If he will make a statement on the effect of changes to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. [138633]

By ending the small employer exemption and extending the employment provisions to more occupations in October 2004, we will bring 1 million more employers and 7 million more jobs within the scope of the Disability Discrimination Act. From the same date, the new duties requiring service providers to tackle physical barriers to access will increase accessibility to services for the 8.6 million disabled people in this country. I hope that the changes, which are designed to facilitate greater participation by disabled people in all walks of life, will be welcomed by hon. Members on both sides of the House.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Although it is recognised that the Government have done more to help disabled people than any previous Government, it is quite clear that such people still come up against barriers. A recent Scope survey found that 45 per cent. of employers reported that they were worried that they could not afford to employ a disabled person and that nearly 20 per cent. would be reluctant to employ such a person because they had not worked with one before. Will she tell us how the changes to the Disability Discrimination Act will resolve those difficulties?

Legislation sets a framework, and the issues that were highlighted by the Scope survey were more about raising awareness. Many small firms, and even larger firms, are not used to employing disabled people because such people have been excluded from the labour market. The firms make all kinds of assumptions about how difficult that would be, which are not borne out by the facts. May I suggest that small firms in my hon. Friend's constituency contact the Disability Rights Commission in the first instance, which can be done by accessing www.drc-gb.org? The website contains a wealth of advice on how firms can employ disabled people, so they will come to realise that it is not that difficult and that there often is no cost involved in employing them above that which is incurred when employing anyone.

Does the Minister agree that any changes to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 that might be a feature of the upcoming parliamentary Session would best be done using pre-legislative scrutiny? The Government have made it clear that they are willing to contemplate that, but is the Department yet able to say what form of pre-legislative scrutiny might take place on any disability discrimination Bill that might be introduced in the next Session?

The hon. Gentleman is trying his best to get me to pre-empt the Queen's Speech, which of course I am far too junior to do. He is right to say that the Government set great store by pre-legislative scrutiny, and the consideration of such changes is especially suitable for such scrutiny. We shall consider that, but I cannot give him more information at present.

After our previous exchanges, will the Minister accept that it is still important that if further advances are to be made, legislation must become a reality? It is not just a matter of consultation, desirable as that may be, because the Government must get on and grasp the nettle on some of the details. If the Minister is holding out for pre-legislative scrutiny, will she at least bear in mind the importance of bringing to bear some of the recent reports of the Disability Rights Commission on its experience of the current legislation in action, to ensure that if we wait a long time for legislation, it will be worth having when we get it?

May I tell the hon. Gentleman, who I faced across the Dispatch Box when he was a Front-Bench spokesman on the matter, that I welcome his support? I hope that the fact that he now sits on the Back Benches when discussing the issue does not imply that there have been any policy changes by his party. I hope that the Conservative Front-Bench spokesmen will support the changes that are being suggested, which are generally well known, especially those that will take place next October. I hope that we will hear an expression of support for the changes from them when they speak. The hon. Member for Daventry (Mr. Boswell) knows of my impatience to get on with this. Consultation is tremendously important when changes are visited on many organisations and small businesses but, at the end of the day, it is implementation that matters.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 was a perfectly reasonable piece of legislation for its time, enhanced by this Government's actions, including the introduction of the Disability Rights Commission? Given the worries, which I think we both share, that some small businesses and others are being provoked into thinking that the implementation of the changes will be a huge challenge, will she join me in advising such people to contact the DRC, the Employers Forum on Disability and the national register of access so that they get not only good advice, but advice that does not cost them money unreasonably and does not worry them unnecessarily?

My right hon. Friend is right to highlight the fact that much excellent free advice is available to all companies, whether they are employers or service providers, on what they need to do to meet their obligations under the changes. Many organisations will offer to charge them for advice, but they should primarily go for the free advice first. Much of the advice is common sense and it is not necessary to pay an enormous amount to get advice that is freely available from the DRC and organisations such as the Employers Forum on Disability, all of which are doing excellent work in that regard. I certainly echo my right hon. Friend's sentiments.

Many charities and small voluntary organisations will suffer from the legislation. They work from old buildings and need Government help, which they feel they are not receiving. The Minister just passed the buck. What will the Government do to help those organisations?

