HC Deb 25 March 1998 vol 309 cc164-6W
Mr. Love

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what representations she has received regarding the length and complexity of the self-assessment forms for claiming disability living allowance; what consideration is being given to changing the questionnaires; and if she will make a statement. [35095]

Mr. Denham

The administration of Disability Living Allowance is a matter for Mr. Peter Mathison, the Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to my hon. Friend.

Letter from David Riggs to Mr. Andrew Love, dated 24 March 1998The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked Peter Mathison to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about what representations have been received regarding the length and complexity of the self assessment forms for claiming Disability Living Allowance (DLA) and what consideration is being given to changing the questionnaires. As Mr. Mathison is away from the office on leave, I am replying. A comprehensive review of DLA and Attendance Allowance (AA) claim packs was undertaken by a dedicated project team over a two year period up until November 1997. Part of the remit for the work undertaken by the team was to reduce the complexity and volume of questions and/or pages within the packs. As a result, ten pages were removed from the DLA claim pack. Additionally a child specific claim pack was introduced in April 1997. This was as a direct response to requests from the disability lobby. Liaison was undertaken with some 30 disability groups of and for disabled people. Effectively disability organisations such as RNIB, Age Concern, Mencap, the National Schizophrenia Association and ASBAH worked with BA staff in redesigning and refining the claim pack. Since the revisions to DLA adult packs and the introduction of the child specific pack the Disability Benefits Directorate has not received any representations regarding the length or complexity of claim packs. In a survey to our customers following the changes to the DLA claim pack it was confirmed that the revised versions were a significant improvement on their predecessors. There are no current plans to review the DLA claim pack given the period of time over which the last review was conducted, the organisations with whom liaison was undertaken and the relatively recent conclusion of such work. However, comments are always welcomed and can be directed to: The Customer Service Team, Disability Benefits Unit, Warbreck House, Warbreck Hill, Blackpool, FY2 OYE, telephone number 01253 337 871. I hope you find the reply helpful.

Mr. Love

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many people(a) nationally and (b) in the Edmonton constituency have had their disability living allowance (i) increased, (ii) reduced and (iii) disallowed as a result of the Benefit Integrity Project; how many of those in categories (ii) and (iii) have been reviewed; of those how many appeals have been held or are pending; and what is the outcome of those appeals that have been heard. [35054]

Mr. Denham

The Benefit Integrity Project aims to ensure that those in receipt of Disability Living Allowance 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 my hon. Friend.

Letter from David Riggs to Mr. Andrew Love, dated 24 March 1998The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked Peter Mathison to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question concerning how many people (a)nationally and (b) in the Edmonton constituency have had their Disability Living Allowance (i)increased, (ii) reduced and (iii) disallowed as a result of the Benefit Integrity Project (BIP); how many of those in categories and (iii) have been reviewed; of those, how many appeals have been held or are pending; and what is the outcome of those appeals that have been heard. The information is not available in the format requested. 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. As at 31 January 1998, 54,839 cases nationally have been examined as part of the BIP. Of the total cases dealt with 1,299 have had their benefit increased, 42,730 have been unchanged, 6,884 have had their benefit reduced and 3,926 have had their benefit stopped. The total includes 10,811 renewal cases; of which 334 had their benefit increased, 5,601 remain unchanged, 2,907 have had their benefit reduced and 1,969 have had their benefit decreased. Of those cases where benefit has been reduced, 1,279 have been reviewed. Of those cases where benefit has been stopped 895 have been reviewed. In total 554 appeals have been registered. As at 17 March 1998, 45 appeals have been heard. Of these 7 have maintained the BIP award, 6 have been reduced to a lower rate, 4 have been increased to a higher rate and 28 have reverted to the original award. I hope you find this reply helpful.