418
Percentage change +6.7 -13.0
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

The percentage change in complement for these offices 1982–83—1985–86 is as follows:

Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Sheffield, North East +22.2 +7.8
Sheffield, North West +18.2 -1.1

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of Housing Benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Frank Cook

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what assessment he has made of the period of time it takes to deal with new claims for supplementary benefit, additional supplementary benefit and single payments made as a result of the Cleveland county council benefits take-up campaign; if he can indicate what is the average time delay for each office in Middlesbrough, Stockton, Hartlepool, Redcar and Eston; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Major

This information is not available. These claims are treated no differently from any others, urgent claims being given priority. I refer the hon. Member to my reply to his previous question on 21 July at columns104–106.

Mr. Cohen

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what was the percentage change in (a) staff handling supplementary benefit and (b) all staff at the local offices of his Department in Leyton and Leytonstcne between 1979 and 1985.

Mr. Major

Leyton and Leytonstone are covered by two of the Department's offices, Leytonstone and Walthamstow, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the area.

Staffing figures are not available before 1982–83.

The percentage change in complement for these offices 1982–83–1985–86 is as follows:

Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Leytonstone -20.9 +3.4
Walthamstow -2.1 -11.8

Staffing levels reflect overall changes in work loads brought about as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Clay

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will estimate the value of the supplementary benefit scale rates excluding housing costs, for a couple with two children, one aged under five years, the other five to 10 years as a proportion of net male earnings for November 1985 and July 1986 using an estimate for the latter on the same basis as his reply of 29 October 1985 to the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood) Official Report, column 446.

Mr. Major

The provisional figure for November 1985 is 45–1 per cent. It is not yet possible to make any estimate for July 1986.

Mr. Clay

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish a table showing the value of the long-term supplementary benefit scale rates, excluding housing costs, for a single person and a married couple as a proportion of average net adult earnings for each year from November 1979 to July 1986, using an estimate for the latter figure.

(thousands)
Claimants Partners Children/other dependants Total
Retirement pensioners 1,674 262 9 1,944
Unemployed 1,953 655 1,096 3,704
Sick and disabled 273 69 61 403
Lone parents 492 832 1,325
Widows with children 4 7 11
Widows without children 25 25
Others 188 100 29 317

Notes:

1.Totals may not balance because of rounding.

2.Widows includes those over age 60.

3.Lone parents are those not included elsewhere.

Source: Annual Statistical Inquiry.

Mr. Clay

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish the latest take-up estimates for family income supplement, one-parent benefit, free welfare milk, free school meals, standard housing benefit, certificated housing benefit and housing benefit supplement, derived from the 1983 families with low income tables showing for each benefit (a) the number entitled to benefit, (b) the proportion receiving benefit, (c) the number eligible but not receiving benefit, (d) the estimated amount of benefit unclaimed and (e) the average weekly amount unclaimed.

Mr. Major

I shall let the hon. Member have a reply as soon as possible.

Mr. Craigen

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what was the number of people claiming

Mr. Major

The information requested is as follows:

Date Long-term scale rates as percentage of average net adult earnings
Single householder Couple
November 1979 29.7 45.0
November 1980 29.1 44.4
November 1981 29.3 44.9
November 1982 30.4 46 5
November 1983 29.5 45.0
November 1984 28.4 43.1
November 1985 27.9 42.3

Notes:

1.The figures for 1985 are provisional.

2.It is not yet possible to provide estimates for July 1986.

3.Net average weekly earnings are the estimates of gross weekly full-time earnings of adult males (aged 21 and over up to November 1982 and from November 1983 all males on adult rates) whose earnings are not affected by absence, less tax and national insurance contributions at the non-contracted out rate plus child benefit (which is off-set against the supplementary benefit scale rates).

Mr. Clay

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish the numbers of recipients of supplementary benefit and the numbers dependent on them in 1984, broken down into the following categories (a) retirement pensioners, (b) unemployed, (c) sick and disabled, (d) national insurance widows, with and without children, and (e) lone parents.

