§ 2. Mr. HoyleTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received from the local authority associations on the 1997 revenue support grant settlement. [7852]
§ Mr. HoyleDoes the Minister agree that his Government give with one hand and take with the other? For the penny reduction in income tax, the public will have to pay at least 2p in council tax. Does the Minister realise that, if the Government were a company, they would be prosecuted for fraud?
§ Mr. CurryThe hon. Gentleman is clearly subject to some arithmetical confusion. The Government have reduced income tax. Council taxes will rise somewhat because we have always felt that it is sensible to return some financial autonomy to local government. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] Just wait. That is what local authorities keep telling me that they want. It is interesting that, when the hon. Member for Holborn and St. Pancras (Mr. Dobson), who leads for the Opposition, addressed local government associations last week, he said that a Labour Government would spend much more on direct grants to local authorities to enable them to deliver what 739 the Government wanted. I want to give local government more autonomy and he wants to give it less. If he does not trust his councils, why should anybody else?
§ Mr. AtkinsWill my right hon. Friend be sure not to listen to any representations from Lancashire county council, especially if they contradict the representations that he has had from Lancashire Conservative Members? He listened to our representations and deferred the area cost adjustment, which was being pressed by the Labour party and would have cost Lancashire some £20 million. Does he recognise that he will receive the thanks of Lancashire Conservatives and of Lancashire folk as a whole for listening to what we said to him?
§ Mr. CurryMy right hon. Friend is right to say that he and other Conservative Members made representations on the area cost adjustment. It is true that I felt that there were problems that had to be resolved before we could address whether that mechanism could be adapted to the standard spending assessment. We have asked local authorities to suggest what work needs to be done to take the matter forward. If Lancashire wants to make representations to me, I must, of course, be willing to listen. However, as he would expect, I always listen to local government representations, with a long list of questions to which I want answers in return.
§ Mr. RendelIs the Minister aware of the letter writing campaign of Cabinet Ministers, and no doubt other Conservative Members to head teachers and chairs of governors peddling the myth that the Government are providing more money for education this year? Is he further aware that the recipients of the letters treat them with scorn and ridicule because they know that the blame for education cuts lies with the Government, not local education authorities?
§ Mr. CurryIt is normal for hon. Members to want to be in regular contact with their teachers and local education authorities; I am, in my constituency. No doubt hon. Members will want to make it clear that local authorities, except those caught by the rule on absolute excess, can increase spending on the passported services, of which education is the most important, over and above what they spend now by the full amount of the standard spending assessment increase, without penalty or cash cuts in the other services. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will convey that message to his head teachers.
§ Mr. CongdonDoes my right hon. Friend agree that the local government settlement was far better than many local authorities had expected? Would not their complaints about funding gain more credence if authorities embraced compulsory competitive tendering by encouraging the private sector to bid rather than awarding contracts in-house, and paid more attention to collecting taxes and rents?
§ Mr. CurryMy hon. Friend is right to say that local authorities have a prime duty to perform the basic management functions of local government efficiently. The filling of voids in council houses and the collection of rents and council tax, which is proving to be a good tax and one that is easy to collect, are the prerequisites of good local government. He asked whether local 740 authorities thought that the increase was reasonable. I sometimes get the impression that, if the Archangel Gabriel were to fly across the country distributing £10 notes, local authorities would still find a way of saying that the settlement was inadequate.
§ Mr. DobsonWill the Minister confirm that, early next year, he will expect Conservative Members to vote for a local government grant settlement that will mean that the citizens of Westminster will contribute only 4 per cent. towards the cost of their council services, while council tax payers in the average Conservative constituency will contribute 25 per cent., and that some Conservative Members will be voting for a settlement that will require their council tax payers to contribute more than 40 per cent. of the cost of their local services—10 times what will be asked of people in Westminster?
§ Mr. CurryI know that the hon. Gentleman has had a bad week, what with his little local difficulty in Camden and the Sunday newspapers saying that he was about to be demoted, so I understand why he has not asked an especially good question.
Because Westminster sets a level of expenditure well below its standard spending assessment, it depends a lot less on what has to be raised from local taxpayers than other councils, which set a level well above SSA. If everyone ran as prudent a council as Westminster, less tax would be imposed on people. It is about time that people realised that the hon. Gentleman's only interest is in waging a prolonged war against Westminster. The citizens of Westminster will note that, in the event of a Labour Government, they will be the first to cop it, with the rest of the country shortly behind.