§ Mr. Hendersonasked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will estimate the differences in rate poundage between Fife regional council's actual budget and a budget conforming to guidelines; and what percentage reduction in the council's expenditure would be necessary to reduce the budget to conform with the guidelines.
§ Mr. AncramIf Fife regional council had conformed to its guideline in 1985–86, its rate poundage would have been 50p instead of 54p. A 4.8 per cent, reduction in planned expenditure would enable the council to meet its guideline.
§ Mr. Hendersonasked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the position of Fife in a list of regional councils in order of rate poundage charged in 1975 and 1985, respectively.
§ Mr. AncramIn 1975–76, Fife regional council had the seventh highest rate poundage among regional councils, in 1985–86 the highest.
§ Mr. Hendersonasked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take selective action to return to ratepayers the product of expenditure in excess of guidelines of Fife regional council.
§ Mr. AncramMy right hon. Friend has to have close regard to the precise terms of the statute before initiating action against a local authority on the grounds that it is planning excessive and unreasonable expenditure. Although Fife's planned percentage excess over guideline is the highest of any regional council and will attract a severe RSG penalty, my right hon. Friend does not consider that the authority is planning excessive and unreasonable expenditure which would justify selective action in terms of section 5 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1966.