HL Deb 10 March 1976 vol 368 cc1270-3

2.45 p.m.

Baroness YOUNG

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government why, according to their Public Expenditure White Paper, the Community Land "surplus account "is still expected to be in an annual deficit of £102 million by the year 1979–80, and when the taxpayer can expect to see the Scheme yield the £350 million annual surplus forecast by the Government.

The PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE, DEPARTMENT of the ENVIRONMENT (Baroness Birk)

My Lords, there must be net expenditure in the early years while receipts are building up. The figures in the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill relate to the full operation of the scheme; and it is too early to say when that stage will be reached.

Baroness YOUNG

My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware of the totally unsatisfactory nature of that reply? Not only during the Second Reading debate last August did her noble colleague Lord Melchett inform the House that the Government confidently expected to make a profit of between £350 million and £550 million on the Land Scheme, but now the noble Baroness is unable to give us any indicaton of when they might make even £1, let alone figures like that. Are the Government satisfied with this state of affairs?

Baroness BIRK

My Lords, I do not think that I can give any answer to any question about the Community Land Act asked by the noble Baroness which would satisfy her. She will be aware that it is quite impossible to show net receipts over expenditure in the first few yews. However, that certainly does not mean that no authorities will be in surplus by 1979–80. What we are talking about is a national figure and within this figure there may be some authorities in surplus.

Baroness YOUNG

My Lords, how can the noble Baroness justify a loss to the Community Land Scheme of £102 million at this moment when local authorities are being asked to cut back on public expenditure for so many essential services?

Baroness BIRK

I can justify it perfectly well, my Lords. First, this is within the Chancellor's PESC strategy and, secondly, it is absolutely essential for us to make a good start on the Scheme to help service the development industry and ensure an adequate supply of land for private development. If we do not start investing now, we will not have the land in the future.

Baroness YOUNG

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the annual deficit of £102 million for the Community Land Scheme in the year 1979–80, given in the Public Expenditure White Paper, includes the administration costs of the Community Land "Advisory Team "and extra Inland Revenue staff to be recruited.

Baroness BIRK

My Lords, the figure does include the professional support team. Any additional Inland Revenue costs will be met in the normal way from Revenue votes.

Baroness YOUNG

My Lords, can we take it from that reply that, regarding the advertisements which we have seen recently in the national Press for "necessary professional staff "earning up to £12,000 a year and more to make the Land Scheme workable, all those salaries will be included in the statement of loss that the Land Scheme is expected to make?

Baroness BIRK

My Lords, they will be included in the expenses of the Land Scheme. They comprise a professional team which will also be involved with the Environmental Board later on. Their role is to provide the Secretary of State with advice on which to base guidance to local authorities. I should have thought that the noble Baroness would regard that as an extremely sensible way of starting the Scheme and an etremely good and economical way of spending money.

Earl FERRERS

My Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness to say how many people the Government are hoping to recruit to operate the Scheme?

Baroness BIRK

My Lords, it includes one senior architect planner, another architect planner, a superintending estates officer, a principal planner, a senior planning officer and two personal secretaries; seven in all.

Baroness YOUNG

My Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness to confirm that the loss given in the Public Expenditure White Paper does not include the 13,000 extra civil servants required at local authority level?

Baroness BIRK

Yes, my Lords, I can confirm that. Figures have been bandied about, but in fact the figure is not more than 12.000. In any event, this figure refers to the time when the full duty is operative, after the second appointed day, when the Scheme is in full operation so certainly that is not included.

Baroness YOUNG

My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that I am very pleased to have her confirmation that not more than 12,000 extra people will be required? Can the noble Baroness invite us to a public meeting at which she will explain to the ratepayers and taxpayers that it is the Government's first priority that these people should be appointed rather than to institute the cuts which are to be made in educational and social service spending?

Baroness BIRK

My Lords, I should not dream of spending public funds on a meeting of that sort. The noble Baroness may he pleased—though I believe that she will be politically disappointed—to hear that our information from many local authorities is that they are taking on fewer staff than was at first envisaged. They are finding themselves able to use existing staff and they are getting on with their plans.