HC Deb 30 March 1995 vol 257 cc728-31W
Mr. Pike

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what organisations and other bodies have made representations to him on the subject of local government reorganisation since his statement of 2 March,Official Report, columns 696–97; and if he will make a statement; [16492]

(2) with whom he has held discussions on the subject of local government reorganisation since his statement of 2 March; and if he will make a statement; [16493]

(3) what discussions he will have with county councils and other district councils in those areas where a hybrid solution is (a) being proposed or (b) may be proposed following the fourth local government review; and if he will make a statement. [16494]

Mr. Robert B. Jones

The Secretary of State has received a large number of representations from organisations and other bodies since 2 March, but it is not possible to identify all these representations individually except at disproportionate cost. The Secretary of State has met the following organisations specifically to discuss local government reorganisation since his announcement on 2 March: South Hams district council, meeting arranged before the announcement of his decision on Devon; Unison; GMB and the Transport and General Workers Union.

All those district councils mentioned in the announcements on 2 and 21 March as possible cases for further review will be invited to discuss their cases for unitary status. These are: Broxtowe, Gedling and Rushcliffe; Dartford and Gravesham; Exeter; Gloucester; Huntingdonshire; Halton; Norwich; The Wrekin.

Mr. Pike

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) which former county boroughs are to be reconsidered under the new review for unitary status; [16487]

(2) which former county boroughs are to regain unitary status following local government reorganisation; [16486]

(3) which areas that were not former county boroughs are to be given unitary status following local government reorganisation; [16488]

(4) which areas that were not former county boroughs are to be considered for unitary status under the new review; [16489]

(5) which former county boroughs will remain as district authorities in a two-tier system following local government reorganisation; [16490]

(6) what is the population of each of (a) the new proposed unitary authorities, (b) those areas under the new review for possible unitary status and (c) those districts remaining within a two-tier system. [16491]

Mr. Robert B. Jones

We intend to refer the following districts to the Local Government Commission for a further review—those marked ?*? were, or have within their areas, former county boroughs:

  • Blackburn* 139,528
  • Gillingham 95,969
  • Northampton* 187,244
  • Warrington* 185,005
  • Basildon 161,699
  • Blackpool* 139,528
  • Rochester 146,201
  • Peterborough 158,375
  • Thurrock 131,226

We are considering whether to refer the following districts to the Local Government Commission for a further review—those marked '*' were, or have within their current areas, former county boroughs:

  • Broxtowe 110,566
  • Exeter* 105,087
  • Gloucester* 104,805
  • Halton 124,111
  • Norwich* 128,050
  • The Wrekin 142,724
  • Dartford 82,600
  • Gedling 111,566
  • Gravesham 93,029
  • Huntingdonshire 148,786
  • Rushcliffe 101,457

We have announced that we have accepted the commission's proposals for unitary status for the following districts or combination of districts—those marked ?*? were, or have within their proposed areas, former county boroughs:

  • Bristol* 397,585
  • Woodspring 182,140
  • Luton 178,642
  • Windsor 136,695
  • Reading* 137,749
  • Wokingham 142,894
  • Langbaurgh 143,858
  • Stockton 177,794
  • Derby* 228,648
  • Torbay 121,113
  • Bournemouth* 159,876
  • Brighton and Hove* 242,925
  • Portsmouth 189,073
  • Herefordshire 162,000(est)
  • York (extended) 167,000(est)
  • Stoke-on-Trent 252,914
  • Hull 267,889
  • Bath and Wansdyke* 163,533
  • Northavon and Kingswood 230,078
  • Bracknell Forest 101,905
  • Newbury 140,967
  • Slough 103,454
  • Milton Keynes 184,440
  • Middlesborough* 145,843
  • Hartlepool* 91,982
  • Plymouth* 259,040
  • Poole 137,159
  • Darlington* 100,163
  • Southend* 167,523
  • Southampton 209,192
  • Isle of Wight 124,773
  • Nottingham 282,590
  • Thamesdown 173,761
  • E Yorks and Beverley and part Boothferry 293,000(est)
  • Glanford and Scunthorpe and part Boothferry 151,335(est)
  • Cleethorpes and Great Grimsby 162,003

Final decisions are outstanding on Leicester*, 289,286, and Rutland, 33,413, pending further consideration of cost and service delivery implications of a unitary Rutland.

Apart from those mentioned above, the following districts were, or contain within their areas, former county boroughs and are to remain in a two-tier county:

  • Barrow in Furness 73,299
  • Canterbury 132,391
  • Chester 120,845
  • East Staffs 98,300
  • Hastings 82,937
  • Lincoln 85,502
    • 731
  • Preston 132,166
  • Burnley 91,446
  • Carlisle 102,878
  • Eastbourne 82,937
  • Great Yarmouth 88,799
  • Ipswich 114,806
  • Oxford 131,967
  • Worcester 104,934

Excluding all the districts listed above, the other districts in England have population ranging from 25,000 to 163,400. All population figures are the Registrar General's estimates for mid-1993.

Mr. Duncan

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what compensation will be available for staff who are obliged to take lower paid jobs as a result of the reorganisation of local government in England and Wales. [18053]

Mr. Robert B. Jones

On 5 December 1994 my Department issued a consultation paper on proposals for compensating local authority staff who may be obliged to accept lower paid jobs as a result of local government reorganisation in England and Wales. Having carefully considered the responses, I intend shortly to bring forward draft regulations setting out a compensation scheme which will allow for staff to have their salary maintained for a transitional three-year period if they are appointed to a new job at a lower salary during the reorganisation period—between the shadow elections and 18 months after reorganisation in England; between shadow elections and 31 March 1997 in Wales.

By avoiding the need for redundancy payments and encouraging councils to restrain existing employees in new jobs, the scheme should benefit staff, employers and the taxpayer.