Rate Support Grant (Hansard, 22 January 1986)

§ 4. Mr. Pike
asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received following the recent announcement on rate support grant settlements.

§ The Minister for Environment, Countryside and Local Government (Mr. William Waldegrave)
I think it is fair to say that my right hon. Friend and I have both received numerous representations.

§ Mr. Pike
The Secretary of State will have received representations regarding section 137, which many local authorities principally use to attract industry, to keep jobs in their areas and to assist voluntary organisations. Because of the way that the RSG is being changed, many councils will have insufficient money to maintain those important services. Will the Minister give me an assurance that until the Widdicombe committee has reported on these aspects he will guarantee that councils can maintain those important programmes?

§ Mr. Waldegrave
The hon. Gentleman refers to a real problem, which my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Mrs. Rumbold) has met the Association of Metropolitan authorities to discuss. I cannot yet give the assurances that the hon. Gentleman seeks. We are still gathering facts about the matter, but I recognise the problem.

§ Mr. Adley
Is my hon. Friend aware that supporting the Government on this issue is hazardous in the extreme? After nearly 16 years as a Member of this House I find myself in the extraordinary position of being criticised by the Christchurch and East Dorset Conservative Association for voting in favour of the rating proposals which were passed on Monday. Will he make it quite clear that, the Government having made their proposals known in Dorset, it is up to the Dorset county council to decide whether to introduce a large, medium or small rate increase this year?

§ Mr. Waldegrave
My hon. Friend is right. The most crucial decision is the spending level of the council, and that is up to the local authority. I confirm what he said.

§ Mr. Meadowcroft
Will the Minister confirm that he has had representations from Leeds city council pointing out that not only will the net amount that it will receive go down on comparable terms this year, but that in comparison with the other metropolitan districts it has been treated particularly badly? Will he explain to the council when it comes to see him and his colleagues on 3 February why it has lost so much money compared with other local authorities?

§ Mr. Waldegrave
I am not sure that the situation in Leeds is quite as bad as the hon. Gentleman sets out, but I have no doubt that when the council meets my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, or any other Minister, it will have the matter properly explained to it.

§ Mr. Powley
I draw the attention of my hon. Friend to a statement made in my constituency on Friday last by the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley), who said publicly that were a Labour Government to be brought back into office after the next general election they would immediately pay back to the shire counties the sum of £13 billion, which the Labour party allegs has been shifted from them by the Government? Is that not a most irresponsible statement? Is it not made even more irresponsible in the light of the fact that under the regression analysis basis the Labour Government shifted vast resources from the shire counties to the inner cities?

§ Mr. Waldegrave
My hon. Friend's question confirms what I have long suspected to be the truth—that the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley) is anxious not to find himself part of a future Labour Government who would be an embarrassment to him. Therefore, he is making a number of irresponsible comments to ensure that there is no danger of that.

§ Mr. Allan Roberts
Has the Minister received representations from the leader of Sefton council, a Conservative council which is a paragon of underspending virtue? The leader of the council, Mr. Ron Watson, supported rate capping on the basis that when the over-spending councils were dealt with there would be more money available for low-spending councils, such as Sefton. He is wondering where that money is. The rate support grant settlement will mean a 20 per cent. rate increase in an authority which has already cut services to the bone.

§ Mr. Waldegrave
I am sure the hon. Gentleman welcomes the fact that inner city authorities have gained from the settlement. There are still problems for all authorities, because we are still seeking economies, even from reasonably low spenders. However, this year's settlement has brought more help than the previous system, even to authorities such as Sefton.

§ Mr. Straw
rose—

§ Mr. Speaker
Mr. Colvin.

§ Dr. Cunningham
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order.

§ Dr. Cunningham
On the previous question to the Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) and I expressed a wish to be called.

§ Mr. Speaker
It was my fault. I did not see the signals. I apologise.

§ Mr. Straw
I refer to the stunt performed by the Secretary of State on Monday, when he published the grant recycling 1986–87 paper in which he tried unsuccessfully to persuade his hon. Friends about the amounts that would be received under grant recycling. Will the Minister answer the question that he dodged on Monday? What assumption about increases in local authority spending were included in that document? Was it 9 per cent.? If not, what was the percentage?

§ Mr. Waldegrave
I dodged no question and no answer. There was an assumption as to what would be the effect of a pool of £400 million.