§ Norman LambTo ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) if he will make a statement on verification framework compliance by housing benefit departments of local authorities; [107104]
(2)if he will snake a statement on the success of the local authority verification framework compliance procedure in tackling housing benefit fraud; [107105]
(3) how many housing benefit departments of local authorities are now verification framework compliant; and how many have not achieved verification framework compliance; [107106]
(4) if he will make a statement on the additional resources made available by the Government to assist in making local authority housing benefit departments verification framework compliant; [107107]
(5) whether his Department plans to commit ring-fenced funding to local authority housing benefit departments for (a) IT and administrative support and
335W(b) document imaging systems as a result of the demands created by the requirement for verification framework compliance; [107108]
(6) whether his Department plans to extend the requirement for verification framework compliance to other providers of benefits. [107109]
§ Mr. WillettsTo ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many local authorities have not implemented the Verification Framework for housing benefit. [107416]
§ Malcolm WicksA total of 327 local authorities have taken up the Verification Framework (VF) so far. They include those who are fully compliant, those who have taken up one or two modules and those who are in the process of implementation. To date, 81 local authorities have not applied to take up VF.
At present 74 per cent. of housing benefit expenditure is processed through VF. We aim to have 100 per cent. of housing benefit expenditure processed through VF by 2006.
We are developing a more targeted method of identifying high-risk cases for VF interventions. This will replace the routine checking that is currently carried out on all claims as a matter of course when a claim reaches the end of its benefit period. We want local authorities' efforts to focus on more cost-effective activities and therefore we expect the VF to become more attractive.
Management information returns indicate that local authorities who operate VF procedures identify 6 per cent. of new claims as being fraudulent or in error and identify in 5 per cent. of renewal claims and at 5 per cent of VF visits an actual or potential overpayment. It is not possible to measure directly how much of this incorrectness would have been found had the local authorities hot been VF compliant.
The Departmental funding for VF is in the form of a one-off payment for set-up costs and on-going funding for the running of the scheme. The set-up cost is intended for costs incurred in the implementation phase and would cover such areas as training, IT changes, staff recruitment, etc. Each local authority's capacity to implement the scheme would dictate how they would need to spend the set-up costs and it is left to their judgment. Purchase of document imaging systems would be one of their options. The funding is not ring-fenced but conditional upon the local authority delivering the specified outcomes.
A total of £223 million is available for the VF scheme for three years from April 2003. This represents a 50 per cent. increase on the 2002–03 allocation for set-up costs and on-going funding. This is the biggest increase since the VF was introduced and will help to increase take-up even further.
The VF was designed specifically for use by local authorities. However, there are already procedures in place to check evidence for other DWP benefit claims.
336W