HL Deb 07 April 1982 vol 429 cc252-4

1.13 p.m.

Lord Lyell rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 23rd February be approved.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move that the draft British Railways Board (Rateable Values) (Scotland) Amendment Order 1982 be approved. First, I would apologise to your Lordships for the fact that we have found it necessary to produce a small correction slip, rectifying one minor misprint. I hope that with your Lordships' usual indulgence we may take the correction slip and append it to the order.

Although at first sight the order might appear somewhat technical and complex, it is in fact fairly straightforward, and I shall attempt to explain it briefly to your Lordships. The order has a very simple purpose. It is required solely to tidy up a few fairly minor, but nevertheless important, consequential matters following the transfer of the operation of the National Freight Corporation to its successor, the National Freight Company, in 1980.

I hope that your Lordships will bear with me if I begin by dwelling briefly on the history of the subject. The National Freight Corporation was set up by the Transport Act 1968, to take over what was previously known as British Rail's Rail Sundries Division. That division served railway stations by collecting and delivering goods by road. Since it was envisaged that the corporation would continue to make use of British Railways Board premises, the 1968 Act provided, in effect, that for rating purposes the corporation would be deemed to continue to be part of British Railways Board where the premises that it occupied were being used for the carriage of goods by rail. Since then the payments which the board made in lieu of rates and, more recently, as rates payments have been assessed to include what would strictly be the corporation's liability, and the corporation was required to make con tributions to the boards' rates payments. Special provision was made for the valuation of premises used partly for rail-linked and partly for road-linked activities, while premises used wholly for road-related traffic were valued in the normal way. Although the rating systems are quite separate, similar arrangements apply in both Scotland and in England and Wales.

The Transport Act 1980 provided for the transfer of the undertaking of the corporation to a limited company, with a view to its eventual privatisation. The undertaking is now carried on by the National Freight Company Limited. To cover that change in structure the 1980 Act also provided that the obligation on the corporation to pay a contribution to the British Railways Board's rate payments would cease to apply on the appointed day, which was determined as 1st October 1980. Since then the successor company has been, and will continue to be, assessed for rates on all its premises in the conventional manner.

That change has of course implications for the British Railways Board. If no amending order were made, it would have to meet, without recompense, future rate bills which would still include an element in respect of the previous rail-linked activities of the National Freight Corporation, even though the corporation's premises are now being rated separately. We considered that that would be inequitable, and so we propose that an adjustment should be made to the British Railways Board (Rateable Values) (Scotland) Order 1978, which determines the board's rateable values. We propose to make the change so that reduction could be made to the board's cumulo rateable value for 1980–81 and subsequent years. A similar order to that which we are now debating has already reduced the standard amount determining the contribution payable in lieu of rates by the board in England and Wales.

Our proposals which, your Lordships will be pleased to note, have been accepted by both the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the British Railways Boards, are as follows. First, there should be a 5.3 per cent. reduction in the board's cumulo rateable value for 1982–83 and for any subsequent years that the present (1978) order remains in force. This percentage reduction was based on information supplied by the board and it corresponded with the percentage reduction already implemented in England and Wales. The second of our proposals is that, additionally, there should be a once-only reduction in the 1982–83 cumulo to compensate the board for the excess rates which it has been paying during the 18 months period beginning 1st October 1980, when contributions from the National Freight Corporation ceased following its privatisation. The reduction is calculated to produce the same repayment as would have followed a reduction of 5.3 per cent. in the cumulos for the 6-month period 1st October 1980 to 31st March 1981, and for the year 1981–82.

The order does not in any way alter the rating liability which the board itself would have borne had the National Freight Corporation not been privatised; nor does the order relieve the National Freight Company from rates, since all its properties are now assessed for rates in the conventional manner. The order also includes some supplementary provisions to remove references to the corporation—which, your Lordships will appreciate are now meaningless—appearing in the 1978 order.

I would apologise that it has been necessary to go through so complicated a background for such an essentially simple order, but I would commend the order to your Lordships.

Moved, That the draft order laid the House on 23rd February be approved.—(Lord Lyell.)

Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Lyell, for explaining this complicated order in detail to your Lordships. Again, this order has been one approved by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments, and there were no particular comments which the Joint Committee wished to draw to your Lordships' attention. The order is of course a result of the coming into effect of the demise of the National Freight Corporation, and is really consequential to that. We on this side of the House were not in favour of the demise of the National Freight Corporation, but we accept that this particular order is a consequence of that and, as much, we do not disagree with it.

On Question, Motion agreed to.