HC Deb 18 January 1982 vol 16 cc22-4W
Dr. Edmund Marshall

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will list, for every local authority in the Yorkshire and Humberside region, his best estimates of total rate support grant to be paid by him (a) during 1981–82 and (b) during 1982–83.

Mr. King

I refer the hon. Member to the material my right hon. Friend laid in the Library of the House pursuant to his reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Reading, North (Mr. Durant) on Monday 21 December.—[Vol. c.322–24.]

Mr. Teddy Taylor

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will review his announcement on 22 December that local authority spending targets for 1982–83 would be related to their revised estimates of spending in 1981–82, in view of its effect of discriminating against those authorities which introduced substantial economies in 1981–82; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. King

My right hon. Friend's proposals for individual local authorities' spending targets for 1982–83 are designed specifically to recognise the efforts of authorities which are planning to spend in line with our plans this year. These proposals will shortly be discussed in the debate on the rate support grant (England) report 1982–83.

Mr. Teddy Taylor

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what considerations he took into account in determining that the county and borough rate support grants formula should be adjusted in such a way as to add 4.2p to the poundage rate payable by ratepayers in Southend on Sea if the county and borough councils, respectively, adhere to Government spending targets.

Mr. King

These considerations will be set out in the rate support grant report which my right hon. Friend will be presenting for approval shortly.

Mr. Teddy Taylor

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what considerations he took into account in determining on 22 December that the county borough rate support grants should be adjusted in such a way as to reduce the poundage rate payable by ratepayers in the London boroughs of Islington and Lambeth, respectively, by 17.4p and 15.4p, respectively, if the Greater London Council and boroughs concerned adhere to Government spending targets.

Mr. King

My right hon. Friend has not yet made any determinations concerning the rate support grant settlement for 1982–83; the proposals which he published on 21 December were based on considerations that will be specified in the rate support grant report that he will shortly be laying before the House. Meanwhile, it may be helpful to my hon. Friend to point out that the figures for grant changes published on 21 December represent grant changes compared with a base position which already takes into account the cut in the grant percentage from 59.1 per cent. to 56 per cent. They cannot therefore be used to draw direct inferences about likely changes in rate poundages next year.

Mr. Teddy Taylor

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what co-operation he has had from the borough of Southend on Sea in his endeavours to contain local government spending since 1979; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. King

Southend on Sea borough council's revised budget for 1981–82 shows planned current expenditure 0.3 per cent. below its volume target for that year. Thus it is planning to achieve more than its contribution to the Government's target for reductions in real terms in local government current spending of 5.6 per cent. between 1978–79 and 1981–82.

Mr. Dobson

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will set out the factors which led to his decision, found by the divisional court to be unlawful, to withhold from eight London boroughs the grant voted by the House on 14 January 1981.

Mr. King

The factors which led to the original decision were set out in the Rate Support Grant (Increase) (No. 2) Order 1980 and the Rate Support Grant (Principles for Multipliers) Order 1980, both of which were approved by Parliament on 14 January 1981.

Mr. Dobson

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he has yet paid increased rate support grant for 1980–81 voted by this House on 14 January 1981 to the eight London boroughs in respect of which the divisional court found that he had withheld payment unlawfully.

Mr. King

I refer the hon. Member to the reply my right hon. Friend gave to the right hon. Member for Brent, East (Mr. Freeson) on 9 November 1981. He has now received fresh representations, and hopes to take a new decision shortly. He will make whatever payments are appropriate as soon as possible thereafter.—[Vol. 12, c.30.]

Mr. Dobson

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he proposes to offer compensation in respect of interest payments to the eight London boroughs from whom his withholding of rate support grant was found by the divisional court to be unlawful.

Mr. King

My right hon. Friend is considering the representations that have been made on this point.

Forward to