I would not agree with the hon. Gentleman's choice of phrase when he says that those who need to meet their obligations to disabled people are suffering as a result. He should not forget that there are 8.5 million disabled people in this country, all of whom would like access to goods, services, facilities and employment opportunities like anyone else. It is about time they had that right and it is not a matter of people suffering to provide it.

If he will make a statement on his assessment of the possible role of identity cards in combating benefit fraud. [138634]

As my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has made clear, the main case for ID cards is to counter terrorism, organised crime and illegal immigration, but it is common sense that they would also be a big help in combating benefit fraud involving false identity.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. We have made useful progress in combating benefit fraud, especially in respect of income support and the jobseeker's allowance, but with millions more national insurance numbers in circulation than there are citizens in the United Kingdom, is it not the case that the more technologically sophisticated proof of identity would help us to make even more progress?

Indeed it would. We inherited an enormous problem with the number of national insurance numbers—some 71.5 million, well in excess of the adult population. If we subtract the actual adult population of 47 million, the deceased records of 15.5 million and the 7.2 million who have gone abroad, 1.8 million are left. As the House would rightly expect, we are working intensively, sampling the national insurance records to check their authenticity. That work should be completed by the end of the year. I expect to report further progress to the House early next year.

The 1997 Labour manifesto estimated the cost of housing benefit fraud alone at £2 billion, suggesting that the total cost of benefit fraud runs into many billions of pounds, yet the Department's evidence is that identity fraud accounts for a tiny fraction of that grand total. Indeed, the Home Secretary said last week in the House that social security fraud was not really what he was talking about when he said that he was cutting down on fraud. Will the Secretary of State confirm that when he says that the measure will be "a big help", the marginal effect of ID cards on social security fraud will be acknowledged as peripheral to the debate on the cards?

Yes, the main fraud that we encounter is not people making false claims of identity, but people making false claims regarding their circumstances. However, that does not mean that cracking down on such fraud will not result in substantial savings. Savings derived from checking multiple claims, verifying national insurance numbers, better recording of immigration and emigration, preventing people who are living together committing fraud, and checking documents add up to about £100 million. It speaks volumes of the way in which Liberal Democrats do their costings that £100 million is neither here nor there to them. That is money that could and should be going to schools and hospitals, not to fraud.

As the Secretary of State has, rightly, welcomed ID cards as a potential means of providing a safe entrance into the social security system, may we take it that, when the proposal was discussed in Cabinet, he gave the Home Secretary 100 per cent. support for its introduction?

As the House knows, we are united in our dedication to combat terrorism, crime and fraud of all kinds. I have strongly supported the good sense in an incremental approach, which demonstrates how an identity document with biometric data would work, initially with driving licences and passports. Once we have established that the technology works and is viable, the House will be able to make a decision on the question of compulsion in future. To my mind, that is a common-sense way to achieve a desirable goal.

On 13 February, the National Audit Office stated that the rate of reduction of fraud and error in jobseeker's allowance and income support had "slowed" this year. Can the Secretary of State explain that latest departmental failure?

We remain on track to hit our targets to reduce fraud in income support and JSA. The Conservatives ought to note that when they were in government, they did not even have a target to tackle fraud, whereas since 1998, we have cut fraud in IS and JSA alone by more than a quarter. Of course there is more to do, but we will take no lectures from the Opposition on how to do it.

Given the developing partnership with local government in the fight against benefit fraud, and the increasing mobility of the British population, what discussions has my right hon. Friend had with the Local Government Association and other local government bodies on how the anti-fraud initiative might help them in the front line of dealing with the problem?

My hon. Friend makes an important point. We are working closely with local authorities. The total number of cases in which action is taken— including prosecution, and the imposition of administrative sanctions and other penalties deployed in combating fraud —is more than double the number in 1997–98. A significant proportion of the increase is accounted for by extra cases and prosecutions brought by local authorities. As well as giving them extra resources, we are keeping in close touch with them on their progress, because the effort has to be a united one involving central Government, local government and all agencies working together to combat an illegal menace that deprives the budget areas that should have priority claim to resources that wrongly go to fraudsters. We have been cracking down jointly with local authorities, and we shall certainly continue to do so.

