§ Mr. Norman Atkinsonasked the Secretary of State for the Environment which Government Departments use his Department's list of programme and partnership authorities for the allocation of resources; in what ways; and if he will provide a breakdown of the additional allocations that have been made to such authorities for the financial years 1982–83, 1983–84 and 1984–85.
§ Sir George YoungThe list is used primarily in the distribution of urban programme resources, to which my Department, the Department of Education and Science, the Department of Health and Social Security and the Department of Transport contribute. The list of districts designated under the Inner Urban Areas Act 1978, including partnership and programme authorities, is also used to give additional weightings to the generalised needs index scores of authorities which determine, in part, their housing investment programme allocations. Allocations to partnership and programme authorities made through the urban programme for the years in question are shown in the table. Because of the local discretionary element in HIP allocations, it is not possible to disaggregate the additional allocations made to partnership and programme authorities as a result of the weighting of their GNI scores.
Urban programme resources allocated to partnership and programme areas 1982–83 £ million
1983–84 £ million
*1984–85 £ million
Partnerships† Birmingham 25.6 24.0 24.5 Docklands‡ 17.0 6.4 2.1 Hackney 12.1 12.4 12.0 Islington 9.7 10.5 10.4 Lambeth 10.4 12.6 13.5 Liverpool‡ 24.8 23.6 24.1 Manchester/Salford 23.6 25.1 24.5 Newcastle/Gateshead 19.8 19.7 18.0 Programme Authorities‡║
362W
1982–83 £ million
1983–84 £ million
*1984–85 £ million
Blackburn¶ 0.78 1.49 3.60 Bolton 2.99 4.56 3.59 Bradford 5.97 5.57 4.58 Brent¶ 1.55 1.27 4.50 Coventry● 0.85 1.65 4.30 Hammersmith and Fulham 4.78 5.43 5.63 Kingston upon Hull 3.89 5.03 4.47 Knowsley● 0.37 1.30 3.70 Leeds 4.63 4.72 4.13 Leicester 5.77 5.83 5.43 Middlesbrough 4.98 5.21 4.62 Nottingham 4.98 5.08 4.85 Oldham 4.36 3.96 3.66 Rochdale¶ 1.46 1.30 3.60 Sandwell¶ 2.81 2.95 4.50 Sheffield 4.86 4.36 4.01 Sunderland 2.95 3.42 3.17 Tower Hamlets■ 0.51 1.40 4.50 North Tyneside 3.07 3.42 3.12 South Tyneside 4.82 4.33 3.93 Wandsworth¶ 1.10 1.60 4.50 Wirral 4.42 3.52 3.67 Wolverhampton 5.52 5.70 4.84 * Provisional. † Figures include urban programme expenditure by metropolitan counties and in some cases health authorities in those areas. They do not include urban development grant or derelict land grant. ‡ The figures for London Docklands and Merseyside authorities exclude allocations to the London Docklands and Merseyside Development Corporations; they also exclude other special projects to promote economic regeneration, improve housing and the environment, and develop the tourist potential of Merseyside. ║ Figures for newly designated authorities and programme authorities which were formerly other designated districts include allocations under the traditional urban programme for 1982–83, but exclude urban programme resources received in those years for continuing projects approved under earlier traditional urban programme circulars. ¶ Former "Other Designated Districts", given programme status on 15 February 1983. ● New designation announced on 15 February 1983. ■ Allocation for projects outside the LDDC area.