§ Mr. David Steelasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list in the OFFICIAL REPORT the amount spent on (a) community development projects; and (b) the urban aid programme, for each year since inception of the schemes; and if he will make a statement on the estimated future expenditure on each programme over the next five years.
§ Mr. Alexander W. LyonFollowing is the information, derived from the White Paper on Public Expenditure (Cmnd. 5519), excluding the transfer of funds from the Overseas Development Administration.
Public Expenditure at 1973 Survey Prices Urban Progamme (including Community Development Project social action programmes) £ m. (Great Britain) Community Development Project (local project costs not attributable to social action programmes) 1968–69 … … 0.1 — 1969–70 … … 2.0 — 1970–71 … … 8.0 0.1 1971–72 … … 7.6 0.2 1972–73 … … 11.5 0.3 1973–74 … … 15.9 0.4 1974–75 … … 16.9 0.4 1975–76 … … 17.3 0.4 1976–77 … … 18.8 0.4 1977–78 … … 19.8 0.4
§ Mr. David Steelasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what were the numbers of (a) research staff and (b) action-based staff, in each of the community development projects for each year since inception of the scheme and 211W the staff cost for each of the community development projects for each year since they were established.
§ Mr. Alexander W. LyonThe following information, so far as action-based
1969–70 1970–71 1972–72 Staff Cost Staff Cost Staff Cost Batley— Research … … 0 — 0 — 2 928 Action … … 0 — 0 — 4 1,968 Birmingham— Research … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Action … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Coventry— Research … … 0 — 2 1,368 4 9,320 Action … … 3 826 3 6,441 5 10,215 Cumbria— Research … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Action … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Liverpool— Research … … 0 — 0 — 2 4,748 Action … … 4 1,404 4 9,305 4 7,569 Newcastle— Research … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Action … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Newham— Research … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Action … … 0 — 0 — 2 2,070 North Tyneside— Research … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Action … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Oldham— Research … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Action … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Paisley— Research … … 0 — 0 — 1 919 Action … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Southwark— Research … … 0 — 3 11,334 3 17,236 Action … … 0 — 2 3,785 4 10,831 Upper Afan— Research … … 0 — 0 — 0 — Action … … 0 — 1 1,917 5 9,537 212W
1972–73 1973–74 1974–75 Staff Cost Staff Cost Staff Cost Batley— Research … … 4 10,514 4 9,759* 4 17,373* Action … … 7 9,796 7 13,036* 7 13,527* Birmingham— Research … … 2 5,312 3 7,288* 3 8,144* Action … … 2 3,562 4 17,800* 6 24,200* Coventry— Research … … 3 9,719 3 7,411 3 9,046* Action … … 5 13,340 6 14,968 6 13,710* Cumbria— Research … … 1 507 3 14,794* 3 12,663* Action … … 3 6,661 6 12,200* 6 12,200* Liverpool— Research … … 3 10,214 4 12,314* 4 10,856* Action … … 4 10,230 4 11,350* 5 11,700* Newcastle— Research … … 1 10,865 2 4,000* 4 16,059* Action … … 4 4,938 5 9,700* 5 10,160* Newham— Research … … 0 — 3 7,894 3 11,000* Action … … 6 10,017 8 11,110* 8 11,750* North Tyneside— Research … … 0 — 4 8,242* 4 9,959* Action … … 4 2,830 7 9,900* 7 10,720* staff are concerned, relates to full-time staff employed within the central administrative unit of each project. Comparable information in respect of staff employed on specific social action projects is not available.
213W
1972–73 1973–74 1974–75 Staff Cost Staff Cost Staff Cost Oldham— Research … … 0 — 4 7,553* 3 12,832* Action … … 2 2,041 4 11,450* 4 11,660* Paisley— Research … … 3 5,489 3 9,105 3 9,600* Action … … 1 2,927 3 9,270 3 10,460* Southwark— Research … … 3 13,721 3 2,054 3 12,794* Action … … 9 14,211 10 16,778* 10 17,765* Upper Afan— Research … … 0 — 4 13,138 4 12,213* Action … … 5 15,485 8 18,660* 7 20,905* * Estimate.
§ Mr. David Steelasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the estimated budget for each of the areas designated under the comprehensive community programme for the next five years.
§ Mr. Alexander W. LyonMy right hon. Friend is not yet in a position to give an estimate, since the implementation of the proposals contained in the comprehensive community programmes prepared for each of the trial areas will depend mainly on a redistribution of resources within existing programmes to meet local needs.