What steps he has taken to promote the take-up of pension credit in Wales.[138635]

If he will estimate the number of pensioners in Wales likely to qualify for the pension credit.[138639]

I am pleased to be able to report that 111,000 pensioner households in Wales are already getting pension credit, of which 75,000 now get more than they would have under the minimum income guarantee. We estimate that about 250,000 pensioner households in Wales are eligible for the new credit.

Given the level of pensioner poverty in Wales, many Welsh Members are promoting pension credit irrespective of our reservations. Our efforts would be far better directed if we had information on take-up by constituency. Is that information likely to become available?

It is difficult to give accurate estimates by constituency. I think that on average, across the whole of Great Britain, we are talking about 5,000 or so people in each constituency, but obviously that is subject to quite significant variation. We will have more details by constituency as the take-up of pension credit proceeds. I welcome the hon. Gentleman's support for pension credit. Whatever our differences of opinion, there are people in our constituencies who need the extra money and we should all endeavour to make sure that they receive it.

May I inform my hon. Friend that about 250,000 pensioner households in Wales will greatly welcome the fact that the Government have recognised that they have modest savings, modest occupational pensions or modest earnings, and that they deserve extra help? The Government are giving them that help. Will my hon. Friend say how those with caring responsibilities will also gain from the extra help?

This is good news for carers because of the pension credit package. One of the ways in which we can help people is through our local pension service, which often works closely with local Members. In Wales, during October alone, we visited more than 2,500 older people, and more than 3,000 have attended outreach events run by the Pension Service. To bring the statistics down to earth, people gaining include a gentleman in Monmouth, my hon. Friend's constituency, who is aged over 80. He called into one of our local surgeries and requested a visit. He is entitled to about £45 a week on pension credit. That is an example of a policy that in practice is benefiting local people.

The Minister will know that because the policy particularly affects the poorest pensioners in my constituency and in every constituency in the land, it is especially to be welcomed. Tribute has already been paid to the Pension Service. However, what measures are we using to reach those who are out of the network of information—for example, those who are contactable through social services within county council services? It is vital that those who do not currently use senior citizens' groups benefit equally from the important measure that the Government have introduced.

Our first line of communication will be to write to every pensioner in Wales and throughout Great Britain about pension credit. They will all receive the application form, and where appropriate a form will be sent in the Welsh language. That is the service that we offer. In addition, through local advice surgeries, home visits and by working closely with social services, Age Concern and other services, we shall endeavour to inform everyone about their pension credit entitlement.

If he will make a statement on long-term trends in employment. 1138638]

The labour market statistics continue to show employment growing and unemployment on a downward trend. As a result of our policies for economic stability and welfare to work the United Kingdom now has the highest employment and the lowest unemployment of the G7.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his response and I congratulate the Government on their great success in reducing unemployment levels to their present levels. I hope that we can continue to improve our performance.

Order.

I thank my hon. Friend for his remarks. I take this opportunity to congratulate him on the sterling work that I know he has done over a number of years in regeneration and tackling unemployment in his constituency. He makes the important point that good though progress is, we need to do still more. It is especially important that we focus on pockets of particular disadvantage and remaining unemployment within each of our constituencies. I can assure my hon. Friend that through the incentive structure within Jobcentre Plus; the partnership work that we are encouraging with local business; and the work that we are doing, for example, through child care partnership managers to ensure that appropriate child care is available to help those who need it to move into jobs, and other area-based initiatives, we shall continue to drive forward. Our ambition is not just to have a better employment system, which is what we have, but to have full employment in every region and every community.

Is the Minister not worried about all the manufacturing jobs that are being exported to eastern Europe and Asia? When Black & Decker announced that it was going to the Czech Republic, when Dyson announced that it was going to Malaysia and, more recently, when Wedgwood announced that jobs were going from Stoke-on-Trent to China, were alarm bells not ringing in his Department? What advice is he giving the hard-pressed people who are scouring department stores in this country for gifts that are made in Britain?

