§ Mr. RooneyTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what action his Department is taking to improve clearance times for appeals. [88212]
§ Angela EagleThe new Executive Agency of the DSS responsible for the administration of appeals will be set up from April 2000, for which demanding targets will be set. In preparation for this change, responsibility for the administration of appeals passed to the Secretary of State from the President of the Independent Tribunal Service (ITS) on 1 June. The phased implementation of the new appeals procedures introduced in the Social Security Act 1998 will continue during the rest of the year and preparations will be made for Agency launch.
Appeals have been taking, on average, around 7 months to be heard and this is wholly unacceptable. During the past year, ITS has taken action to improve the situation and in 1998–99 began to make significant in-roads into its backlog of cases, ITS figures showing a record case clearance of 370,008 cases. However, there remains much to do before ITS/The Appeals Service reaches an acceptable level of performance.
A dual strategy to achieve the necessary improvements during 1999–2000 has been agreed with the new Chief Executive of ITS/The Appeals Service. First, ITS/The Appeals Service is mounting a systematic assault on its backlog of older and oldest appeals (defined for this exercise as any case lodged with ITS before 1 October 1998). Secondly, and in parallel to tackling this finite backlog of cases, ITS/The Appeals Service is seeking to 371W reduce both the numbers of all other cases outstanding and the length of time individual appellants have to wait for their appeals to be dealt with.
In assessing performance during the coming year we have therefore agreed to monitor two new performance indicators. First, we will be monitoring the number of cases in the backlog and the length of time for which these cases have been outstanding. It is the intention that the vast majority of these cases should be cleared by the end of 1999–2000. Secondly, for cases not in the backlog, we will be monitoring the age profile of outstanding cases, by month; and the age profile of cases which have been cleared, by month. This will give a clear picture of how long appellants still in the ITS/The Appeals Service queue have been waiting, and how long those cases have just been cleared actually had to wait. While efforts are being concentrated on the backlog in the early part of the year, progress here will not be as quick as we would like, but the intention is that both waiting times and clearance times will have been reduced by the end of 1999–2000.
The use of average clearance times as the key indicator of performance has not provided appellants, commentators, or ITS itself with a true picture of the levels of performance being achieved. First, average clearance times mask a wide range of performance and, in past years, did not expose the full extent of the backlog of cases which was building up. Secondly, average clearance times actually provide a perverse incentive not to clear backlog cases—the more effective ITS/The Appeals Service is in tackling its backlog of older cases, the less successful it appears in terms of average clearance
Cost of changing the tariff income rule £ million Option Income support Jobseeker's allowance (income based) Housing benefit Council tax benefit Total cost £1 per week of every £300 10 Less than £2.5m 20 10 40 £1 per week of every £400 15 Less than £2.5m 45 25 85 £1 per week of every £500 20 Less than £2.5m 65 30 115