§ 23. Sir Richard Pilkingtonasked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what representations he has had from the Association of Municipal Corporations about the impact of the rising rate demand on people with fixed incomes; and what reply he has sent.
§ Sir K. JosephThe answer to the first part of the Question is "None", Sir. The second part does not therefore arise.
§ Sir Richard PilkingtonIs my right hon. Friend aware that, however it is done, the Government must take some action to help those people who are worst affected by the rate increases? Many examples have been sent to him by myself and my hon. Friends. Will he take some action in the matter?
§ Sir K. JosephI am obviously most sympathetic to my hon. Friend's approach to the problem, but he will recognise that the taxpayer is already bearing more than half the cost of these local authority services. Thanks to the Government's action, industry and commerce have now lost the concessions they had, with the result that the domestic.ratepayer is bearing only—I say "only" cautiously—24 per cent. of the total cost of these expanded services.
§ Mr. WadeIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that on 30th November, 1960, in the Second Reading debate on the Rating and Valuation Bill, his predecessor said:
If nothing were done the share falling on the householders would be greater—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Verbatim quotation from speeches is out of order at Question Time.
§ Mr. WadeIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that his predecessor indicated that it was important not to subject householders to too severe a jolt? Surely that is precisely what is happening in a number of cases. Is there not now an obligation on the Minister to grant some form of relief in those cases?
§ Sir K. JosephI was waiting for other hon. Members' supplementary questions. It is true that in some areas, especially where there is a lack of industry, revaluation has shifted some of the burden of rates on to householders, but it is to a far lesser extent than was anticipated when the pledge was given by the Government when the revaluation legislation went through. I am considering the case of areas particularly concerned, and shall be writing to them shortly. But I must repeat that the Government had in mind an increase in the share of rates, due only to revaluation, of about 30 630 per cent. before using their derating powers.
§ Mr. EdenDoes not my right hon. Friend agree that Bournemouth is an example of the area to which he has just been referring? On the question of representation, can he assure the House that he has had full representation from Bournemouth, drawing to his attention the likely effect upon elderly people, in fixed income groups in particular, of the increased rate call?
§ Sir K. JosephAny decision to which I come on the problems of Bournemouth will be based on the most vigorous representations by both my hon. Friends who represent constituencies there, and by the most articulate explanation of the results, both of revaluation and the rate call, by local authority representatives.
§ Mr. DugdaleCan the right hon. Gentleman tell the House whether the hon. and gallant Member for Poole (Sir R. Pilkington), the hon. Member for Bournemouth, West (Mr. Eden) and the hon. and learned Member for Hove (Mr. Marlowe) did or did not vote for the Government's revaluation Bill?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. There is no obligation upon a Minister to give information of that kind.
§ Mr. ManuelOn a point of order. We should be jealous of our duties in this House. With due respect to you, Mr. Speaker, am I to understand that you are ruling that the Minister may not answer?—[Interruption.] He was rising to do so.
§ Mr. SpeakerI rule that the question is out of order, because questions are permitted only if they are within the realm of the Minister's responsibility. The Minister does not have a duty to report the contents of Division lists in the House.
§ Mr. ManuelWill you control the House, Mr. Speaker? Will you ensure that there are not about a dozen "Mr. Speakers" trying to carry out your duties from the benches opposite?
§ Mr. SpeakerI hope that I may have the assistance of the House in general in getting on with Questions.
§ 26. Mr. D. Smithasked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he will recommend the appointment of a Royal Commission or institute an independent inquiry into the rating system with the object of devising a more equitable distribution of the rate burden throughout the community and of finding additional or alternative means of raising local revenue.
§ 28. Mr. Awberyasked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he is aware that the new valuation for rating places a burden upon those who are least able to bear it; and if he will institute an inquiry into the most equitable method of raising money by local authorities to pay for the social services and amenities which they provide.
§ Sir K. JosephI am not at the moment convinced that the appointment of an inquiry would do anything more than raise hopes unduly of finding some substantial new source of revenue—unavailable to the Chancellor.
