§ 13. Mr. Fearnasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has any estimates as to the likely evasion levels of the proposed poll tax.
§ Mr. HowardI have no reason to suppose that evasion will be significant.
§ 31. Mr. Teddy Taylorasked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many letters he has received from the general public about the proposed introduction of a community charge.
§ Mr. HowardA summary of responses received by my Department before 31 October 1986, when the consultation period on the Green Paper "Paying for Local Government" (Cmnd. 9714) ended, was placed in the Library on 15 December 1986. 1,217 responses were received. Though opinions varied, twice as many people wanted to abolish domestic rates as wanted to keep them. The community charge received greater support than any other replacement for the rates. We continue to receive representations about specific aspects of our proposals as well as requests for further information.
§ 44. Mrs. Mahonasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will grant a separate identifiable sum of money to local authorities to cover the cost of implementing the community charge.
§ Mr. HowardThe cost of implementing the community charge will be taken into account in the rate support grant settlement for 1989–90 and in the needs assessments which will be used to determine grant entitlements under the new system.
§ 51. Mr. Geraint Howellsasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has made any estimates as to the likely increase in administration costs incurred by local authorities if a poll tax is introduced.
§ Mr. HowardOur preliminary estimate is that the cost per person liable of collecting the community charge may be broadly similar to the cost per person liable of collecting domestic rates.
§ 65. Mr. George Howarthasked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many responses has he received 719W to his consultation paper "Non-domestic Rates, Amendments to the Rating Legislation in England and Wales" published in July.
§ Mr. HowardA total of 281 responses to the consultation paper were received, of which five were from local authority associations, 16 from professional organisations, 56 from national and local commercial and industrial organisations, 101 from local authorities, 30 from firms of surveyors and 73 from other private sector firms and individuals. We are considering the proposals in the light of these responses.
§ 66. Mr. Maddenasked the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received about the impact of the poll tax on Bradford.
§ Mr. HowardMy Department received 1,217 responses before 31 October 1986 when the consultation period of the Green Paper "Paying for Local Government" (Cmnd. 9714) ended. Two, about our proposals for a community charge were from respondents in Bradford. We continue to receive representations from all parts of the country about specific aspects of our proposals as well as requests for further information.
§ 67. Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a further statement on the arrangement for phasing in the proposed poll tax.
§ Mr. HowardThe Government are considering the arrangements for introducing the community charge in England in the light of views that have been expressed. An announcement will be made in due course.
§ 69. Mr. Grocottasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list those professional or academic organisations specialising in local government finance who are in favour of introduction of a poll tax.
§ Mr. HowardI refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave earlier today to my hon. Friend the Member for Southend, East (Mr. Taylor).
§ 72. Mr. Altonasked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many local authorities have made representations to him in support of his poll tax proposals.
§ Mr. HowardI refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Gateshead, East (Ms. Quin) on 24 July at column722.
§ 73. Mr. Pikeasked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will next be meeting the Consultative Council on Local Government Finance to discuss proposed changes to the rating system.
§ Mr. HowardThe annual cycle of meetings of the Consultative Council on Local Government Finance should recommence in the spring of next year.
§ 81. Mr. Illsleyasked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether the Government's proposals for a community charge or poll tax will apply to tenants of tied housing in the agricultural or other industries.
§ Mr. HowardYes.
§ 83. Mr. Allenasked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many responses to the consultation document on the community charge he has received from the Nottingham area.
§ Mr. HowardThe booklet "Paying for Local Government—the Community Charge" was not a720W consultation document. Since it was published in December 1986, the Department has received several thousand letters from all over the country of all aspects of our rate reform proposals.
§ Mr. Canavanasked the Secretary of State for the Environment what recent representations he has received about the Government's proposals to introduce a poll tax.
§ Mr. HowardI refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave earlier today to my hon. Friend the Member for Southend, East (Mr. Taylor).
§ Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list all the factors outside the control of a local authority which can influence the relationship between levels of expenditure and poll tax; and if he will make a statement outlining how these factors have been taken into account in the Green and Yellow Papers relating to the introduction of the poll tax.
§ Mr. Howard[holding answer, 3 November 1987]: The amount of central Government grant and payments from the non-domestic rate pool will both be fixed in advance of that year. Changes in authorities' spending, in relation to that year, will be reflected directly in community charges. Payments of grant and non-domestic rates may vary between years. That is why our proposals for the payment of grant, published on 23 September, included proposals for substantially reducing instability in grant entitlements. Payments from the non-domestic rate pool will be proportionate to adult population and will reflect only changes in the income to the pool.