HC Deb 08 July 1997 vol 297 cc806-11

'In section 55 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989, after subsection (3) there shall be inserted— (3A) Any criteria of housing need used in the allocation of supplementary credit approvals shall be the same in England as in Wales.".".—[Mr. Evans.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley)

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

With this, it will be convenient to discuss new clause 8—Total amount of supplementary credit approvals to he allocated between England and Wales according to relative share of funding for local government in those countries— 'The Secretary of State shall secure that the allocation of the total amount of supplementary credit approvals as between England and Wales accords with the formulae employed to determine the relative levels of funding of local authority revenue expenditure in England and Wales.'.

Mr. Evans

I have great pleasure in moving new clause 6. It has become quite apparent that, although Labour Members have wailed 18 years to be in government, they have forgotten what it is to be the Government of the country. One of the great challenges and opportunities for a Government is to answer the questions that are posed. I am afraid that they have signally failed to do that since they took office.

I shall give the Minister an opportunity to answer at least two questions on the allocation of supplementary credit approvals, which many people living in Wales will be asking themselves concerning the Bill—although, as we saw, the Government were asked many questions on the issue of devolution, and not only did we not get any answers, but we seemed to get more questions.

I understand that there is a timetable for procedure involving SCAs, but Wales is seemingly being left in the dark about how much money it will receive. My hon. Friend the Member for Christchurch (Mr. Chope) tabled a question on the issue. Even though I am going to ask the question again in this debate, I should say that the Treasury did not seem to know the answer earlier. We shall be listening for any further information from the Minister.

New clauses 6 and 8 will give the Minister the opportunity to tell the people of Wales specifically how much they will receive of the allocations of £200 million and £700 million. It will depend on what formula is used, how the money will be distributed and what criteria will be used. Will the Barnett formula he used to allocate the total budget?

We know that the Barnett formula was first used in 1978. It is an example of a non-statutory policy rule based on a mutual understanding between parties in a policy network, the implementation of which is subject to both sides observing the behavioural rules of the game. Thus, for example, if £1 billion is added to planned health service expenditure in England, £106.6 million would be added to the Scottish block and £60.2 million to the Welsh block.

The system offers three advantages to the territorial Departments. First, the operation of the formula protects to a large extent the existing situation, where spending per head is above the national average. Secondly, there is no need for the Departments to argue the case for equal treatment on each occasion that a relevant programme in England receives increased funding. Thirdly, the Secretary of State retains the freedom to allocate the block between programmes.

We might this evening be seeing the ending of the use of the Barnett formula. Perhaps it is an idea of the Government in order to distance themselves from Wales. Together with the devolution referendum, perhaps the Government are slowly but surely moving away from their commitment to Wales.

If the Barnett formula will not be used, what measures will be used? We already know that Wales is being downgraded by the Secretary of State for Wales and that he wants to see Wales marginalised in the United Kingdom, with his powers being transferred almost lock, stock and barrel to the turbo-charged county council, otherwise known as the Assembly, which will sit in Cardiff.

The Minister has the opportunity to tell the people of Wales, and she must do so, whether they will lose out under this deal. The great fear is that they will, and that Wales, which has suffered too long from Labour-controlled local authorities will lose out.

6 pm

Once the allocation is known—I hope that we will be told this evening—how will its distribution in Wales be defined? Will we be told that the definition of housing need in Wales is exactly the same as that used elsewhere? As a Member of Parliament for an English constituency, I regret that we have so few Welsh Members in their places on the Government Benches today. They speak long and loudly about their commitment to Wales, but it is a shame that so few of them have sufficient commitment to be present when we are debating something of great importance to Wales.

I represent an English constituency, but my family live in Swansea and I have spent 17 of my 23 long years in politics in Welsh politics. As far as I am concerned, the definition of need should be the same whether in Wales or England. Local authorities need to know the definition of need that will be used and whether it will be the same. If it is not to be the same, what definition will be used? If a different needs formula will be used, will the Minister tell us why that is so?

Mr. Win Griffiths

Has the hon. Gentleman read the Welsh consultation paper, because the answer is there?

Mr. Evans

Yes. I have read the Welsh consultation paper, but I did not get the answers to my questions. I hope that we will not be fobbed off merely by advice to the people of Wales to refer to the Welsh consultation paper. The Minister has an opportunity to give us a clear figure for how much money Wales will get and what formula will be used. I know the definitions that have been used in the consultation paper, but I want to know whether they will be exactly the same as the definitions that will be used in England.

The people of Wales will be put in double jeopardy by the Government, as they sway from a tried and tested formula that has served Wales well for many years. Different needs criteria could cause tremendous problems. The only thing that is certain is that the people of Wales face needless uncertainty. The Minister should understand that Wales is not second class and the Welsh people are not second-class citizens. Wales deserves the answers to these questions.

I started my speech by saying that answering questions is a responsibility of government. This Government have been quick to shirk that responsibility. They asked us for trust during the general election, but trust is a two-way street, and the journey starts here.

Ms Armstrong

It gives me great pleasure to answer the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans). I realise that, because there are now no Welsh Tory Members of Parliament in the Labour party, it has been difficult for Opposition Members to keep up with this debate and with what has already been said about allocations in Wales and the previous Government's practice in determining housing need in Wales. We have inherited the same formula that they used. The new clause would do down Wales and make its position much worse.

