Asked by: Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the letter sent by Carers UK to the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 3 February, and of the proposal that a £20 supplement to the Carer’s Allowance be made in the Budget to support carers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
This Government continues to protect the value of benefits paid to carers whilst also spending record amounts in real terms. The level of Carer’s Allowance is protected by uprating it each year in line with the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The purpose of benefit uprating is to ensure that the value of benefits stays in line with the general level of prices. For the April 2021 increase, the Department for Work and Pensions used the September 2020 CPI, which was 0.5 per cent. Since 2010, the rate of Carer’s Allowance has increased from £53.90 to £67.25 a week, meaning around an additional £700 a year for carers. Between 2020/21 and 2025/26 real terms expenditure on Carer’s Allowance is forecast to increase by nearly a third (around £1 billion). By 2025/26, the Government is forecast to spend just over £4 billion a year on Carer’s Allowance.
In addition, Carer’s Allowance isn’t the only benefit available to carers. Carers have access to the full range of social security benefits depending on their individual circumstances. Income replacement benefits help individuals and households on lower incomes, and can include a carer premium, which is currently £37.50 a week. An equivalent additional amount applies in Pension Credit. Universal Credit also includes a carer element at the rate of £162.92 per monthly assessment period. These amounts recognise the additional contribution and responsibilities associated with caring and mean that lower-income carers can receive more money than others who receive these benefits.
Asked by: Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact on low income consumers of the Financial Conduct Authority’s decision to close down Wirecard's operations on 26 June; and what steps they plan to take to protect anyone without access to resources as a result of that decision. [T]
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Wirecard AG, the German payments provider, entered administration last week. It has a UK subsidiary, Wirecard Card Solution Ltd (Wirecard UK), which is FCA regulated. This subsidiary is not in administration.
Last week, the FCA temporarily applied restrictions to Wirecard UK’s business while the firm ensured it could safeguard customers’ money. The government worked closely with the FCA to understand and mitigate the impact of this measure – for example, the DWP worked to ensure those who received benefits into accounts using Wirecard UK had an alternate means of receiving payments.
The firm has now been able to demonstrate that it has met the necessary conditions, and the restrictions were lifted on Tuesday 30 June. Customers can access their money as usual.
Asked by: Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Agnew of Oulton on 22 June (HL5695), what financial support will be made available to people who do not have COVID-19 but are required to self-isolate under the COVID-19 contact test and trace system who are unable to work from home; and what consideration they have given to including such people as eligible for the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme. [T]
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
The Government has committed to an unprecedented package to support individuals through this difficult time. This includes the introduction of the Coronavirus Job Retention and Self-Employment Income Support Schemes, as well as through injecting an additional £8bn into the welfare system.
For employees unable to work from home, DWP has laid new regulations to ensure that people asked to isolate by the Test and Trace service will be eligible for Statutory Sick Pay (SSP). This is in addition to changes already made which make SSP payable from day one rather than day four of an absence from work. Employees will still be entitled to claim SSP from their employer even if they are asked to self-isolate several times. A SSP Rebate Scheme was also announced at Budget to support SMEs which may face a financial strain due to staff absences caused by COVID-19.
Self-employed people are eligible for “new style” Contributory Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) if they are incapable of work due to COVID-19, including all those who are required to self-isolate according to Government guidance. The Government has made it easier for people to claim by removing the seven-day waiting period, which means people can get support from day one.
The Government is committed to helping the lowest paid through the coronavirus outbreak, and the welfare system is best placed to provide this support.
Asked by: Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what financial support will be made available to people required to self-isolate under the COVID-19 contact test and trace system who are unable to work from home; and what consideration they have given to including such people as eligible for the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme. [T]
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Employees who are on sick leave or self-isolating as a result of coronavirus have access to Statutory Sick Pay subject to other eligibility conditions. The Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme is not intended for short-term absences from work due to sickness.
