Civil Servants (Hansard, 16 March 1998)

§ Mr. Swinney
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will list the number and percentage of civil servants employed at each grade in (i) Scotland, (ii) London and (iii) the South East of England. [34225]

§ Dr. David Clark
Because there are many different systems in the civil service since the delegation of pay and grading, estimates are provided in the table on the basis of responsibility levels corresponding to the former service-wide grades.
The administration of this programme is a matter for Peter Mathison, Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member with further details.
Letter from David Riggs to Mr. Jim Cousins, dated 13 March 1998: The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked Peter Mathison to reply to your recent Parliamentary Questions asking for the reasons records on the regional effects of the Benefits Integrity Project (BIP) are not maintained/available. As Mr. Mathison is away from the office on leave, I am replying. Disability Living Allowance is a national benefit awarded as a result of mobility and care needs arising from disability. The BIP has been introduced to ensure that the correct benefit is in payment on the basis of an up to date statement of those mobility and/or care needs. It is not expected therefore, that there would be significant variations based on geographical location. The database of casework has not been designed to extract information geographically during the project. To do so would necessitate high cost and disruption to the processing of ongoing casework. However, once the casework has been completed a full evaluation of the data is planned to provide a geographical analysis. A brief monthly statistical report is produced and a copy of the report for December 1997 and subsequent months can be found in the House of Commons Library. I hope you find the reply helpful.

§ Mr. Oaten
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) how many individuals have been subject to 499W (a) a reduction and (b) an increase in benefit as a result of investigation due to the Benefit Integrity Project; [26949]
(2) how many individual reviews have been carried out to date under the Benefit Integrity Project; [26950]
(3) how many of the reviews carried out to date as part of the Benefit Integrity Project have (a) identified errors and (b) identified cases of fraud. [26948]

§ Mr. Denham
The Benefit Integrity Project aims to ensure that those in receipt of DLA are entitled to it. While it is right to check that people are receiving the correct amount of benefit, we are determined that those checks should be undertaken as sensitively as possible. Also, that we should ensure all decisions taken as a result of the project are right. We have, therefore, acted to introduce an extra safeguard to improve the quality of, and confidence in, benefit decisions made by the Project.
The administration of this programme is a matter for Peter Mathison, Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member with further details.
Letter from David Riggs to Mr. Mark Oaten, dated 13 March 1998: The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked Peter Mathison to reply to your recent Parliamentary Questions regarding the Benefit Integrity Project (BIP). As Mr. Mathison is away from the office on leave, I am replying. The statistical information is given as at 31 January 1998. The number of awards reduced as part of the BIP is 6,884, the number disallowed is 3,926 and the number increased is 1,299. The BIP has examined 54,839 cases of which 7,276 have been reviewed. A further 10,811 cases due for renewal have been dealt with under normal Disability Living Allowance (DLA) renewal action by the BIP team. These are cases that meet the criteria for BIP action. Information on the number of identified errors is not available in the format requested. A total of 12,109 cases, including renewal cases, have had their award changed as a result of the BIP. The BIP aims to ensure that those people in receipt of Disability Living Allowance are entitled to it and are receiving the correct amount. While the Project has, broadly, sustained the estimated level of incorrectness, it has not sustained the level of fraud estimated by the Benefit Review. The BIP has identified 157 cases in which fraud was suspected, of which 49 have been referred to the Benefit Fraud Investigation Service for further investigation, which have not yet been completed. In the remaining 108 cases, fraud staff in the Disability Benefits Directorate decided that there was no realistic prospect of determining whether fraud had occurred and the files were closed without further action. From 9 February, no case likely to result in the reduction or removal of benefit will be passed to an Adjudication Officer (AO) for review without further evidence in addition to that supplied by the customer on the BIP questionnaire. This extra safeguard is to improve confidence in the decisions made by the BIP and to help safeguard the position of severely disabled people. I hope you find the reply helpful.

§ Ms Walley
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many fraudulent disability living allowance claims have been uncovered by the Benefit Integrity Project to date. [27664]

§ Mr. Denham
The Benefit Integrity project aims to ensure that those in receipt of DLA are entitled to it.500W While it is right to check that people are receiving the correct amount of benefit, we are determined that those checks should be undertaken as sensitively as possible. Also, that we should ensure all decisions taken as a result of the project are right. We have, therefore, acted to introduce an extra safeguard to improve the quality of, and confidence in, benefit decisions made by the Project.
The administration of this programme is a matter for Peter Mathison, Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency. He will wright to my hon. Friend with further details.
Letter from David Riggs to Ms Joan Walley, dated 13 March 1998: The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked Peter Mathison to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking how many fraudulent Disability Living Allowance claims have been uncovered by the Benefits Integrity Project (BIP) to date. As Mr. Mathison is away from the office on leave, I am replying. The BIP aims to ensure that those people in receipt of Disability Living Allowance are entitled to it and are receiving the correct amount. While the Project has, broadly, sustained the estimated level of incorrectness, it has not sustained the level of fraud estimated by the Benefit Review. As at 31 January 1998, the BIP had identified 157 cases in which fraud was suspected, of which 49 have been referred to the Benefit Fraud Investigation Service for further investigation. These investigations are still ongoing. In the remaining 108 cases, fraud staff in the Disability Benefits Directorate decided that there was no realistic prospect of determining whether fraud had occurred and the files were closed without further action. I hope you find the reply helpful.

§ Mr. Burstow
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what assumptions her Department has made concerning the level of disability living allowance fraud in devising the Benefit Integrity Project(a) in cash terms and (b) in terms of the number of claimants committing fraud. [30223]

§ Mr. Denham
[holding answer 18 February 1998]: The Benefit Integrity Project is designed to help ensure the correctness of payments of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) to people receiving the higher rate of the (DLA) mobility component along with either the middle or highest rate of the DLA care component, by collecting up-to-date information about their care and mobility needs through a programme of visits and postal inquiries. It is not a fraud drive. The focus of the activity was dictated by the findings of the DLA Benefit Review. There is no suggestion that people contacted as part of the Project are thought to be claiming DLA fraudulently.
The Benefit Review was initiated by the last Government as a research mechanism to measure the extent of error, including fraud, across all major benefits. The DLA Benefit Review was undertaken in 1996 and published in February 1997; it represents a snap-shot of the benefit at a point in time. Findings are based on a statistically valid sample of cases selected at random.
The DLA Benefit Review, in common with Reviews that preceded it, presented an analysis of what was going on in the benefit by categorising each sample case. Based on that methodology, the DLA Benefit Review reported that nearly 501W 73 per cent. of people receiving DLA were receiving it at the correct rate at the time they were visited. Therefore, some 27 per cent. of people receiving DLA were doing so at an incorrect rate. Reasons for incorrectness ranged from Departmental error (1.1 per cent. of cases) or customer error (9.6 per cent. of cases) through to confirmed fraud (1.5 per cent. of cases) and involved under as well as over payments.
The DLA Benefit Review reported a headline figure for fraud in DLA of 12.2 per cent.: the sum of cases categorised as strong suspicion of fraud (10.7 per cent. of cases) and those categorised as confirmed fraud. These sample findings were extrapolated to provide an estimated annual expenditure loss from overpayments due to fraud of around £499 million.
This Government are not convinced that the analysis of the Benefit Review results enables us properly to identify the reason behind wrongly made benefit payments; these can often be a mixture of misunderstanding and weakness in the benefit design. while the Benefit Integrity Project has, broadly, sustained the estimated level of incorrectness, it has not sustained the level of fraud estimated by the Benefit Review. In view of this, officials have been asked to undertake further work on the methodology and analysis of all current Reviews.