It never ceases to stagger me that Opposition Members should run down British manufacturing industry and its enormous achievements. This Government have acted, for example, by introducing the research and development tax credit—there was no such encouragement under the Conservatives—and developing a skills strategy. It is only by being competitive in the high value-added areas of manufacturing industry that we will build on the considerable manufacturing success in this country. There have been successes in the aeronautical industry, for example, and success in my own constituency, where BMW is producing new Minis—a sales leader across the world—and taking on more workers. We should hear more from Opposition Members about the success of manufacturing industry instead of hearing them talk Britain down.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Lloyds TSB is proposing to close its call centre in Newcastle to exploit low-paid workers in India, with the potential loss of almost 1,000 jobs in my constituency, despite promises made when the centre opened two years ago that those would be long-term, sustainable jobs? What can he do to try to dissuade Lloyds TSB from that course of action, and what does he propose to do in light of the potential loss of tens of thousands of jobs in this country?

It is the same question the other way round.

I understand the concerns expressed by my hon. Friend on behalf of his constituents, and I can well imagine local anxieties. However, my answer is the same as the answer that I gave earlier. It is by investing in skills and competitiveness that we can best ensure jobs for the future. I urge employers in my hon. Friend's constituency and elsewhere to keep the promises that they made to local workers and urge Members on both sides of the House to back a strategy of investing in skills so that more people can fill the 10,000 vacancies that are reported to Jobcentre Plus each and every day.

Is it not important to secure not just full employment, but productive employment? Over the past three years, the decline in manufacturing employment has been offset by a massive increase in public sector employment. East Germany, Poland and so on always had full employment in the days of the Warsaw pact and COMECON—the Council for Mutual Economic Co-operation—but they were never productive or satisfying places to live.

It is an outrageous slur on our nurses, doctors, teachers and police officers—we are proud of the extra numbers employed in those front-line services—to suggest that they are not productive. They are productive, and not only has there been a welcome increase in public sector employment, but there are more jobs in the private sector.

If he will make a statement about the contribution of the Employment Service to the Selby taskforce. [138640]

Jobcentre Plus is a key member of the Selby taskforce, making a positive contribution to its work to help the local community. Working closely with local organisations, Jobcentre Plus has provided advice, guidance, and training to help those made redundant to make the move back into work. I know that my hon. Friend has been working hard to support the efforts of the taskforce, and I am sure that his work, in conjunction with that of the taskforce, is appreciated by those people who have moved into work.

Will my hon. Friend congratulate Mrs. Alison Seabrooke who, incidentally, is married to a Selby man and who, perhaps more than anyone else, has helped co-ordinate the various agencies involved in the Selby taskforce, and helped to ensure that the current mine closure is handled differently from the mine closures that occurred in Yorkshire in the 1980s and 1990s? Does my hon. Friend share my hope that UK Coal and the National Union of Mineworkers will work hard to reach agreement on terms that will allow 260 Selby miners to transfer to nearby Kellingley colliery?

I am more than happy to join my hon. Friend in congratulating Mrs. Seabrooke on her contribution to the efforts of the taskforce. I will pass on to those working closely with Jobcentre Plus my hon. Friend's advice about the opportunities available to Selby miners, to ensure that the best is made of those opportunities.

What plans he has to maximise take-up of the pension credit. [138641]

Pension credit is already making a real difference in the lives of pensioners. As I reported to the House last week, at the end of October there were 1.97 million pensioner households—around 2.3 million individuals—receiving pension credit, and 1.2 million households—around 1.4 million individuals—are now receiving more money than they did before, with an average award of –47.10 per week. Our advertising campaign is continuing and we are working with partner organisations, such as Help the Aged, Age Concern and the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux, to fulfil our aspiration that as many pensioners as possible should take up their entitlement.

I suggest to my right hon. Friend that take-up of pension credit is likely to be higher if there is confidence in the assessment and delivery process, and conversely, that if confidence fell, take-up would fall. The computer history of large organisations in the private sector and in the public sector, including the Department, is not always good. Can my right hon. Friend assure me that the telephony and the computer systems are robust enough for pension credit?

Yes, indeed. We learned the lessons of previous experience in that area, and ensured that the project was not dependent on new IT, that the staff were thoroughly trained, and that the take-up was phased. On telephony, I can report that the average to date is 95 per cent. of calls being answered within 30 seconds, not by a metallic recording machine, but by a human being. Last week the pension credit application line answered 100 per cent. of calls within 30 seconds.

