Unemployment Benefit (Hansard, 11 February 1994)

§ Mr. Michael Forsyth

Responsibility for the subject of the question has been delegated to the Employment Service agency under its chief executive. I have asked him to arrange for a reply to be given.

Letter from M. E. G. Fogden to Mrs. Bridget Prentice, dated 11 February 1994: The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question concerning the cost of administering unemployment benefit in the London travel to work area in each of the past five years. It may be helpful if I explain that the Employment Service (ES) has responsibility for delivering a number of benefits in addition to unemployment benefit, as well as a range of other services to people seeking employment and training opportunities. Therefore, the figures t have provided relate to the costs of delivering the full range of our services in London. It has not been possible to provide the information you seek for the full five year period. For audit purposes, the ES retains financial records of running costs for the proceeding three financial years. Additionally, the organisation of the ES Region responsible for London, the London and South East Region, has undergone considerable re-organisation during this period. I am therefore only able to provide comparable figures for the financial years 1991–92, 1992–93 and 1993–94 (projected figures). These figures relate to the ten ES areas which cover London. There are currently 15 ES areas within the London and South East Region; nine of which serve London and the remainder the Shires 495W surrounding it. These figures exclude fixed premises costs, ie the costs of leasing and purchasing premises and the associated running costs, as the method of collecting this information has changed considerably over the last three years. Given these provisions, the relevant costs, which include staff salary and other running costs such as fuel and telecommunications, are as follows:

	£
1991–92	89,467,057
1992–93	105,609,559
1993–94	¹128,646,766
¹Projected.

I must emphasise that these figures are not strictly comparable. As you may be aware, since 1990 the ES has been pursuing a policy of bringing together Unemployment Benefit Offices and Jobcentres with the aim of providing a more efficient and effective service to our clients. Individual ES staff are responsible for all aspects of ES work and it is not possible to provide accurate or meaningful breakdowns of the costs of specific activities.I hope this is helpful.