§ 17. Mr. Brazier
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what measures he is taking to publicise the availability of community charge benefits.
§ 116. Miss widdecombe
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what action he is taking to encourage the maximum possible take-up of community charge benefits.
§ Mr. Chris Patten
I refer my hon. Friends to the reply given to the hon. Member for Coventry, South-East (Mr. Nellist) earlier today.
§ Sir John Stanley
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the rate support grant allocations per head of population for each borough and district council in Kent for 1989–90 in descending order of magnitude.
§ Mr. David Hunt
[holding answer 15 January 1990]: The following is the information requested for the period from 1 April 1989 to 31 March 1990: 735W
1989–90 Rate support grant per head
Gillingham 66.16 Thanet 56.76 Medway 43.45 Canterbury 42.19 Dover 40.50 Dartford 38.20 Gravesham 36.79 Shepway 35.57 Swale 34.83 Tunbridge Wells 34.29 Ashford 31.64 Maidstone 30.96 Sevenoaks 28.76 Tonbridge and Mailing 21.66
§ Mr. Gale
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will state his revised projected community charge per capita for(a) Thanet district council and (b) Canterbury city council based upon (i) 100 per cent. collection, (ii) 95 per cent. collection and (iii) 90 per cent. collection; and if he will state the rate of inflation and population figures upon which these calculations are based.
§ Mr. Chope
[holding answer 15 January 1990]The community charge figures requested are as follows:
Thanet district council Canterbury district council (i). Assumed community charge based on 100 per cent. collection 229 222 (ii). Assumed community charge based on 95 per cent. collection 241 234 (iii). Assumed community charge based on 90 per cent. collection 254 247
These figures assume spending figures for the district councils and for Kent county council based on their respective 1989–90 rate income and grant, adjusted for changes in function and uprated by 4.64 per cent. to be consistent with total standard spending for all authorities of £32.8 billion. They are shown after safety net adustments. The calculations are based on the following population figures: Thanet 96,367; Canterbury 95,811.
The published community charge exemplifications make no allowances for losses on collection; but, equally, they do not allow for certain additional offsetting sources of income (such as standard community charges or interest on cash flow, including the advance payment of revenue support grant that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment recently announced).
§ Mr. Chope
Every adult individual has a statutory duty to inform the community charges registration officer of any change of circumstances which affects his or her register entry. There is, however, no duty to volunteer such information about any other person. A responsible736W individual has a duty to provide information about people other than him or herself only in response to a specific request from the registration officer.
§ 104. Mr. Carrington
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what proportion of those liable to pay the community charge will be eligible to receive community charge benefits.
§ 88. Mr. Terry Davis
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received about the new system of local authority capital controls.
§ Mr. Chope
The consultation paper "Capital Expenditure and Finance" published in July 1988 resulted in about 400 representations from the local authority associations, individual local authorities, other organisations, hon. Members, councillors, and other companies and individuals. Since then, my right hon. Friend has received further representations about various aspects of the new capital finance system provided for in part IV of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989.
§ 69. Mr. Terry Fields
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his estimate of the likely average percentage increase in community charge rates for 1991–92 over 1990–91.
§ 60. Ms. Primarolo
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to finalise the details of the new system of local authority capital controls.
§ Mr. Chope
My right hon. Friend has made no estimates of the likely level of community charges. Figures placed in the Library on 11 January showed what the community charge could be in English districts if spending were in line with Government assumptions. My right hon. Friend has no plans to revise these figures.
§ 28. Mr. Winnick
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what latest representations he has received over the workings of the poll tax.
§ Mr. David Hunt
My right hon. Friend and I continue to receive representations about the administration of the community charge. The aspects most frequently raised recently have been the fairness of the new arrangements, questions about comunity charge benefit, and details of the standard charge.
§ 20. Mr. Speller
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what estimate he has made of the cost of
1990–91 SSAs.cash changes from adjusted 1989–90 GREs 1989–90 GRE
Adjusted 1989–90 GRE
Cash change (Col 3-Col 2)
Cash change (Col 3-Col 2) £/adult Cash change (Col 3-Col 2) per cent. Kent Ashford 5.266 4.894 6.275 1.381 20 28.2 Canterbury 8.219 8.025 8.839 0.814 8 10.1 Dartford 4.935 4.802 5.321 0.519 8 10.8 Dover 6.387 6.205 7.420 1.216 16 19.6 Gillingham 6.311 6.169 6.954 0.785 11 12.7 Gravesham 5.701 5.523 6.418 0.896 13 16.2 Maidstone 7.382 7.193 9.059 1.867 18 25.9 Rochester upon Medway 10.021 9.532 11.719 2.187 20 22.9 Sevenoaks 5.400 5.144 5.964 0.819 10 15.9 Shepway 6.029 5.855 6.502 0.647 9 11.1 Swale 6.394 6.182 7.663 1.481 17 24.0 Thanet 9.862 9.620 10.242 0.622 6 6.5 Tonbridge and Mailing 5.059 4.921 5.830 0.908 12 18.5 Tunbridge Wells 5.548 5.422 6.561 1.139 15 21.0