Does the Secretary of State recall his Minister of State, the Minister for Pensions, saying:

"No one of sound mind could advocate wholesale means-testing"?

As emerged from the pensions debate that the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues initiated a few weeks ago, the income assessment for pension credit is a million miles away from the old intrusive, demeaning means-testing that disfigured this country in the past. I note that last week the hon. Gentleman was forecasting that it would take six to seven years to reach the 3 million figure. I will make a deal with him. If we are wrong and it takes that long to hit 3 million, I will apologise to the House. If and when we hit our target, as I am confident we will, he should be back in the House explaining why we are right and admitting that the Opposition were wrong.

Let me tell the Secretary of State that we do not do deals. The Government must do the deals. As a matter of arithmetic, at the current rate at which the pension credit is being taken up by new claimants, if he extrapolates that trend, when will he reach his target for the take-up of the pension credit?

The hon. Gentleman knows that we must hit 3 million by 2006. I am confident that we are on course and look forward to his coming to the House and apologising when we hit our target.

Will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating St. Helens council on recently holding an advice street stall in the town centre at which hundreds of pensioners were helped with the pension credit? Will he encourage more councils to do the same?

I join my hon. Friend in congratulating his local authority, working in partnership with the Pension Service. Such activities are taking place across the country, because partnership is at the heart of our drive to maximise take-up of the pension credit. It is a pity that the Conservative party does not join in that partnership to encourage the take-up of pension credit. Anyone listening to the hon. Member for Havant (Mr. Willetts) a few minutes ago would have thought that the Conservative party would abandon the pension credit.

Further to the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Havant, when the Labour Government came to power, the Chancellor of the Exchequer said that one of the Government's central objectives was to get rid of means-testing for the elderly. Was the Chancellor of the Exchequer right or wrong, or have the Government done a massive U-turn?

I have already pointed out that the pension credit is a million miles away from the old, degrading, intrusive weekly means test. We receive hundreds of messages through the local Pension Service to the effect that pensioners who have successfully applied for pension credit appreciate not only being better off, but the value of the sensitivity and the helpfulness with which the Pension Service has handled their applications. That is amplified not only by those working on the telephone lines, but by the important work of the local Pension Service, which visits people in their homes and helps them to claim their entitlement. Conservative Members should admit that that is not the old-style means test.

If he will make a statement on the impact of the new deal for young people. [138642]

The new deal has already helped nearly 450,000 young people into work, including 720 in my hon. Friend's constituency.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Given the scheme's great success in my constituency and others, will he tell the House what work has been done on what the impact might be if it were withdrawn?

I know that my hon. Friend strongly supports the work done by Jobcentre Plus in her constituency. She will know from her experience how many individuals the new deal for young people has helped—it has helped 720 people in her constituency in six years. If she can contemplate 720 people becoming unemployed for 18 months or more in her constituency, it would be a decent measure of what abandoning the new deal for young people would do over the next six years.

The new deal for young people cost taxpayers a third of a billion pounds last year, so we are entitled to ask whether it helps young people. The Employment Service survey found that three out of four new deal options reduce the chance of a young person moving away from the new deal itself or jobseeker's allowance. Is the Minister happy with that?

May I first congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his promotion to the Front Bench? I look forward to working with him on the part of the brief for which he is responsible. When he has an opportunity to acquaint himself with more information about the new deal for young people, he will come across independent research by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, which found both that long-term youth unemployment would have been twice as high without the new deal and that a large number of young people left unemployment quicker than they would have done without it. That same institution has produced research showing that the economy as a whole is richer by £500 million a year as a result of the new deal for young people. It is more than justified by those factors alone.

While I accept that many young people have indeed been helped by the scheme, many others seem to have disappeared from the system: they neither appear on the records nor are they in work. Is the Minister, like me, worried that they are being deserted by the system?

