§ Mr. BradyTo ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the oral answer to the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) of 14 January 1999,Official Report,columns 430–31, on the New Deal for Young People, what assumptions in respect of savings in benefits and increased tax revenue from those funding work are made in his calculations of the cost per job; and if it is his intention to apply this methodology to other Government programmes. [66592]
§ Mrs. Roche[holding answer 19 January 1999]: I warmly endorse the answers given by my right hon. Friend the Minister for Employment, Welfare to Work and Equal Opportunities to the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) on the New Deal for Young People on 14 January 1999, Official Report,columns 431–31. Expenditure on the New Deal is, as he said, money well spent. Early evidence suggests that the New Deal has speeded up the rate of exit from unemployment and the rate of entry into jobs amongst 18–24 year olds.
31WThe Government's estimate of the average cost of jobs secured so far through the New Deal does not rely on assumptions in respect of savings in benefits and increased tax revenue. However, it does take general account of these factors when assessing the effectiveness of employment or other analogous programmes. As the New Deal increases sustainable employment and reduces structural unemployment, revenue would be gained and benefit outlay reduced as a result. This would contribute to the Government's Welfare to Work agenda, reducing dependency, maximising self-determination and contributing to the development of communities.