HC Deb 04 April 1990 vol 170 cc664-8W
Mr. Riddick

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will calculate the amount payable by a man on average earnings living in a house valued at £60,000 under a system of local government finance based on capital values rates with a local income tax element based on Kirklees council's projected spending in 1989–90 and 1990–91; and what the figures would have been for a woman on average earnings in similar circumstances.

Mr. Chope

The amount payable would depend on the precise detail of how such a system would operate and on the taxable income of the individuals.

Mr. Austin Mitchell

To ask the Secetary of State for the Environment what is the Government's estimate of the number of households who pay the full rate who would gain under the poll tax; and what is their estimate of the average gain in such cases.

Mr. Chope

I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 29 March 1990,Official Report, Vol. 170, column 247.

Mr. Austin Mitchell

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will publish a table in theOfficial Report showing the estimated numbers in each sample category of people paying more poll tax than rates, together with the Government's estimate of their contribution under the present system and the amount which the Government considered they ought to pay.

Mr. Chope

The Government have not prescribed an amount that people ought to pay.

An analysis of the distributional impact of the introduction of the community charge was placed in the Library on 15 February.

Mr. Austin Mitchell

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will publish in theOfficial Report a table showing in each case the assumed underlying long-run community charge per adult as a percentage of average earnings in the northern region and the south-east for full-time adult male manual workers in the year to April 1989, together with an explanation for the difference.

Mr. Chope

The assumed long-run community charge used for 1990–91 revenue support grant purposes, expressed as an amount per week, represents 2.9 per cent. of average full-time earnings at April 1989 for male manual employees on adult rates of pay in the Northern region and 2.2 per cent. of the equivalent figure in the south-east including Greater London.

The assumed personal community charge, which reflects the transitional arrangements for 1990–91, expressed as an amount per week, represents 2.4 per cent. of average full-time earnings at April 1989 for male manual employees on adult rates of pay in the Northern region and 2.3 per cent. of the equivalent figure in the south-east including Greater London.

Mr. Vaz

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many representations he has received from members of the public(a) supporting and (b) opposing the poll tax.

Mr. Chope

I have received and continue to receive many representations on the community charge reflecting a wide range of views.

Mr. Jack

To ask the Secretary of state for the Environment if he will update the figures put in the Library on 6 November 1989 showing, for each local authority area, what level of (i) capital value rates and (ii) local income tax would be required in order to raise the same amount of revenue as with the 1990–91 community charge.

Mr. David Hunt

I have today placed in the Library a table showing the information requested.

Mr. David Martin

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will place in the Library a table showing for each rating or charging authority(a) his estimate of the average rate bill per domestic ratepayer in 1989–90, (b) the information he has on the average personal community charge actually set in each area in 1990–91, (c) the percentage domestic rate increase which would have taken place in 1990–91 if the same amount of revenue had been raised in each area as is being raised in community charges and (d) the rate bill per domestic ratepayer in each area consequent upon that increase in domestic rates.

Mr. David Hunt

I have today placed in the Library a table showing the information requested.

Mr. French

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list those local authorities now known to him which have announced their intention to levy a standard community charge at less than twice the personal community charge.

Mr. Chope

[holding answer 3 April 1990]: I have [...] gathered the information requested except on an informal basis from a few authorities on a basis which did not imply that it would be published.

Mr. Gould

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what consideration was given in calculating standard spending assessment and grant to Westminster city council to the daily population figure; and if he will set out the sum thereby arrived at.

Mr. Chris Patten

[holding answer 2 April 1990]: Standard spending assessments and revenue support grant entitlements are calculated in the same way for all local authorities. The basis of calculation is set out in the revenue support grant distribution report approved by this House on 18 January. Resident population, adjusted for visitors and for the net inflow of commuters, features in the SSA element for all other services; resident population features in the SSA for fire and civil defence; and resident population adjusted for the net inflow of commuters features in the SSA for highway maintenance. There is thus no single daily population figure used in the calculation for Westminster city council.

Mr. Gould

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will reconsider the standard spending assessment for Brighton and other holiday and conference resorts.

