Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (Hansard, 26 October 1994)

§ 2. Mr. Graham
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next plans to meet representatives of COSLA to discuss local services.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Allan Stewart)
My right hon. Friend and I will meet representatives of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on 11 November as part of the normal consultation on local government finance matters.

§ Mr. Graham
In his discussions with local authorities, will the Secretary of State raise a question that is causing incredible problems for my constituency and others in Scotland—the demand for the release of green-belt land for building? Many people are spending a fortune trying to stop the onslaught on the green belt. It is costing local authorities and local folk a fortune to pay QCs to fight their case. Surely this nonsense must be stopped and people allowed the peace of mind of knowing that the green belt is no longer under threat.

§ Mr. Stewart
I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his new slimline image. I do not believe that there is a significant difference of approach between what he has said and the position that my right hon. Friend and I take. We are vigorous defenders of the green belt.

§ Mr. John Marshall
When my hon. Friend meets representatives of COSLA, will he raise the question of corruption in local government? Did he see the headline in yesterday's Daily Record—scarcely a Conservative party publication—suggesting that there is to be a second inquiry into Monklands?

§ Mr. Stewart
Of course, I always read the Daily Record. I understand that the police are conducting two inquiries: one into allegations about taxi licences, and the other into more general allegations of corruption. I further understand that it is now in the public domain that a third inquiry is being conducted into allegations of expenses fraud in the Monklands area, but that does not involve elected councillors of Monklands district council.

§ Mr. Welsh
Will the Minister admit that the private financing of public water services will add between 50 to 100 per cent. to borrowing costs, which the consumer will have to meet in higher bills? Why is he replacing a low-cost, high-quality local government service with a high-cost quango system, which no one in Scotland wants?

§ Mr. Stewart
The hon. Gentleman is simply wrong. I am aware of the allegations to which he refers, which understate the cost of finance in the public sector, 875 overstate the cost of finance in the private sector and ignore the financial benefits of being protected from financial risk.

§ Mr. Canavan
Does the Minister agree that one of the most important local services is residential accommodation for frail, elderly people, whether it be in local authority homes or hospitals such as Lochgreen in my constituency, which is threatened with closure and where, even now, the management are stopping new admissions? Will the hon. Gentleman intervene to instruct the management of Lochgreen that they must not pre-empt the Secretary of State's decision on the matter? Will he ensure that adequate resources are given to the trust to ensure that Lochgreen remains open and is able to make the improvements necessary to modernise its facilities, so that its excellent staff can carry on their work for patients?

§ Mr. Stewart
I certainly can give the hon. Gentleman the assurance that I will look into the specific constituency matter that he raises. I emphasise the Government's commitment to care in the community through the transfer of £106 million from the Department of Social Security, with an extra £55 million in 1994–95. An extra £15 million will be available under the bridging finance scheme, and for long-stay hospital patients, to whom he referred, there is an extra resource transfer of £10 million in 1993–94. The Government's general commitment to care in the community is without question.

§ Mr. George Robertson
Anyone who has studied the figures produced by Strathclyde regional council on the future of water services, and its view that, under the Government's preferred financing objective, water bills will rise by twice as much as they would have under local councils, will believe Strathclyde regional council, not the Government. Is the Minister willing to give a guarantee that, after quangoisation, water bills in Scotland will not explode to English levels? Why are the Government still hell-bent on going ahead with their plans, which face almost universal hostility in Scotland and which would take water out of locally elected control and place it, like so much else, in the hands of unelected appointed Government cronies?

§ Mr. Stewart
For the very simple reason that it will result in a much more cost-effective system. I have made it clear why I believe the Strathclyde figures to be misplaced. On the more general question, it is perfectly clear that Strathclyde regional council has more than adequate finance. I understand that it is taking out a full-page advertisement in tomorrow's edition of The Daily Telegraph. I think that that shows that Strathclyde regional council has money to burn.