HC Deb 26 January 1983 vol 35 cc881-2
3. Mr. Chapman

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made in his review of the operation of provisions relating to the rating of empty industrial premises.

The Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Tom King)

Whilst I am continuing to keep this under close review, my hon. Friend is aware that local authorities already have full discretion either to reduce further or to waive rates on empty industrial premises. I hope that all authorities will take this into account in the light of the difficult problems faced by industry at the present time.

Mr. Chapman

As many local authorities have disregarded that advice, does my right hon. Friend not think it absurd that owners of factories and warehouses are having to remove the roofs of their premises to avoid a continuing and crippling rate burden? Will he promise to complete his review and have a word with our right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in good time before the Budget on 15 March?

Mr. King

I am well aware of the concern over these matters. My hon. Friend has drawn attention to it before in the House. I shall be talking to my right hon. Friends on this and other matters. I am prepared to give that undertaking.

Mr. Stephen Ross

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are many local authorities—not all Tory controlled—which would like to help in this respect? However, the legal advice that is being given to them is that they can opt for the three-month relief or knock off rates altogether. It appears that a local authority cannot opt for a six-month release or a nine-month release, which to some of us are periods that make sense. The effect on authorities is that they lose income by granting this relief. Will the right hon. Gentleman consider that aspect?

Mr. King

I might be able to help the hon. Gentleman. The gross period cannot be altered, but the percentage can of the rate that is charged. That will have exactly the same effect over a year. It is open to a local authority, at its discretion, to reduce the percentage rate that it chooses to charge. The Government thought it right, in the most recent local government legislation, to reduce the liability to 50 per cent. However, it is in a local authority's discretion to reduce it further or to waive rates altogether. I understand that 156 authorities waive rates altogether.

Mr. Hugh D. Brown

Was that not a non-reply? Will the right hon. Gentleman make clear whether he is prepared to offer guidance to local authorities on this subject? If he were to do so, would the guidance cover Scotland as well? What would be the estimated total loss of rate income at current prices?

Mr. King

It is not possible to make such an estimate, because we do not have the necessary figures. I made it clear in the main answer that I hope that all authorities will take into account the difficult problems that are being faced by industry. Whether this will apply to anyone in Scotland must depend, I suppose, on whether anybody in Scotland is listening.

Mr. Ward

When my right hon. Friend is considering the reform of domestic rates, will he bear in mind the crippling effect of industrial rates? Will he ensure that that is not made greater by transferring an extra burden from the domestic to the industrial sector?

Mr. King

My main answer made it clear that I am conscious of the impact of industrial rates. There has been some discussion in the House about the impact on industry. I note that the rating proposals of the Birmingham city council and the reduction in the rate will save British Leyland £676,000 on its rate bill in the coming year. I am sure that the House, recognising the problems faced by British Leyland, will welcome that. Equally, I hope that the House will condemn the likelihood that that reduction will be more than lost by the increase proposed by the Labour-controlled West Midlands county council.