Mr. Chris Patten

[holding answer 2 April 1990]: I have made it clear that I am willing to consider any new evidence on standard spending assessments with a view to making changes for 1991–92 if that should prove necessary.

Mr. Gould

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish a table in theOfficial Report setting out for each council the impact on its standard spending assessment arising from new duties under the Environmental Protection Bill and the Food Safety Bill [Lords].

Mr. Chris Patten

[holding answer 2 April 1990]: Duties under these bills will not affect local authority spending in 1990–91. New duties will be taken into account in setting standard spending assessments for 1991–92.

Mr. Gould

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the authorities which benefited in their standard spending assessment and revenue grant allocation from a consideration of the impact of daily population increases.

Mr. Chris Patten

[holding answer 2 April 1990]: The basis of calculation of standard spending assessments and revenue support grant entitlements is set out in the revenue support grant distribution report (England). Resident population adjusted for daily visitors and for the net inflow of commuters features in the assessment for all other services. All authorities receive a positive contribution to their SSAs from the allowance for visitors. The authorities listed in the table receive a positive contribution to their SSAs from the allowance for net inflow of commuters. The latter also features in the SSA element for highway maintenance.

Authorities with positive day time net inflow

  • Alnwick
  • Ashfield
  • Avon CC
  • Barking and Dagenham
  • Barrow in Furness
  • Bassetlaw
  • Bath
  • Birmingham
  • Blackburn
  • Boston
  • Bournemouth
  • Brighton
  • Bristol
  • Burnley
  • Cambridge
  • Cambridgeshire CC
  • Camden
  • Carlisle
  • Carrick
  • Cheltenham
  • Chester
  • Chesterfield
  • Christchurch
  • City of London
  • Cleveland CC
  • Colchester
  • Copeland
  • Coventry
  • Crawley
  • Crewe and Nantwich
  • Darlington
  • Derby
  • Devon CC
  • Dover
  • Durham
  • East Staffordshire
  • Eastbourne
  • Ellesmere Port and Neston
  • Exeter
  • Forest Heath
  • Fylde
  • Gloucester
  • Great Grimsby
  • Great Yarmouth
  • Hackney
  • Hammersmith and Fulham
  • Hartlepool
  • Hastings
  • Hereford
  • Hillingdon
  • Hounslow
  • Ipswich
  • Isles of Scilly
  • Islington
  • Kensington and Chelsea
  • Kingston upon Hull
  • Knowsley
  • Lambeth
  • Leeds
  • Leicester
  • Leicestershire CC
  • Lincoln
  • Liverpool
  • Luton
  • Manchester
  • Medina
  • Middlesbrough
  • Milton Keynes
  • Newcastle upon Tyne
  • North Bedfordshire
  • Northampton
  • Northavon
  • Norwich
  • Nottingham
  • Nottinghamshire CC
  • Oxford
  • Peterborough
  • Plymouth
  • Poole
  • Portsmouth
  • Preston
  • Reading
  • Restormel
  • Rochester upon Medway
  • Rugby
  • Rushmoor
  • Salford
  • Salisbury
  • Sandwell
  • Scunthorpe
  • Selby
  • Sheffield
  • Shrewsbury and Atcham
  • Slough
  • South Somerset
  • Southampton
  • Southwark
  • St Edmundsbury
  • Stafford
  • Stockton-on-Tees
  • Stoke-on-Trent
  • Taunton Deane
  • Thamesdown
  • Tower Hamlets
  • Trafford
  • Wakefield
  • Walsall
  • Warrington
  • Watford
  • Welwyn Hatfield
  • West Dorset
  • West Somerset
  • Westminster
  • Winchester
  • Wolverhampton
  • Worcester
  • Worthing
  • York

Mr. Speller

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will introduce regulations to require YTS trainees to pay only 20 per cent. of the community charge.

Mr. Chope

[holding answer 29 March 1990]: No. From May, 18-year-old YTS trainees will receive £35 per week plus top-up payments which can be substantial. Their liability for the community charge will depend upon their net income, but it is likely that most will be eligible for community charge benefit.

Forward to