Hello again.
The IB figures in that table are claimants rather than recipients - i.e. all those found that if they had enough NI contributions they would have been eligible regardless of whether or not they did receive IB itself.
I leave as a homework problem the numbers of IS claimants on grounds of incapacity.
I might add (having just received Alan Joyce's email, that DLA is completely separately administered and causes endless complications with people applying for and having to renew claims to two different bits of the same department covering the same conditions - that's without going anywhere near Industrial Injuries benefits - which are not included in these stats but they are in DWP's quarterly summaries.
---------------------------------------------------------
Paul Bivand
Head of Analysis and Statistics
Direct Line: 020 7840 8335
Inclusion
3rd floor, 89 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7TP
Tel: 020 7582 7221
Fax: 020 7582 6391
Inclusion website: www.cesi.org.uk
The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient please return the e-mail to the sender and delete from your mailbox.
The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are intended solely for the use of the addressee.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email list for Radical Statistics
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Spicker
> Sent: 21 November 2007 15:42
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Incapacity Benefit
>
> Sorry - perhaps I'm being dense - but the figures that Paul
> Bivand just referred us to on his second link state that all
> the 2.643 million people categorised as IB claimants receive
> IB or SDA, and that none of them receives IS or Pension
> Credit without receiving IB or SDA. That means that a
> "claimant/beneficiary not receiving payment" can't be someone
> who gets IS instead of IB. What, then, does it mean? And
> who are the 992,000 people in this category?
>
> Paul Spicker
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email list for Radical Statistics
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mike Brewer
> Sent: 21 November 2007 14:18
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Incapacity Benefit
>
> I always understood that the people classified as
> "claimant/beneficiary not receiving payment" met the
> ill-health and (lack of) work conditions to receive IB, but
> didn't have enough NI contributions to be entitled to IB.
>
> However, being classified as "ill enough to get IB" allows
> you to claim IS on the grounds on incapacity, as the other
> Paul described.
>
> It seems perfectly reasonable to lump the 2 together. If IB
> didn't exist, then there would be 2.6m fewer benefit recipients.
>
> Mike
>
>
> --
> Mike Brewer
> Programme Director, Direct Tax and Welfare Institute for
> Fiscal Studies, www.ifs.org.uk, 020 72914800
>
> Registered Office: 7 Ridgmount Street, London WC1E 7AE
> Registered in London, Company number 954616, limited by
> guarantee IFS is a registered charity, number 258815
>
>
>
>
> Paul Spicker wrote:
> > The data table is very helpful, but it does describe nearly
> a million
> > people as "claimant/beneficiary not receiving payment".
> The welfare
> > reform green paper (A new deal for welfare: empowering
> people to work)
>
> > clearly states that "there are currently over 2.7 million people on
> > incapacity benefits" (start of chapter 2). Are these statements
> > compatible? They do raise the suspicion that the
> government will be
> > able to offer us a million fewer people "on benefit" in the near
> future.
> >
> > Paul Spicker
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: email list for Radical Statistics
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Bivand
> > Sent: 21 November 2007 13:47
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Incapacity Benefit
> >
> > The 2.7 million (2.6 million working age - just - with
> rounding down)
> > is IB claimants including those receiving Income Support on
> grounds of
>
> > Incapacity to work.
> >
> > The last Welfare Reform Act created the new Employment and Support
> > Allowance to cover both groups. IB recipients being
> confined to those
> > with the necessary National Insurance contributions - everyone else
> > gets Income Support on grounds of Incapacity (some with dependants
> > and/or mortgages receive both). It is the IS on grounds of
> incapacity
> > numbers that had been rising rather than the IB recipients.
> >
> > Try this link to data: Your email may split the (long) link.
> >
> http://83.244.183.180/100pc/ibsda/ccdate/beneficiary/ccclient/a_carate
> > _r _ccdate_c_beneficiary_p_ccclient_working_age.html
> >
> > Sourced from http://www.dwp.gov.uk/asd/tabtool.asp
> >
> > The million to come off benefit is definitely the stock claimants
> > rather than beneficiaries (and a proportion of that is
> demographic -
> > but the demographic proportion is limited by the fact that many
> > disabling conditions are age-related). There are 811,000 IB
> claimants
> > aged over 55 and a further 390,000 aged 50-54. I guess they
> looked at
> > those figures, thought they were all 'victims of
> Thatcherism' who were
>
> > going to reach retirement age and at first thought saw a
> reduction of
> > 1 million as almost in the bag. When they realised the
> extent to which
>
> > conditions are age-related they realised the commitment
> they had made
> > was rather 'braver' than they had realised.
> >
> > Paul Bivand
> > ---------------------------------------------------------
> > Paul Bivand
> > Head of Analysis and Statistics
> > Direct Line: 020 7840 8335
> >
> > Inclusion
> > 3rd floor, 89 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7TP
> > Tel: 020 7582 7221
> > Fax: 020 7582 6391
> > Inclusion website: www.cesi.org.uk
> >
> > The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are
> intended solely
> > for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient
> > please return the e-mail to the sender and delete from your mailbox.
> > The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are
> intended solely
> > for the use of the addressee.
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: email list for Radical Statistics
> >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Spicker
> >> Sent: 21 November 2007 13:26
> >> To: [log in to unmask]
> >> Subject: Incapacity Benefit
> >>
> >> The recent press releases give the numbers of claimants of
> Incapacity
>
> >> Benefits at 2.7 million. This is not consistent with the last
> >> figures
> >
> >> I had, so I've checked back; it seems that the numbers of
> >> beneficiaries (as opposed to claimants) are nowhere near
> 2.7 million,
>
> >> but have fallen to over 2.1 million - a figure that has
> already been
> >> revised backwards to include Severe Disablement Allowance
> claimants,
> >> because SDA was merged with IB in 2001. The government is
> now using
> >> the figure for claimants, which is also the headline figure in the
> >> DWP
> >
> >> ASD tables. The welfare reform green paper, last year,
> also uses the
>
> >> higher figure, though it says that over two and a half
> million people
>
> >> are "on" the benefit, which to me sounds like they're in receipt -
> >> and
> >
> >> they're promising to reduce the figure by a million.
> >>
> >> What is going on?
> >>
> >> Paul Spicker
>
> ******************************************************
> Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message
> will go only to the sender of this message.
> If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
> 'Reply-to-All'
> button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask]
> Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of
> the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the
> range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics
> Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims
> and activities and read current and past issues of our
> newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
> *******************************************************
>
> ******************************************************
> Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message
> will go only to the sender of this message.
> If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
> 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to
> [log in to unmask]
> Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of
> the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the
> range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics
> Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims
> and activities and read current and past issues of our
> newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
> *******************************************************
>
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|