Mr. Major

Provisional informaton is as follows:

supplementary benefit in the Glasgow, Maryhill constituency in 1979 and 1985; what percentage change that represents; and if he will give the percentage change in staff handling supplementary benefit and in total staff at local offices of his Department in the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 14 July 1986 c. 410.]: Glasgow, Maryhill is covered by four of the Department's offices, Maryhill, City, Partick and Springburn, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency. Springburn is a National Insurance Office and does not deal with supplementary benefit.

Information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available for the offices is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Maryhill Partick City*
1979–80 12,384 8,401 5,072
1985–86 13,770 12,787 8,227
Percentage change + 11.2 + 52.2 + 62.2

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Maryhill Partick City
1979–80 8,274 4,435 3,354
1985–86 12,179 7,577 8,949
Percentage change + 47.2 + 70.8 + 166.8
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.
† In 1981–82 staff and work were transferred from Woodside office to City.

Percentage change in complement 1979–80—1985–86:
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Maryhill + 46.9 +6.3
Partick* + 45.8 + 45.8
City† + 139.5 + 15.9
Springburn n/a -53.7
n/a = Not applicable.
*Deals with Supplementary benefit only.
† In 1981–82 staff and work were transferred from Woodside office to City.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as workloads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

1985. Mr. Dixon

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) what was the number of people who claimed supplementary benefit in the Jarrow constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; and what percentage change this represents;

(2) what was the percentage change in staff handling supplementary benefit between 1979 and 1985;

(3) how many staff were employed in local offices of his department in: (a) 1979 and (b)

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his replies, 14 July 1986 c.410 and 418]: Jarrow is covered by three of the Departments offices, South Shields and two offices in Jarrow, one of which is a national insurance office and does not deal with supplementary benefit. Their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency. Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (inc. unsuccessful)
Jarrow South Sheilds
1982–83 7,515 12,462
1985–86 8,879 15,801
Percentage change + 18.2 + 26.8

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Jarrow South Sheilds
1982–83 7,867 8,731
1985–86 8,490 11,950
Percentage change +18.2 +26.8
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February

Percentage change in complement 1982–83—1985–86
Supplementary benefit staff
Jarrow Area Office +5.0
Jarrow National Insurance Office Not Applicable
South Shields 0

Complement
1982–83 1985–86
Jarrow Area Office* 60 63
Jarrow National Insurance Office 28 22
South Shields 148 132
* Deals with Supplementary benefit only.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of Housing Benefit and postal claim forms.

Dr. Bray

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in Motherwell and Wishaw constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985, what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at his Department's local offices for the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 14 July 1986, c. 410]: Motherwell, South is covered by three of the Department's offices, Motherwell, Hamilton and Wishaw, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency. Wishaw is a national insurance office and does not deal with supplementary benefit.

Information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available for the offices is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (inc. unsuccessful)
Motherwell Hamilton
1979–80 12,740 14,665
1985–86 13,641 21,714
Percentage change +7.1 +48.1

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Motherwell Hamilton
1979–80 7,134 8,443
1985–86 11,797 15,556
Percentage change +65.4 +84.3
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1979–80 to 1985–86
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Motherwell +60.3 +6.1
Hamilton +64.8 +8.4
Wishaw n/a -42.4

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Canavan

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in Falkirk, West constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at the local offices of his Department for the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 14 July 1986, c. 410]: Falkirk, West is covered by one of the Department's offices, Falkirk, but the office's boundary is not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available for the office is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (inc. unsuccessful) Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
1979–80 14,651 7,494
1985–86 19,533 14,147
Percentage change +33.3 +88.8

Percentage change in complement 1979–80—1985–86:
Staff
Supplementary benefit staff +77.6
All staff +15.8

Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work-loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Dewar

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the Glasgow, Garscadden constituency in: (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change in the number of claimants occurred between 1979 and 1985; and what was the percentage change in the number of staff: (i) handling supplementary benefit claims and (ii) the total number of staff at local offices of his Department serving the constituency over the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 14 July 1986, c. 410]: Glasgow, Garscadden is covered by two of the Department's offices, Anniesland and Partick, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available for the offices is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
1979–80 1985–86 Percentage change
Anniesland 11,091 10,115 -8.8
Partick 8,401 12,787 +52.2