I hear what my hon. Friend has to say. I know from the interest that he takes in his constituents that he speaks with some degree of knowledge of the labour market in Glasgow. I can reassure him by saying that research shows that approximately the same number of young people go into work from that group as from other groups. Our Department consistently carries out research on the destinations of young people, both on leaving school and from the new deal. The evidence suggests that people leaving to unknown destinations are just as likely to enter jobs as those leaving to known destinations—about 57 per cent. do SO.

If he will make a statement on the effectiveness of the Pension Service. [138643]

The Pension Service is the first ever service dedicated to the needs of elderly people. It operates through a network of 26 pension centres across the country, supported by a local service provided in accessible locations and delivered in partnership with local statutory and voluntary organisations. It has only been operating since April 2002, but we already know from customer and partner feedback that it is making a real difference.

The Secretary of State just talked about pensioners who have made successful applications for pension credit as if that should qualify them for a special achievement award. Despite the local field workers in the Pension Service, most pensioners have to rely for advice on the hotline to the call centres, where it is recommended that they should allow at least 20 minutes for their call to be processed. Can the Minister name one other advice line that recommends a minimum of 20 minutes to deal with what should be a straightforward benefit to members of the public, elderly or otherwise?

The hon. Gentleman's cynicism about this social policy is a cause for concern. I hope that he does not go around spreading that cynicism in his constituency, because much good work is going on there. People can now choose how to apply for pension credit—by filling in the application form, by ringing the freephone number, by visiting the advice surgery or by having a home visit. That is a great advance. In October alone, in the hon. Gentleman's constituency—I am sure he knows this—91 home visits were made, 173 people dropped into local surgeries, and there were 16 surgery appointments. [Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman, from a sedentary position, seems to say that he is not participating. If he wants to know about the good work on the pension credit in his own constituency, he should get out more.

When I visited the Pension Service in my constituency last Friday, I found its dedicated staff working flat out to try to explain the pension credit to pensioners. Given the Minister's assumption that 1.4 million of the poorest pensioners will not get round to claiming it owing to its complexity and means-testing, why not simply boost the basic pension, which has 100 per cent. take-up, and restore the link with earnings?

We know that since 1980, members of the Tory party have become born-again earnings linkers—a bit late, methinks. Let me tell the hon. Gentleman about the figure of 1.4 million: that is the number of individuals who have already gained from pension credit and are better off. The number will grow and grow. I welcome the hon. Gentleman's support for our local Pension Service, which comprises a dedicated group of people. However, they will be helped by enthusiasm from local Members of Parliament, not by Conservative Members stirring up apathy about a major social advance.

If he will make a statement on the new scheme for dealing with Child Support Agency cases. [138645]

The new scheme was introduced for new cases and those connected to a new scheme case in March this year.

I am sure that the 6,000 beneficiaries will be grateful for the new scheme and that my hon. Friend will confirm that the Government clearly perceive it to be a fairer system. Can my hon. Friend therefore understand the frustration of the many people on the old scheme who feel that they are locked into it, and sometimes pay not only more than they believe to be right but more than their former partners believe to be right? Can he provide a ray of hope to many people that the management system in the CSA will get to grips with the problem and that the new scheme will be rolled out for all those who need it?

We understand why people are impatient to move to the new scheme, which is fairer, simpler and helps to ensure that hildren get the support that they need and deserve as effectively as possible. We are making good progress, with the CSA clearing thousands of cases each week, but we have always said that we will transfer existing cases to the new scheme when we are satisfied that it is working well. We shall not make the mistakes of 1993, when the existing scheme was introduced too hurriedly and at considerable cost and heartache both to parents with care, and non-resident parents and to their children.

The Under-Secretary will naturally want to be candid with hon. Members about the reasons for the delay in transferring the old cases to the new scheme. Will he confirm or deny the report in this week's Computer Weekly, which claims that up to 40 per cent. of the old records could contain defects, omissions and anomalies; that up to 14 million individual items may need validating, correcting or checking; and that the CSA has

"no clear solution to its difficulties, no real idea when it will transfer the million cases … and has not told the whole truth to Parliament about its affairs"?

Well, Mr. Speaker! May I welcome Conservative Members' new-found enthusiasm for this matter? A little more than two weeks ago, we had an opportunity to discuss it in practical terms in Committee. Only one Conservative Member, who stayed for one minute of the proceedings, turned up. Conservative Members were concerned with three letters—not "CSA" but "IDS".

