Skip to main content

Written Parliamentary Question 26th June 2007

Work and Pensions: Incapacity Benefit: Disposable Income

Q:To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the median net disposable income of households receiving incapacity benefit was (a) before and (b) after housing costs were taken into account in the latest period for which figures are available.


A:Latest available data show that the median net (disposable) weekly income of households receiving incapacity benefit is £302 before housing costs and £260 after housing costs.

Notes

1. The source of the information provided is the Family Resources Survey (FRS), United Kingdom 2005-06. The Survey is a nationally representative sample of approximately 28,000 households.

2. Data for 2005-06 was collected between April 2005 and March 2006.

3. The estimates are based on sample counts that have been adjusted for non-response using multi-purpose grossing factors which align the FRS to Government Office Region populations by age and gender. Estimates are subject to sampling error and remaining non-response error.

4. Incapacity benefit receipt is under-reported on the FRS. However, there is no other reliable source for this information at a household level.

5. Figures for the median net weekly income are rounded to the nearest pound.

6. Net (disposable) weekly income includes income from all sources for all adults and children in the household, less income tax and national insurance contributions (for adults).

7. Housing costs include household rent for rented accommodation or mortgage interest for those buying their home with a mortgage, plus water and sewerage charges (including council tax water charge in Scotland), plus premiums paid on structural insurance, plus charges for owner occupiers (ground rent, service charges etc.)
Anne McGuire (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Work and Pensions)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…