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
1979–80 1985–86 Percentage change
Anniesland 6,938 11,285 +62.7
Partick 4,435 7,577 +70.8
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1979–80—1985–86:
Supplemetary benefit staff All staff
Anniesland +49.4 -2.2
Partick* +45.8 +45.8
* Deals with supplementary benefit only.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Dormand

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in Easington constituency in 1979 and 1985, respectively; what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in (a) staff employed on supplementary benefit and (b) all staff employed at his Department's local offices, Peterlee and Seaham, for the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 14 July 1986, c. 410]: Easington is covered by two of the Department's offices, Peterlee and Seaham, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested. Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Peterlee Seaham
1982–83 9,314 3,312
1985–86 10,170 4,038
Percentage change +9.2 +21.9

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Peterlee Seaham
1982–83 6,497 2,747
1985–86 6,960 3,043
Percentage change +7.1 +10.8
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1982–83 to 1985–86
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Peterlee +8.9 -12.2
Seaham +13.0 -8.3

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Dr. Marek

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) how many staff were employed at the local Wrexham office of his Department in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; how many of the staff were involved in handling supplementary benefit; and how many of these staff were involved in handling supplementary benefit for the Wrexham constituency area;

(2) how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the Wrexham constituency area in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; and what percentage change this represents.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 14 July 1986, c. 410]: Wrexham is covered by one of the Department's offices, Wrexham, but the office's boundary is not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1981–82 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available for Wrexham office is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (inc. unsuccessful) Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
1981–82 26,499 17,681
1985–86 25,015 20,805
Percentage change -5.6 +17.7
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February

Complement Supplementary benefit staff Complement Total staff
1981–82 117 222
1985–86 148 245

Figures are not available on the involved in handling supplementary constituency area.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Patchett

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the Barnsley,East constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at the local office of his Department over the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 14 July 1986, c. 410]: Barnsley, East is covered by three of the Department's offices, Barnsley, East, Wath on Dearne and Goldthorpe. Goldthorpe is a national insurance office and does not deal with supplementary benefit. Their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Barnsley East Wath on Dearne
1982–83 10,786 9,350
1985–86 10,889 9,393
Percentage change +1.0 +0.5

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Barnsley East Wath on Dearne
1982–83 9,384 6,958
1985–86 11,087 8,174
Percentage change +18.1 +17.5
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1982–83 to 1985–86:
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Barnsley East +18.8 -15.2
Wath on Dearnef + 17.9 + 17.9
Goldthorpe Not applicable -32.0

† Deals with Supplementary Benefit only.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Dr. Cunningham

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the Copeland constituency in (a) June 1979 and (b) June 1985; what percentage change this represents; and what was the percentage change in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at the local office of his Department over the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 14 July 1986, c. 410]: Copeland is covered by two of the Department's offices, Barrow in Furness and Whitehaven, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Barrow in Furness Whitehaven
1982–83 10,538 6,520
1985–86 10,265 6,529
Percentage change -2.6 +0.1

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Barrow in Furness Whitehaven
1982–83 8,183 4,864
1985–86 8,427 4,893
Percentage change +2.9 +0.6
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1982–83 to 1985–86:
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Barrow in Furness +3.4 -12.2
Whitehaven +28.1 -10.0

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Evans

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the St. Helens, North constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; and what percentage change this represents;

(2) what was the percentage change in (a) staff handling supplementary benefit and (b) all staff at local offices of his Department in the St. Helens, North constituency between 1979 and 1985.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 14 July 1986, c. 410]: St. Helens, North is covered by two of the Department's offices, St. Helens and Warrington, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83, and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
St. Helens Warrington
1982–83 19,407 20,123
1985–86 18,491 19,854
Percentage change -4.7 -1.3

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
St. Helens Warrington
1982–83 17,501 16,609
1985–86 18,743 18,695
Percentage change +7.1 +12.6
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February

Percentage change in complement 1982–83—1985–86:
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
St. Helens +16.7 -6.6
Warrington +15.6 -4.2

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of Housing Benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Dewar

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the Glasgow, Garscadden constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change in the number of claimants occurred between 1979 and 1985; and what was the percentage change in the number of staff (i) handling supplementary benefit claims and (ii) the total number of staff at local offices of his Department serving the constituency over the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 14 July 1986, c. 410]: Glasgow, Garscadden is covered by two of the Department's offices, Anniesland and Partick, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available for the offices is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Anniesland Partick
1979–80 11,091 8,401
1985–86 10,115 12,787
Percentage change -8.8 +52.2