I support the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Central (Tony Lloyd). I emphasise that many of my constituents have told me that the CSA has told those on the old system that it will take many years to get on to the new system. Will my hon. Friend consider that seriously and do what he can to speed up the process?

I assure my hon. Friend and his constituents that we will transfer the existing cases as quickly as we can, because we understand the frustration and impatience both of non-resident parents and of parents with care about the need to move quickly—but we shall do so only when we are sure that the system is working effectively. We would be doing no favours to the House, and certainly not to the parents or children involved, if we tried to move forward before we were ready.

If he will reduce the imputed return on savings in the calculation of benefits entitlement. [138646]

We have already done so in respect of pension credit, for which the tariff income on savings is half that for the minimum income guarantee, which it replaced. We have no plans to change the tariff income on other benefits, but we keep all income and capital rules under review.

I accept the Minister's reply, in that the Government have indeed reduced the assumed rate of annual return from the ludicrous level of 20 per cent. However, does the Minister accept the criticisms of the pensions experts who came before the Treasury Committee last week, who said that the current assumed rate of 10 per cent. on savings over £6,000 was totally unrealistic, because no bank offers anything remotely like that, and was a significant disincentive to saving?

Less than 5 per cent. of customers are assessed as having any tariff income at all, and we must bear in mind that the first tranche of savings is disregarded altogether. The tariff income rules allow people to continue to receive income-based benefit even if they have some savings, rather than their being disqualified outright. I think that the hon. Gentleman would agree that it would be wrong to disqualify people totally simply because they had some savings. The tariff income rules are a way of phasing out the entitlement to benefit, without pushing people over a cliff edge, but we keep all the rules under review, and will continue to do so.

When he next plans to visit Nottingham, North to meet jobcentre staff to discuss the number of local unemployed people. [138647]

Unemployment in my hon. Friend's constituency has fallen by 31 per cent. since 1997. From March next year, Jobcentre Plus will be working with Nottingham city council to co-ordinate a number of local employment projects within the neighbourhood renewal employment strategy, to help even more people into jobs in the future. My hon. Friend will remember that last month my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State told him that he would be happy to visit his constituency, and he knows that he has only to invite him.

My hon. Friend will realise that in 1997, unemployment was the No. 1 issue in my constituency, as in many others. Now it often barely rates a mention—and that is the greatest tribute to my right hon. and hon. Friends on the Front Bench, and the rest of the Government, for what they have done since 1997. However, some of the hardest cases still remain. Will my hon. Friend take some time to consider the possibility of the Employment Service and others connected with employment doing more outreach work? In my constituency, individuals in places such as the Westwood and Broxstowe estates are doing incredibly good work on a one-to-one basis. Will my hon. Friend re-examine this matter and see whether the Employment Service and Jobcentre Plus can be pushed out to where the unemployed are, so that we can crack some of the harder remaining cases?

I thank my hon. Friend for his recognition of the Government's achievements on employment. They have not been achieved alone, and a significant number of partners, including local Members of Parliament, have contributed to them. I am aware that last year my hon. Friend corresponded with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State about the other matter that he raised. Jobcentre Plus and the Pension Service are developing local partnerships across the country, exactly as my hon. Friend describes in his constituency, and I know that he will be pleased to hear that as part of the jobcentre roll-out, we will offer some of our services in local community surgeries, and from sites shared with local authorities. We are also planning worklessness pilots in some of the most disadvantaged areas throughout the United Kingdom.

What recent assessment he has made of the take-up rate of pension credit in Scotland. [138648]

Pension credit has got off to a good start in Scotland. Already, 155,000 pensioners in Scotland are better off than they were under the old system and, for the first time, people who have saved for their retirement are being rewarded. At the end of October, there were already 202,000 pensioner households in Scotland receiving pension credit.

I thank the Minister for that answer. Obviously, however, much still needs to be done to ensure that all pensioners in Scotland receive their entitlement as soon as possible. In that regard, is the Minister concerned by reports that one of the partner organisations in the take-up campaign, Help the Aged, has proposed swingeing and disproportionate cuts to its services in Scotland, including the closure of the Edinburgh office of its free telephone advice service, SeniorLine? Surely that is likely to have a negative impact on take-up in Scotland.