I welcome the hon. Member for Ribble Valley to the debate on the Bill, because we are always pleased to welcome new recruits. We announced last week after the Budget the amounts that the Chancellor had allocated to England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. We will use the Barnett formula—

Mr. Evans

Will the Minister give way?

Ms Armstrong

I am trying to answer the hon. Gentleman's questions.

We will therefore allocate £9.54 million this year to Wales and £33.38 million next year. That is the allocation according to the Barnett formula and we will undertake consultation in Wales on the precise distribution mechanism. As I have said, the definition of need was used consistently by the previous Government in their allocation year on year to the housing programme in Wales. They recognised that housing need in Wales is different from that in England, because Welsh housing stock is different. That is reflected in the manner in which need is assessed. I hope that the hon. Member for Ribble Valley understands that his new clause would be to the detriment of Wales.

The indicators used in the allocation of resources for capital expenditure will cover broadly the same measures for all authorities, but the differences between England and Wales have been developed to take account of the differences in the housing needs of English and Welsh authorities. For example, the differences include the high demand for renovation grants in Wales, reflecting the higher level of unfitness in the private sector stock and the economic circumstances of owner-occupiers. Those needs will, of course, be reviewed when the results of the English and Welsh house condition survey become available.

Consultation papers issued by the Department and the Welsh Office set out the needs indicators that we propose to use in each case. Those are available for people in Wales and all Welsh authorities to examine, and we will consult them.

Mr. Bernard Jenkin (North Essex)

I am sorry to take the Minister back to the issue of the shares that England and Wales will receive. She gave us—strangely—the figures that the Chief Secretary failed to give in a written answer today. Will she explain why that information is available for her speech, but was not available to the Chief Secretary? Will she also explain, or perhaps confirm, that the Bill and the allocations represent extra money for housing in England and Wales but not in Scotland? Can she give us a figure for Scotland?

Ms Armstrong

I suspect that I would be out of order if I strayed too far on to the subject of Scotland, but—as I have already said—the amount allocated by the Chancellor last week covered England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. I have not announced any new figures today and I am concerned that that has not been reflected in the written answer. If the hon. Gentleman will give me a copy of the question, I shall respond to him on another occasion. I suspect that the problem lies in the nature of the question that was asked.

Mr. Chope

Will the Minister give way?

Ms Armstrong

I have already offered to respond to the question on another occasion.

Mr. Chope

rose—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. Is the hon. Lady giving way?

Ms Armstrong

No. [Interruption.] I am sorry. I have not seen that question. I cannot be expected to give a response at the Dispatch Box.

Mr. Richard Ottaway (Croydon, South)

That is what the hon. Lady is paid for.

Ms Armstrong

It is not what I am paid for: I am paid to be honest and straight with Parliament. I must have proper and appropriate discussions with colleagues. Hon. Members earlier accused me of being frivolous, but I was not. I was trying to draw hon. Members' attention to the fact that they had not read the consultation document. They should have the decency to deal with questions properly. I am seeking to do that, and you are saying, "Oh no, you don't need to do it properly, you can give me a quick answer across the Dispatch Box." That is not the way I work. I shall come back to you with an answer.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I remind the hon. Lady that she is continually using the word "you".

Ms Armstrong

Sorry. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I was getting carried away.

The people of Wales want parity and fairness. The Bill will give them the fairness that the previous Government were not prepared to give them, because they did not deal with the real needs of the people in Wales. This Government are prepared to face the problems of housing need that were so neglected by the previous Administration. I hope that, having been given straight answers to his questions, the hon. Gentleman will not press the new clause. If he does, we will resist it.

Mr. Evans

The Minister began by saying that there were no Welsh Members of Parliament in the Labour party.

Ms Armstrong

I said that there were none in the Tory party.

Mr. Evans

Hansard will no doubt help the hon. Lady, but that is what she said. Perhaps she was pre-empting the next general election. We shall see.

The hon. Lady also said that the new clauses would do down Wales. That is not our intention. We wanted to discover whether the Government were intent on doing down Wales. No one has done more to assist Wales in the past 18 years than the Conservative Government, as can be seen from the figures for expenditure per head of population and from inward investment into Wales. I have no reservations about our commitment to Wales.

We wanted clarification on the Barnett formula, because it was not clear in the document. It is amazing that my hon. Friend the Member for Christchurch (Mr. Chope) received a non-reply from the Chief Secretary to the Treasury earlier today, yet the Minister can give us the exact figures. I am quietly bedazzled by that, but perhaps she will consider the matter and tell us later why the Treasury Minister was unable to answer the question that she has just answered.

We want clarification on a number of points. The Government have clarified one matter, but I am still not happy about the definition of housing need. However, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.

Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Chope

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. An important issue arose in that debate. When the Budget was announced, a press notice said that the allocation between England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland of the £200 million for housing would be announced shortly after the Budget. I tabled a priority notice question for written answer today from the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I received an answer from the Chief Secretary to the Treasury saying that he would write to me shortly. The hon. Lady has now given a partial answer to that question, which is extraordinary.

Mr. Win Griffiths

The hon. Gentleman should think himself lucky.

Mr. Chope

That is my point of order. Are the House and the Opposition entitled to obtain information by seeking answers to parliamentary questions, or are we to be given information as and when the Government design to give it to us?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

The content of parliamentary answers is not a matter for the Chair.

Forward to