Number of people receiving supplementary benefits*
Anniesland Partick
1979–80 6,938 4,435
1985–86 11,285 7,577
Percentage change +62.7 +70.8
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1979–80 to 1985–86
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Anniesland +49.4 -2.2
Partick* +45.8 +45.8
* Deals with supplementary benefit only.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislation, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Ron Davies

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) how many people claimed supplementary benefit in Caerphilly constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; and what percentage change that represents; change

(2) what was the percentage change in (a) staff handling supplementary benefit and (b) all staff at his Department's local offices in the Caerphilly constituency between (i) 1979 and (ii) 1985.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 14 July 1986, c. 410]: Caerphilly is covered by three of the Department's offices Caerphilly, Bargoed and Merthyr Tydfil but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1981–82 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Merthyr Tydfil Bargoed Caerphilly
1981–82 7,687 6,181 7,648
1985–86 7,452 6,119 7,924
Percentage change -3.1 -1.0 +3.6

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Merthyr Tydfil Bargoed Caerphilly
1981–82 6,691 4,639 4,988
1985–86 7,999 6,120 6,599
Percentage change +19.5 +31.9 +32.3
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action in February.

Percentage change in complement 1981–82 to 1985–86
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Merthyr Tydfil +10.9 -5.9
Bargoed +17.5 -16.3
Caerphilly +9.1 -12.6

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Barry Jones

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in Alyn and Deeside constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at the local offices of his Department over the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 15 July 1986, c. 447]: Alyn and Deeside is covered by two of the Department's offices, Wrexham and Mold, but the offices' boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency. Mold is a national insurance office and does not deal with supplementary benefit.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1981–82 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available for Wrexham office is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful) Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
1981–82 26,499 17,681
1985–86 25,015 20,805
Percentage change -5.6 +17.7
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1981–82 to 1985–86
Percentage change
Supplementary benefit staff +26.5
All staff +10.4

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Milian

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) if he will give the figures for the number of claimants of supplementary benefit in the Govan constituency at the most recent date for which figures are available and comparable figures for 1979; and what percentage change the latest figures represent;

(2) what were the numbers of staff employed on supplementary benefit work in his Department's local offices in the south west of Glasgow at the latest available date; and if he will give comparative figures for 1979.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 15 July 1986, c. 447]: Govan is covered by two of the Department's offices, Southside and Craighton, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested. Information for the number of claimants for these offices is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Craighton Southside
1979–80 10,617 14,203
1985–86 9,969 13,778
Percentage change -6.1 -3.1

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Craighton Southside
1979–80 6,936 7,511
1985–86 11,567 13,264
Percentage change +66.8 +76.6
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action in February.

South west Glasgow is covered by four offices, Southside, Craighton, Rutherglen and Laurieston. Complement figures for supplementary benefit staff in these offices are as follows:

Number of staff
1979–80 1985–86
Southside 80 130
Craighton 70 110
Rutherglen 97 154
Laurieston* 43 124
* Laurieston did not open until 1980. Previously there were two separate offices, Hutchesontown Area Office and national insurance office. The complement for the area office, which dealt with supplementary benefit only, is given for 1979. In May 1985 Laurieston gained 26 posts following the closure of Queens Park area office.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claims forms.

Mr. Nellist

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit at the latest available date in 1986 and the comparable month in 1979 at each of the Coventry offices of his Department; what percentage change that represents; and what was the change in numbers and in percentage terms in the staff handling supplementary benefit and in all staff at those offices for the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 15 July 1986, c. 447]: Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested. Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Coventry, East Coventry, West
1982–83 22,908 20,159
1985–86 17,838 17,528
Percentage change -22.1 -13.1

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Coventry, East Coventry, West
1982–83 14,248 11,728
1985–86 22,235 18,091
Percentage change +56.1 + 54.3
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Change in complement 1982–83 to 1985–86
Supplementary benefit staff
Number per cent.
Coventry, East 1982–83 129
1985–86 164 +27.1
Coventry, West 1982–83 87
1985–86 118 +35.6