I am always concerned to hear about organisations that do good work, such as Age Concern, having that kind of difficulty. I hope, though, that the hon. Lady will be able to step into the breach and start to encourage pensioners in Perth to claim their entitlement. if she did so, far more people would claim. I hope that she will be able to do that, even though her party opposed the pension credit.

I congratulate my hon. Friend and her Department on the work that they are doing. Will she assure me and the elderly people of Anniesland that, even when we reach the June deadline for contacting people, we will not stop there, and that we will not be satisfied until every pensioner is getting what they are due?

My hon. Friend is well known for the work that he does in this area, particularly on encouraging pensioners to take up their entitlement. I am sure that he will not stop doing so come next June. It is certainly our intention that everybody who is entitled to pension credit should take up that entitlement, and the Pension Service—particularly the local service—will continue its effort to ensure that as many people as possible, and preferably all those who are entitled, take up their entitlement.

How many people in receipt of benefit have been in NHS hospitals for more than a year. [138649]

The latest information is that there are, at any one time, between 20,000 and 25,000 people on benefit who have been in hospital for more than 52 weeks. In May this year, we extended the period before benefits are reduced as a result of a stay in hospital from six to 52 weeks.

Almost 9,000 people with mental ill health in England and Wales have been in hospital for more than a year. Given that benefit cuts at that point can be demonstrated to be anti-therapeutic, and can therefore lengthen the stay in hospital, is it not right, in medical, moral and monetary terms, to push that 52 week limit even further, perhaps to something approaching two years? The cost would not be great, the Chancellor is listening, and this is the time of year to do it.

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend, and also to Mind and the other mental health charities that have argued this case. My hon. Friend will recognise, however, that 97 per cent. of hospital in-patients leave hospital within six weeks, and so would not even have been affected by the pre-May 2003 rules. Our recent change means that even more people will see no reduction in their benefit while they are in hospital, but I think that my hon. Friend would agree that we have to draw the line somewhere, and that it is right in principle that social security benefits should not be paid in full indefinitely when someone is in an NHS hospital and therefore getting their day-to-day living expenses met. However, this is an issue that we shall keep under review.

The hon. Gentleman referred to those who have been in hospital and are over a certain age, many of whom will be elderly and mentally infirm patients. What provisions has his Department made to ensure that checks on those eligible for pension credit have been made? Also, could his hon. Friend the Minister for Pensions possibly find the time to respond to the question that I put to him a month ago? He said that he would reply if I wrote to him; I have written, but I am still waiting for a reply.

I will ensure that the hon. Lady gets a reply, and I apologise if there has been a delay. We estimate that, at any one time, about 20,000 pensioners and 3,000 income support recipients aged under 60 are benefiting from the May 2003 change to which I referred. We want to ensure that those who are in hospital long term receive the benefits to which they are entitled. I will certainly give the hon. Lady my assurance that we will continue to do that.

Pursuant to the Government's response to the 62nd report of the Public Accounts Committee, Session 2001–02, on the new deal for young people, how the Government will track the progress of those who have left the new deal for young people and moved into employment. [138650]

Consistent with the Department's response to the Public Accounts Committee report, we are working with the Inland Revenue to link our records with theirs where possible. That work will improve our understanding of what happens in the long term to people who leave our programmes, such as the new deal for young people. We are also conducting separate work to identify immediate destinations of people on leaving the new deal for young people.

As the Minister has explained, the Employment Act 2002 gives his Department the chance to access all the Inland Revenue records of all those who have been on new deal so that we can check exactly what is happening to their employment. Is the Department doing that and trying to track all those who have been on the new deal, and what has it learned from that analysis about the sustainability of their employment and about their earnings? If it is not doing so, that will add credence to the charge made by the Minister's colleague the hon. Member for Glasgow, Pollok (Mr. Davidson), that many people are simply vanishing from the system.

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point, and we are of course undertaking such checks. I repeat that we are working with the Inland Revenue to link our records with theirs where possible. We will report to the House once that work is concluded, or when we are in a position to draw conclusions from it.