Local Government Finance Bill (Hansard, 21 January 1987)

§ Dr. Boyson
In conclusion, I recommend to my hon. Friends that we vote against this amendment and keep the clause as it is.

§ Mr. Meadowcroft
I beg to move amendment No. 77, in page 4, line 23, leave out '(b) or (c)'.
I hope that the amendment's import becomes clear. If the wording is not exactly correct it must be remembered that we do not have the great parliamentary draftsmen at our disposal. I am sure that wording could be corrected in another place if we convince the Committee, by our eloquence, to accept the principle.
986 The crucial point concerns the amounts which are available under central funding through grants to local government and which are constrained by the provisions in the clause that we seek to amend. The amendment seeks to take out the provision for the transport supplementary grant—to take out subsection (b) or (c) in section 54(2) of the 1980 Local Government, Planning and Land Act. That would give local government some £7 million of transport supplementary grant and national parks supplementary grant.
Since the advent of deregulation, the transport problems, especially in urban areas, have been more acute. This is of no surprise to many hon. Members. Local government has to subsidise transport to ensure a proper transport system is available but providing that service has become a serious problem because of lack of resources. I hope, therefore, that the Government will recognise the problem and recognise that this sum of money should go back into the amount for local government. We will then have some extra help, small though it may be, to deal with local government problems.

§ Dr. Boyson
The amendment would mean that relevant expenditure would be a figure net of transport supplementary grant and national parks supplementary grant unless my right hon. Friend makes specifications to avoid that. According to current practice, relevant expenditure is not a figure net of these supplementary grants. We wish that to continue. Therefore, the amendment serves no purpose and I recommend hon. Members to resist it in spite of the oratory of the hon. Member for Leeds, West (Mr. Meadowcroft) which I found slightly persuasive if I could have been persuaded.

§ Mr. Boyes
Clause 3 is intended to give the Minister effective power to rewrite the definitions when it suits him. New powers may be given to the Minister in subsections (4)(c), (5)(c), (7)(b) and (8). He may adjust the basis of calculation of debit and credit items of account; he may adjust up or down the basis of calculation of total expenditure for any local authority; he may specify the manner of calculation of total expenditure and the factors to be taken into account. For practical purposes, the Secretary of State will gain control of local authority expenditure calculations and definitions with the clear intention of using the power to restrict spending. There is no limitation in the Bill on the manner of calculation or factors which may be relevant. The power is not subject to parliamentary scrutiny and there is no requirement to consult affected parties, despite the fact that large amounts could be involved. It is normal practice in relation to grant matters to consult at least the local authority associations. Finally, I agree with the remarks of the hon. Member for Portsmouth, South (Mr. Hancock) and with the remarks that I made myself on other amendments which demonstrate that certain clauses are completely incomprehensible to the people who have to administer local government finance.

§ Dr. Boyson
I must not be tempted by the last point made by the hon. Gentleman. I was glad to hear that he 987 still agrees with himself and with what he said on earlier amendments, which shows consistency that all of us should follow. Certainly I try to be consistent.
The clause defines for the year 1987–88 and subsequent years the relevant expenditure and total expenditure of local authorities for the purposes of part VI of the 1980 Act. The clause is a key provision in providing a new statutory definition of relevant and total expenditure and follows the practice adopted since 1981. So once again we are trying to continue a practice that we believe should remain.
988 The clause provides a definition which refers to items of account debited or credited to the rate fund revenue account set up by clauses 1 and 2. Those items of account include as debit items transfers from the rate fund revenue account to special funds such as reserve funds, and as credit items transfers to the rate fund revenue account from special funds. In short, the clause is the key to setting up in statute the practical method of calculating relevant and total expenditure which we have been operating since 1981. The definitions in the Bill will validate them for the past, and also, we trust, for the future.