Asked by: Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether employees on Maternity Allowance can categorise that Allowance as earnings for the purpose of calculating furlough payments.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
The Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS) is designed to help employers whose operations have been severely affected by coronavirus (COVID-19) to keep their employees and protect the UK economy.
Under the CJRS, an employer will be entitled to claim for a grant that covers 80% of their furloughed employee’s usual monthly wage costs, up to £2,500 a month. They can also claim for the associated Employer National Insurance contributions and pension contributions, up to the level of the minimum automatic enrolment employer pension contribution, on that subsidised furlough pay.
For employees on fixed pay, claims for full or part time employees furloughed on return from family-related statutory leave should be calculated against their salary, before tax, not the pay they received while on family-related statutory leave. The same principles apply where the employee is returning from a period of unpaid statutory family-related leave.
Claims for those on variable pay, returning from statutory leave should be calculated using the highest of either:
Asked by: Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that residents without recourse to public funds will have financial protection during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
The government has introduced a range of measures to provide financial protection for those affected by Covid-19, including those with no recourse to public funds (NRPF).
Employers will be able to apply for grants under the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme for workers on the PAYE system. The government has also extended Statutory Sick Pay to be payable from Day 1 rather than Day 4 and made Contributory Employment and Support Allowance available from the first day of sickness rather than the eighth, subject to other eligibility criteria. For those who file Self-Assessment returns, the government has deferred Income Tax Self-Assessment payments from July 2020 to January 2021.
In addition, the government has announced that banks and building societies will offer a three-month ‘mortgage holiday’ for borrowers in financial difficulty, including landlords with tenants in financial difficulty, as a result of Covid-19. Alongside this, the government has legislated to prohibit tenant evictions for three months.
Asked by: Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of the proportion of (1) the male, and (2) the female, working population that earn (a) £25,600 or over, (b) £23,040 to £25,599, and (c) £20,480 to £23,039, per year.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Estimates of the proportion of the male and female working population by income band are provided in the following table:
| ||||||||||||||||||
The proportion of the (1) male, and (2) female working population (employment and/or self-employment income only) in the tax year 2017 to 2018 | ||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Source: Survey of Personal Incomes, tax year 2017 to 2018
Notes on the table
Asked by: Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what was their total spending, in constant prices, on (1) child benefit, and (2) income-related benefits, for children for each year since 2000.
Answered by Earl of Courtown - Captain of the Queen's Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard (HM Household) (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords)
Total Child Benefit payments, in real terms at 2019/20 prices, since 2000 can be found in the Benefit expenditure and caseload tables 2019 published by the Department for Work and Pensions. This information has been presented below (Table 1) for the years for which outturn data is available.
Table 1 - Child Benefit expenditure, real terms (2019/20 prices),
| £billions |
2000-01 | 12.6 |
2001-02 | 12.6 |
2002-03 | 12.5 |
2003-04 | 12.9 |
2004-05 | 12.8 |
2005-06 | 12.7 |
2006-07 | 12.8 |
2007-08 | 13.1 |
2008-09 | 13.5 |
2009-10 | 14 |
2010-11 | 14.1 |
2011-12 | 14 |
2012-13 | 13.7 |
2013-14 | 12.6 |
2014-15 | 12.6 |
2015-16 | 12.6 |
2016-17 | 12.3 |
2017-18 | 12 |
Notes:
- Real terms, 2019/20 prices
- Figures presented are based on outturn data
Source:
- Benefit-expenditure-and-caseload-tables-2019
2. Income-related benefits
The information requested relating to Universal Credit is not held and can only be made available at a disproportionate cost.
Expenditure in real terms is available in respect of Income Support and income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance on child elements in DWP Benefit expenditure and caseload tables. Again, to be helpful, this information has been presented below (Table 2) for the years for which outturn data is available.
