§ 15. Mr. Tony Banksasked the Secretary of State for the Environment what matters were discussed at the meeting with the chairman of the London Residuary Body on 19 May 1986.
§ Mrs. RumboldMatters relevant to the residuary body's functions under the Local Government Act 1985 were discussed.
§ Mr. BanksDoes the Minister recall the answer that she gave to me on 11 July regarding the timing of distribution of balances from the London Residuary Body to the London boroughs? She said:
The timing … is a matter for the"—[HON. MEMBERS: "Reading."] At least I can read. It appears that an awful lot of liquid lunches have been consumed by Conservative Members. The Minister said:The timing of the distribution is a matter for the LRB." —[Official Report, 11 July 1986; Vol. 101, c. 310.]However, it is equally clear from the meeting that the Secretary of State had with the chairman of the London Residuary Body on 19 May—which was duly recorded —that the Government have been directing the London Residuary Body about the timing of the distribution of 339 those balances. That is not unconnected with the local council elections on 8 May. Would the Minister now care to recorrect her position and stop misleading the House?
§ Mrs. RumboldThe chairman of the London Residuary Body came to see the former Secretary of State on 19 May about an announcement that he was to make on the balances, which he subsequently made on 20 May following his discussions with the then Secretary of State. In relation to the further balances, following the Law Lords' decision striking down the GLC's last-minute forward funding package, as the hon. Gentleman knows, the LRB has the power to distribute balances to the boroughs and to decide the timing as and when it pleases.
§ Sir John Biggs-DavisonIs my hon. Friend aware that, despite our local representations, the residuary body has placed Hainault Forest under the control of three different authorities? Is she further aware that this is bad management and is making it more difficult to deal with the problem of the gipsy intrusion? Will my hon. Friend consider this problem?
§ Mrs. RumboldAs my hon. Friend is aware, this is a matter for the London Residuary Body. I shall, however, consider the matter.
§ Mr. StrawWhen the chairman of the London Residuary Body next meets the Secretary of State and asks why he and the House were tricked by the Secretary of State yesterday about the total of the rate support grant 340 settlement, what answer will he receive? Specifically, what answer will he receive when he asks why the Secretary of State yesterday deliberately withheld from the House information that the level of grant-related expenditure assessments will be £1,260 million below the level of current expenditure? It means that £1 billion is being given to local authorities, yet £1,260 million will be taken away from them.
§ Mrs. RumboldThat was an unworthy question and the hon. Gentleman is totally incorrect.