All staff
Number per cent.
Coventry, East 1982–83 233
1985–86 234 +0.4
Coventry, West 1982–83 171
1985–86 175 +2.3

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Bermingham

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the St. Helens, South constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change this represents; and what was the percentage change in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at the local offices of his Department for the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 15 July 1986, c. 447]: St. Helens, South is covered by one of the Department's offices, St. Helens, but the office's boundary is not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available for the office is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful) Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
1982–83 19,407 17,501
1985–86 18,491 18,743
Percentage change -4.7 +7.1
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1982–83 to 1985–86
Percentage change
Supplementary benefit staff +16.7
All staff -6.6

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Lambie

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in Cunninghame, South constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change this represents; and what was the percentage change in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at the local offices of his Department for the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 15 July 1986, c. 447]: Cunninghame, South is covered by one of the Department's offices, Irvine, but the office's boundary is not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available for the office is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful) Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
1979–80 12,447 6,227
1985–86 15,170 12,484
Percentage change +21.9 +100.5
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1979–80 to 1985–86
Percentage change
Supplementary benefit staff +86.3
All staff +29.3

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Faulds

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the Warley, East constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at the local offices of his Department over the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 16 July 1986, c. 554]: Warley, East is covered by one of the Department's offices, Smethwick ILO but the office's boundary is not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1980–81 and no information is available on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit throughout the year.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (inc. unsuccessful) Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
1980–81 19,065 13,253
1985–86 15,419 20,579
Percentage change -19.12 +55.28

Percentage change in complement 1980–81—1985–86
Change
Supplementary benefit staff +47.19
All staff +7.07
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as workloads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of Housing Benefit and postal claim forms.

Dr. McDonald

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) ho many people claimed supplementary benefit in Thurrock in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; and what percentage change that represents;

(2) what was the percentage change in (a) staff handling supplementary benefit and (b) all staff at his Department's local offices in Liverpool between 1979 and 1985, inclusive.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 16 July 1986, c. 554]: Thurrock is covered by one of the Department's offices, Grays ILO but the office's boundary is not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and no information is available on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit throughout the year.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeal claims to supplementary benefit (inc. unsuccessful) Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
1982–83 14,272 11,545
1985–86 11,495 11,807
Percentage change -19.5 2.3

Percentage change in complement 1982–83-1985–86
change
Supplementary benefit staff +10
All staff -4.5
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as workloads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of Housing Benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Clelland

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) what was the percentage change in (a) staff handling supplementary benefit and (b) all staff at his Department's local offices serving Tyne Bridge constituency in the period 1979 to 1985;

(2) how many people claimed supplementary benefit in Tyne Bridge constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; and what percentage change that represents.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 17 July 1986, c. 613]: Tyne Bridge is covered by two of the Department's offices, Newcastle St. James and Newcastle East, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Newcastle St. James Newcastle East
1982–83 17,693 17,153
1985–86 17,636 17,251
Percentage change -0.3 +0.6

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Newcastle St. James Newcastle East
1982–83 15,212 15,080
1985–86 17,173 16,874
Percentage change +12.9 +11.9
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1982–83 to 1985–86
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Newcastle St. James +8.8 -4.4
Newcastle East +6.4 -6.7

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Allen McKay

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many persons claimed supplementary benefit in Barnsley, West and Penistone constituency in (a) 1979, (b) 1983, (c) 1985 and (d) 1986 to date; what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at local offices of their Department for the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 17 July 1986, C. 613]: Barnsley, West and Penistone is covered by one of the Department's offices, Barnsley West, but the office's boundary is not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and no information is available on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit throughout the year.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (inc. unsuccessful) Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
1982–83 8,585 6,640
1985–86 9,486 8,269
Percentage change +10.50 +24.53
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1982–83 to 1985–86
Change
Supplementary benefit staff +29.17
All staff -7.96

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Dr. Godman

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the Greenock and Port Glasgow constituency in: (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in: (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at the local offices of his Department over the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 17 July 1986, c. 613]: Greenock and Port Glasgow constituency is covered by two of the Department's offices, Greenock and Port Glasgow, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available for the offices is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (inc. unsuccessful)
Greenock Port Glasgow
1979–80 13,013 7,118
1985–86 12,898 5,675
Percentage change -0.9 -20.3

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Greenock Port Glasgow
1979–80 6,465 2,978
1985–86 11,386 5,030
Percentage change +76.1 +68.9
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1979–80—1985–86
Supplementary-benefit staff All staff
Greenock +63.8 +20.6
Port Glasgow† +47.4 +5.7
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.
† Port Glasgow Area Office and Greenock west national insurance office merged into Port Glasgow integrated local office in October 1981.

