§ Mr. Shoreasked the Secretary of State for the Environment what, in constant prices, was the value of the rate support grant payment to the London borough of Tower Hamlets in 1986–87 and for each preceding year Ito 1978–79; what is the proposed payment of 1987–88 showing separately for each relevant year the payments received by the London Borough of Tower Hamlets in respect of services transferred from the Greater London council after abolition and information available to him on expenditure in Tower Hamlets by the Greater London council on such services.
§ Mr. Shoreasked the Secretary of State for the Environment what, in constant prices, was the payment to the London Borough of Tower Hamlets through the housing investment programme, showing Greater London council housing investment, and Tower Hamlets housing investment separately in 1986–87 and in each preceding year to 1978–79; and what is his housing investment programme for 1987–88.
91W
§ Mr. TraceyThe table gives the housing investment programme allocations made to Tower Hamlets borough council since 1978–79, together with the total capital expenditure the council has incurred on housing:
£ million (1985/86 prices) HIP allocation Expenditure 1978–79 27.220 21.459 1979–80 22.009 16.576 1980–81 17.123 20.083 1981–82 6.586 11.268 1982–83 12.176 7.720 1983–84 13.264 10.895 1984–85 13.050 12.000 1985–86 11.644 12.011 1986–87 15.950 1 20.591 1 Estimate. Prior to 1986–87 the GLC was free to use its resources throughout London and figures for its investment in individual boroughs are not available. The HIP allocation made to Tower Hamlets for 1986–87 took account of the resources which would otherwise have gone to the GLC.
The HIP allocation made to Tower Hamlets for 1987–88 was £14.997 million. The council can augment this, as in previous years, by making use of its capital receipts.
§ Mr. Hickmetasked the Secretary of State for the Environment what consideration he gave in deciding the rate support grant for Scunthorpe borough council to the level of that council's expenditure on recreation compared to other similar authorities; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. ChopeAn authority's grant entitlement is determined by the relationship of its overall spending to its overall grant-related expenditure assessment, broadly its need to spend. Specific consideration is not therefore given to individual items of expenditure. On the basis of the Secretary of State's firm intentions announced on 13 January, the recreation component of Scunthorpe's GREA is £1.156 million or £18.17p per head which is the 34th highest of all shire districts.
§ Mr. Hickmetasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on why Scunthorpe borough council is under penalty under the latest rate support grant settlement; by how much its expenditure would have to be reduced to avoid penalties; and what would be the change in domestic and non-domestic rates of such a reduction.
§ Mr. ChopeLike most authorities, Scunthorpe gains grant as it reduces its expenditure and loses grant as it increases it. The rate at which grant is gained or lost is greater above the GRE threshold. Scunthorpe would have to reduce its spending by £1.7 million to get below the GRE threshold and reduce its rate of grant loss. The consequences for both domestic and non-domestic rates of such a reduction could be 23p.