Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Jobcentre Claimants: Travel Costs

Monday 7 October 2024 · 3 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 3 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Guidance published on gov.uk instructs private contractors to reimburse claimants' reasonable travel costs.
  • Performance of private contractors is reviewed regularly, including through customer satisfaction surveys.
  • The Minister emphasized the importance of claimants not incurring financial loss due to travel costs for Jobcentre Plus sessions.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Josh Newbury Lab Cannock Chase
Employment Benefits & Welfare
Context

The question arises from constituent concerns about travel cost reimbursements for Jobcentre Plus sessions.

Question

What guidance her Department has issued to private contractors working in partnership with Jobcentre Plus on reimbursing claimants' travel costs. Provider guidance, which is published on gov.uk, makes clear that contractors on all our employment programmes must reimburse customers' reasonable travel costs. My constituent Connor is out of pocket for taxi fares to weekly or even twice weekly sessions with a Jobcentre Plus private contractor. The sessions last barely 15 minutes and are not helping him reach his goal of becoming an engineering apprentice. Will the Minister review the value of Jobcentre Plus private contracts to both jobseekers and taxpayers?

Answer from Stephen Timms

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Performance is reviewed regularly and there are customer satisfaction surveys, but unlike the previous Government, this Government want to publish performance data so that everybody can see what is going on.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific review or commitment regarding the value of Jobcentre Plus private contracts was not provided.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Josh Newbury Lab Cannock Chase
Employment Benefits & Welfare
Context

The question stems from constituent issues with travel costs and the effectiveness of Jobcentre Plus sessions.

Question

My constituent Connor is in a predicament: he is out of pocket for taxi fares to weekly or even twice weekly sessions with a Jobcentre Plus private contractor. The sessions last barely 15 minutes and are not helping him reach his goal of becoming an engineering apprentice. Will the Minister review the value of Jobcentre Plus private contracts to both jobseekers and taxpayers?

Answer from Stephen Timms

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Performance is reviewed regularly and there are customer satisfaction surveys, but unlike the previous Government, this Government want to publish performance data so that everybody can see what is going on.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific review or commitment regarding the value of Jobcentre Plus private contracts was not provided.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q3 Jim Shannon DUP Strangford
Employment Northern Ireland Benefits & Welfare
Context

The question is prompted by concerns about claimants facing financial difficulties due to unreimbursed travel costs.

Question

I thank the Minister very much for his response. I think everyone wishes for claimants to be able to get job opportunities without finding themselves in a financial mess due to having to pay out for travel costs when they should be reimbursed. This is a big issue in my constituency in Northern Ireland. Will the Minister help directly those constituents who have been accordingly disadvantaged?

Answer from Stephen Timms

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I am not familiar with the arrangements in Northern Ireland, but certainly in the rest of the UK it is very clear that contractors ideally need to pay up-front, buy tickets and give them to the jobseeker before they embark on their journey, or, if not, reimburse them very quickly on production of a receipt.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Direct help for disadvantaged constituents was not specifically addressed.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)