The combined complements for 1979–80 have been used for comparative purposes.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Tom Cox

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the Tooting constituency in (i) 1979 and (ii) 1985; what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in (a) staff handling supplementary benefit and (b) all staff in his Department's local offices for the same period.

Mr. Major [pursuant to his reply, 18 July 1986, c. 662]: Tooting is covered by three of the Department's offices, Balham, Streatham and Wandsworth, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Balham Steatham Wandsworth
1982–83 19,454 11,793 13,106
1985–86 19,353 12,615 10,729
Percentage change -0.5 +7.0 -17.6

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Balham Steatham Wandsworth
1982–83 12,378 8,028 8,514
1985–86 13,111 9,277 9,285
Percentage change +5.9 +15.6 +9.1
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action in February.

The percentage change in complement for these offices 1982–83 to 1985–86 is as follows:

Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Balham +9.4 +1.9
Streatham +58.2 +14.5
Wandsworth -6.3 -15.8

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type arid duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Alfred Morris

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the Manchester, Wythenshawe constituency and the city of Manchester, respectively in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change the figures represent; and what were the percentage changes in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at his Department's local offices for the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 18 July 1986, c. 662]: Manchester, Wythenshawe constituency is covered by one of the Department's offices, Wythenshawe and the office's boundary is conterminous with the boundary of the constituency. The city of Manchester is covered by the Department's offices of Manchester Central, Cheetham, Chorlton, Failsworth, Longsight, Openshaw, Rusholme and Wythenshawe but the offices' boundaries not conterminous with the boundary of the city.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested. Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
1982–83 1985–86 Percentage change
Wythenshawe 12,375 11,892 -3.9
Central 9,489 7,752 -18.3
Cheetham 10,971 10,836 - 1.2
Chorlton 12,030 10,221 .150
Failsworth 15,644 12,510 .200
Longsight 14,605 14,684 +0.5
Openshaw 11,237 9,912 .11.8
Rusholme 18,865 13,965 .260
Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Wythenshawe 13,454 14,195 +5.5

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
1982–83 1985–86 Percentage change
Central 5,947 6,057 +1.8
Cheetham 10,962 11,817 +7.8
Chorlton 8,805 10,242 +16.3
Failsworth 12,123 13,586 +12.1
Longsight 10,906 11,923 +9.3
Openshaw 10,177 10,465 +2.8
Rusholme 11,140 12,499 +12.2
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

The percentage change in complement for these office 1982–83—1985–86 is as follows:

Percentage change in complement 1982–83 to 1985–86
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Wythenshawe +11.0 -1.9
Central +10.9 -1.7
Cheetham +33.3 +4.8
Chorllon +11.9 -2.9
Failsworth +12.5 -5.8
Longsight +15.2 +2.3
Openshaw -1.4 -13.6
Rusholme +6.1 -6.2

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Geoffrey Robinson

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the Coventry, North-West constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (ii) all staff at the local offices of his Department over the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 18 July 1986, c. 662]: Coventry, North-West is covered by two of the Department's offices, Coventry, West and Coventry, East, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1980–81 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available for the offices is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Coventry, East Coventry, West
1980–81 22,908 20,159
1985–86 17,838 17,528
Percentage change -22.1 -13.1

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Coventry, East Coventry, West
1980–81 14,248 11,728
1985–86 22,235 18,091
Percentage change +56.1 +54.3
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1980–81 to 1985–86
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Coventry, East +27.1 +0.4
Coventry, West +35.6 +2.3

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. Stan Thorne

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) how many people claimed supplementary benefit in Preston in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; and what percentage change that represents;