§ Mr. SmithIs my right hon. Friend aware that the stage has now been reached at which expanding local services, which are very welcome to all members of the community and are shared by them all, can no longer be paid for by any one section of the community? Will he also bear in mind that of the 25 million wage earners, about 9 million are paying nothing whatever, or very little, towards the rating system? In view of the grave anxiety expressed by so many ratepayers, which has been echoed here this afternoon, will my right hon. Friend reconsider his decision and once again confer with his Cabinet colleagues?
§ Sir K. JosephI think that my hon. Friend was forgetting for the moment that this expanding burden, as he rightly calls it, is being shared between the taxpayer and the ratepayer and, among ratepayers, between the domestic ratepayer and industry and commerce. The Government have to bear in mind all these interests, ratepayers and taxpayers, as well as industry and commerce, and they have to bear in mind the vitality and economic prudence of local authorities.
§ Mr. AwberyIs the right hon. Gentleman aware, from the number of questions which have been put to him from both sides of the House, how disturbed hon. Members are about the increases in rates? He states that they have not been brought about by the new system of valuation. What we are complaining about is that the new system of valuation is unjust in its effect upon those people who are unable to pay. We are asking for an inquiry into the valuation system so that a more equitable system can be devised by the Government.
§ Sir K. JosephI cannot accept that the revaluation is unjust. My hon. Friends voted for it in the round because not only did it put valuation for all on the same basis, but it withdrew concessions which otherwise would have been enjoyed to this day by industry and commerce.
§ Mr. HockingWill not my right hon. Friend agree that insufficient consideration has been given to alternative sources of revenue for local authorities and to alternative means of payment? Will he give further consideration to those two points?
§ Sir K. JosephI do not think that alternative sources of revenue offer very much relief to the taxpayer because, as far as I know, all the substantial ones are already available to the Chancellor for his own use. As to alternative means of payment, I am shortly to get in touch with local authorities about increasing the means of paying by instalments.
§ Mr. Denis HowellIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that ratepayers are also taxpayers and that what concerns a great many people is the inequity of the system inasmuch as an old person in one house pays the same rates as six families in a house next door? Is not this flagrantly wrong? Will the right hon. Gentleman look at the question of a local income tax as a sensible way of dealing with the problem?
§ Sir K. JosephThe hon. Member must realise that if one lady is living in one house of the same size as that occupied by six families and is paying the same rates, she must be under-occupying to a formidable extent.
§ Mr. M. StewartWill the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that so long as extremely high interest rates and land profiteering continue, there will continue to be a burden of rates on local authorites?
§ Sir K. JosephNo. This is an absolute red herring. Hon. Members opposite should recognise that under a Tory Government the vast and simultaneous programme of development on all fronts is so large that we need all the capital we can find. That means paying a proper price for the money that is lent.
§ 27. Mr. Harold Daviesasked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he will now consider alternative methods of local government financing in view of the difficulties currently being experienced by local authorities in operating the present rating system, since the burden falling upon ordinary householders takes no account of their capacity to pay.
§ Sir K. JosephI have no reason to think that local authorities generally find themselves in difficulties in operating the rating system, though it is true that unavoidable increases in their expenditure face them with the disagreeable necessity of increasing the rate call.
As for the burden on householders, the rate bill of the average householder during the present year comes out at rather less than 10s. a week, for which he receives a wide range of services.
§ Mr. DaviesWhatever the statistics may say, the reality is that millions of people are unable to meet the rate bill. The operative phrase in this Question is, will the right hon. Gentleman "now consider alternative methods". Does he not already possess powers under the 1958 Act by means of which, if he wanted, be could make an increase in the block grant for this transitional period? In view of the present crisis in the country, something should he done. Will not he apply an increased block grant and at least consider alternative methods?
§ Sir K. JosephThe hon. Member has committed a wild mis-statement and exaggeration. The average rate burden of the average household is less in real terms than it was before the war owing to the 634 greatly increased contribution of the taxpayer to the rapidly expanding local authority services. The block grant was increased substantially last year to cover this year and next year, and the taxpayer is paying his full share for local authority services.