§ Mr. BlunkettTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) if he will show the effects of the proposed community charge benefit taper of 15 per cent., with tapers of(a) 20 per cent., (b) 12½ per cent., (c) 10 per cent. and (d) 7½ per cent., by showing for each of these tapers the cost at 1988–89 prices of paying community charge benefit to each of the following categories of income units, showing for each category how many income units he estimates would actually receive community charge benefit and how many would be entitled to community charge benefit: (i) all income units, (ii) income units consisting of a single person over pensionable age, (iii) income units consisting of a couple both of whom are over pensionable age, (iv) income units consisting of a single person with dependent children, (v) income units consisting of a single person of less than pensionable age without dependent 811W children, (vi) income units consisting of a married or cohabiting couple one or both of whom is of less than pensionable age, without dependent children, (vii) income units consisting of a married or cohabiting couple with dependent children and (viii) any income units not included in the categories above;
(2) what he now estimates will be (a) the total cost of community charge benefits in 1990–91 at 1988–89 prices, (b) the total number of income units in receipt of community charge benefits in 1990–91, (c) the total number of income units entitled to community charge benefits, whether or not they claim and receive benefit, (d) the total cost in 1988–89 of rate rebates, (e) the total number of income units in households which are in receipt of rate rebates in 1988–89, (f) the total number of income units in households which are entitled to rate rebates on 1988–89, whether or not rebate is actually claimed and received arid (g) the cost of administering rate rebates in 1988–89 and the cost of administering community charge benefits in 1990–91, at 1988–89 prices; and if he will attribute any additional cost of community charge benefit compared to rate rebates to (i) payment of benefit to non-householders, (ii) the reduction in the taper from 20 per cent. to 15 per cent., (iii) increased administrative costs and (iv) other reasons.
Case load and costs of the community charge benefit scheme by family type—the effects of changes in the taper Community charge benefit case load (thousands) Family type 20 per cent. 15 per cent. Taper 12.5 per cent. 10 per cent. 7.5 per cent. Pensioners Single 2,590 2,730 2,800 2,870 2,970 Couple 1,050 1,190 1,260 1,340 1,460 Non-pensioners Lone parent 670 680 680 710 750 Single no child 1,660 1,740 1,810 1,930 2,220 Couple no child 480 550 610 730 930 Couple with child 1,000 1,200 1,370 1,660 2,150 Total 7,450 8,080 8,520 9,230 10,470
Community charge benefit costs (£ million) Family type 20 per cent. 15 per cent. Taper 12.5 per cent. 10 per cent. 7.5 per cent. Pensioners Single 435 455 470 485 505 Couple 285 325 350 380 415 Non-pensioners Lone parent 125 130 130 130 135 Single no child 295 305 315 330 355 Couple no child 155 170 180 200 235 Couple with child 340 365 395 440 525 Total 1,635 1,750 1,835 1,960 2,175 Notes:
1. The tables refer to Great Britain.
2. Costs are expressed in terms of 1988–89 prices.
3. Component figures may not sum to totals owing to rounding.
4. Case load estimates are for tax-units rather than individuals.
5. Pensioner couples are defined here as those in which both partners are aged 60 or over.