(2) what was the percentage change in (a) staff handling supplementary benefit and (b) all staff at the local offices of his Department between 1979 and 1985.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 21 July 1986, c. 88]: Preston is covered by two of the Department's offices, Preston, North and Preston, South, but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Preston, North Preston, South
1982–83 12,993 13,838
1985–86 15,479 15,563
Percentage change +19.1 +12.5

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Preston, North Preston, South
1982–83 13,208 10,522
1985–86 14,293 11,541
Percentage change +8.2 +9.7
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1982–83—1985–86
Supplemen tary benefit staff All staff
Preston, North -2.2 -10.9
Preston, South +18.8 -3.2

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. John Smith

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed benefit in the Monklands, East constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in (i) staff handling supplementary benefit and (11) all staff at the local offices of his Department over the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 21 July 1986, c. 88]: Monklands, East is covered by four of the Department's offices, Aidrie, Coatbridge area office, Coatbridge national insurance office and Shotts NIO. Their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency. The national insurance offices do not deal with supplementary benefit.

Information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available for the offices is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Coatbridge Airdrie
1979–80 7,637 7,308
1985–86 7,889 8,417
Percentage change +3.3 +15.2

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Coatbridge Airdrie
1979–80 3,947 3,831
1985–86 6,871 7,735
Percentage change +74.1 +101.9
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action in February.

Percentage change in complement 1979–80—1985–86:
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Coatbridge AO† +56.5 +56.5
Airdrie +107.5 +29.8
Coatbridge NIO Not applicable -38.9
Shotts NIO Not applicable -29.4
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action in February.
† Deals only with supplementary benefit.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housng benefit ad postal claim forms.

Mr. Fatchett

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) what was the percentage change in individual Department of Health and Social Security offices in Leeds of (a) staff handling supplementary benefit and (b) all staff at the Leeds Department of Health and Social Security offices;

(2) how many people claimed supplementary benefit in Leeds Central constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; and what percentage change that represents.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 21 July 1986, c. 88.]: Comprehensive figures are not available before 1982–83 and information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Leeds, Central is covered by two of the Department's offices, Leeds, North and Leeds, North-West but their boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful)
Leeds, North Leeds, North-West
1982–83 21,508 23,609
1985–86 19,409 23,515
Percentage change -9.8 -0.4

Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
Leeds, North Leeds, North-West
1982–83 19,617 16,188
1985–86 20,533 15,914
Percentage change +4.7 -1.7
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Leeds is covered by five offices, Leeds, North, Leeds, North-West, Leeds, South, Leeds, South-East and Leeds, West. The offices' boundaries are not conterminous with the boundary of the city.

Percentage change in complement 1982–83—1985–86:
Supplementary benefit staff All staff
Leeds, North +10.2 -4.0
Leeds, North-West +6.7 -6.2
Leeds, South +2.3 -9.2
Leeds, South.East* -1.1 -1.1
Leeds, West -2.2 -12.3
* Deals only with supplementary benefit.

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Mr. McKelvey

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people claimed supplementary benefit in the Kilmarnock and Loudoun constituency in (a) 1979 and (b) 1985; what percentage change that represents; and what was the percentage change in (a) staff handling supplementary benefit and (b) all staff at the local offices of his Department for the same period.

Mr. Major

[pursuant to his reply, 21 July 1986, c. 88]: Kilmarnock and Loundoun is covered by one of the Department's offices, Kilmarnock, but the offices's boundary is not conterminous with the boundary of the constituency.

Information on the number of individuals who claimed supplementary benefit is not available in the form requested.

Information that is available is as follows:

Number of new and repeat claims to supplementary benefit (including unsuccessful) Number of people receiving supplementary benefit*
1979–80 9,009 5,315
1985–86 11,479 8,869
Percentage change +27.4 +66.9
* Based on a 100 per cent. count of cases in action at February.

Percentage change in complement 1979–80 to 1985–86
Percentage change
Supplementary benefit staff +55.7
All staff +12.5

Direct comparisons between numbers of staff and claims are misleading as work loads vary considerably by type and duration of claim and the action that has to be taken. All these factors vary over time as a result of legislative, policy and procedural changes. Examples of such changes are the introduction of housing benefit and postal claim forms.

Forward to