4. Mr. O'NeillTo ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he intends to meet Clackmannanshire council to discuss local government finance. [38707]
§ Mr. KynochNeither the hon. Gentleman nor Clackmannanshire council has requested such a meeting.
Mr. O'NeillSince the question was tabled, there has been some movement by the Government, which the local authority welcomes, in respect of the funding of the A907 improvements. However, two other aspects of local government financial problems require attention. One is the partnership priority area bid and the competition for additional funds, for which Clackmannan is in contention. Will the Minister tell us when the bidding process will be completed and when an announcement is likely to be made?
The second aspect relating to the road system in Clackmannanshire is the likely construction of a westward element to the Kincardine bridge. When will an announcement be made about that? It is important for the industrial development of an area in which, even allowing for the slight improvement in unemployment figures today, 18 per cent. of males capable of working and ready to work cannot get jobs. Will the Minister act as a matter of urgency to resolve these matters so that the anxieties of people in Clackmannanshire can be allayed?
§ Mr. KynochI am glad that the hon. Gentleman recognises that the Government have moved to help Clackmannanshire council. I thought that he might ask for a meeting with me, in which case I would have suggested that he bring the newly elected Conservative councillor, Alastair Campbell, who on 10 October increased the Conservative majority in a by-election in Clackmannan. I congratulate Mr. Campbell and wish him well in bringing common sense to Clackmannan council.
With regard to the specific issues that the hon. Gentleman raised, I am assured by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State, who is responsible for transport matters in Scotland, that announcements will be made shortly.
§ Dr. SpinkCan my hon. Friend confirm that grant support in Scotland is 44 per cent. higher than in England, and how can I justify that to my constituents?
§ Madam SpeakerOrder. We are dealing with a particular council. The hon. Gentleman is aware— 808 [Interruption.] Order. I will deal with this. The hon. Gentleman will relate his question to Clackmannanshire, or he will not be called. Which is it to be?
§ Dr. SpinkI have visited Clackmannanshire four times in the past two years, but I doubt whether the hon. Member for Clackmannan (Mr. O'Neill) has ever visited my constituency.
Will my hon. Friend the Minister comment on the profligacy of Liberal and Labour-controlled councils such as that of Clackmannanshire?
§ Mr. KynochMy hon. Friend is right that Labour-controlled local authorities and some Liberal Democrat and Scottish National party local authorities have complained that they must make cuts in expenditure this year—at a time when, as my hon. Friend rightly stated, they are being funded by central Government with taxpayers' money at 44 per cent. more per head than those south of the border. Clackmannanshire has a budget this year which enables it to increase last year's budget by almost 6 per cent.; yet like many other Labour councils, it is talking of cuts. That is because of their inheritance from outgoing councils which did not adhere to budgets. That is typical of the financial management of the Opposition parties. We believe in setting budgets and keeping to them.
§ Mr. ChisholmWhen will the Minister face up to the crisis in local government finance in Clackmannanshire and elsewhere, which arises from the Government's squeeze on spending and from their serious underestimate of the costs of local government reorganisation? Why is his response a planned 1.4 per cent. cut in grant levels for next year, which would mean massive council tax increases in Clackmannanshire and elsewhere simply to keep cash budgets at their present unsatisfactory level? If tomorrow's joint report by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on the costs of local government reorganisation confirms what Labour has been saying, will the Minister undertake to increase grant levels so that local council tax payers do not have to pay the price for this Government's miscalculations and incompetence?
§ Mr. KynochIf the hon. Gentleman knew how government worked, he would know that it is far too early to talk of next year's settlement. Equally, I suspect that it is too early realistically to look at the cost of reorganisation to local authorities. Indeed, as I travelled around the country during the summer and visited many local authorities, I was appalled to find that most of them were unable even at that stage of the year to present management accounts to enable councillors to determine how they were performing against budget. That indicates to me that it is difficult for councils to make the sort of statements that the hon. Gentleman is making, which are simply scaremongering.
The amounts involved are in any case nothing in relation to the cost to the taxpayer that would result if the hon. Gentleman's party got the £395 million extra expenditure that it asked for last year. The hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion) at least had the decency to try to find a source for that money in that he indicated that it could come from the health service.
809 The hon. Member for Edinburgh, Leith (Mr. Chisholm) should talk to councils and find out some facts rather than just feelings before he makes such reckless statements.
§ Mr. John MarshallDoes my hon. Friend agree that compulsory competitive tendering has been of great benefit to local authorities in Clackmannanshire and elsewhere? Does he agree that in opposing CCT the Opposition have shown that they are much more interested in jobs for the boys than in value for money for the taxpayer or quality of service for council service users?
§ Mr. KynochMy hon. Friend is absolutely right. I find it unbelievable that elected councillors, who are elected to look after taxpayers' money and to try to provide services in the most cost-effective way, are so reluctant to put tenders out to competition not only to themselves but to the private sector. I should have thought that if by doing so they could gain savings for taxpayers in their area, they would have welcomed that. My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that they do not recognise that competition brings improvement and better value for the taxpayer, although that is what they were elected to achieve.