Table 2 - Income Support and income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance on child elements, real terms (2019-20 prices),
| Income Support (£millions) | Jobseeker's Allowance (£millions) |
2000-01 | 4,270 | 442 |
2001-02 | 4,774 | 408 |
2002-03 | 5,121 | 406 |
2003-04* | 5,151 | 351 |
2004-05 | 4,381 | 191 |
2005-06 | 3,290 | 31 |
2006-07 | 2,593 | 15 |
2007-08 | 2,144 | - |
2008-09 | 1,749 | - |
2009-10 | 1,039 | - |
2010-11 | 737 | - |
2011-12 | 518 | - |
2012-13 | 329 | - |
2013-14 | 190 | - |
2014-15 | 130 | - |
2015-16 | 87 | - |
2016-17 | 63 | - |
2017-18 | 44 | - |
Notes:
- Real terms, 2019/20 prices
- Figures presented are based on outturn data
- *since Apr 2004, financial support for children is normally provided through Child Tax Credit
Source:
- Benefit-expenditure-and-caseload-tables-2019
Annual expenditure on tax credits cannot be broken down between Child Tax Credits and Working Tax Credits. However, this breakdown is available for the closely related measure of annual tax credits entitlement, and provided in Table 3 below. The main difference between tax credits entitlement and tax credits payments is that entitlement figures are based on the amounts households are entitled to once awards have been finalised, whereas payments are based on provisional awards which may differ from final awards, and can include payments and repayments in respect of earlier years.
Table 3 - Annual entitlement to Child Tax Credit (introduced 2003-04), real terms (2019-20 prices),
| £millions |
2003-04 | n/a |
2004-05 | 18,128 |
2005-06 | 18,255 |
2006-07 | 18,874 |
2007-08 | 19,351 |
2008-09 | 21,653 |
2009-10 | 23,336 |
2010-11 | 23,815 |
2011-12 | 24,648 |
2012-13 | 24,405 |
2013-14 | 23,902 |
2014-15 | 23,519 |
2015-16 | 23,112 |
2016-17 | 21,935 |
2017-18 | 20,494 |
Notes:
- Figures for 2003-04 are not readily available and can only be provided at disproportionate cost.
Source:
- Nominal figures taken from Table 1.1 of HMRC’s Child and Working Tax Credits Statistics
- Real terms 2019-20 prices. To convert the nominal figures into real terms, the GDP deflators published in March 2019 were used.
- The estimates for 2016-17 and 2017-18 are affected by the introduction of Universal Credit.
- This table does not include entitlement to Working Tax Credit or Working Families Tax Credit as they are not considered income related benefits for children, although they do contain some child related elements.
Asked by: Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Young of Cookham on 8 July (HL16704), whether they will carry out a cumulative impact assessment of tax and spending decisions by gendered household type, which avoids the need to make assumptions about income sharing within households.
Answered by Lord Young of Cookham
The government carefully considers the impact of its decisions on those sharing protected characteristics - including gender - in line with both its legal obligations and with its strong commitment to promoting fairness.
However, analysis of the impact of tax and spending decisions by gendered household type will present a partial picture of the impact of policy decisions on different genders as most people live in households with other people.
Asked by: Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the reply by Baroness Buscombe on 25 June (HL Deb, col 1003), whether they will now ask the National Audit Office to examine the feasibility of implementing the cumulative social impact assessment recommended by the UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights; and whether they will explain what they meant by their reservation concerning "unreasonable assumptions about income sharing" set out in paragraph 38 of the Comments by the State on the UN Special Rapporteur’s report.
Answered by Lord Young of Cookham
The Treasury regularly publishes detailed analysis on the cumulative impact of policy decisions on tax, welfare and public spending on households of different incomes. The government also carefully considers the impact of its decisions on those sharing protected characteristics - including at Budgets and other fiscal events - in line with both its legal obligations and with its strong commitment to promoting fairness.
Our statement concerning income sharing reflects our reservations about producing cumulative analysis of the impact of tax and spending decisions on vulnerable groups beneath household level (for instance, by gender). This analysis often requires unreasonable assumptions about how income is shared within households. As independent experts at the Institute for Fiscal Studies have said, “because most people live in households with others, and we don't know how incomes are shared, it is very hard to look at effects separately for many men and women.”