HC Deb 15 October 1990 vol 177 cc605-9W
Mr. Meacher

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the current percentage collection rate by each local authority for the poll tax; what is the shortfall in revenue; and by how much poll tax rates would have to be increased in each case to compensate for the loss of revenue from non-payment.

Mr. Portillo

The Government have no comprehensive information on current collection rates. We shall be receiving details of collection rates at 30 September 1990 from local authorities and this information will be collated and made available to the local authority associations in the same way as was the information for 30 June.

Mr. David Nicholson

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish in theOfficial Report the latest figures he has for actual spending in 1989–90 and planned spending in 1990–91 for (a) each of the London boroughs, (b) the metropolitan districts of Salford, Stockport, Trafford, Sefton, Wirral, Coventry, Sandwell, Bradford and Leeds and (c) the shire counties of Cambridgeshire, Devon, Dorset, Gloucestershire, Hereford and Worcestershire, Kent, Oxfordshire, Somerset and Wiltshire.

Mr. Key

The available information is as follows:

Net revenue expenditure provisional outturn 1989–90 and budget estimates 1990–91
Provisional outturn 1989–90 £'000s Budget estimates 1990–91 £'000s
Cambridgeshire 304,500 335,093
Devon 456,617 519,332
Dorset 273,158 304,476
Gloucestershire 241,871 274,190
Hereford and Worcester 292,162 320,493
Kent 661,425 760,000
Oxfordshire 247,861 291,554
Somerset 234,537 250,951
Wiltshire 261,404 285,110
Salford 151,658 163,400

Total expenditure1 final outturn 1985–86 to 1989–90. Net revenue expenditure2 provisional outturn 1980–90 and budget estimates 1990–91
Final Outturn 1985–86 £'000 Final Outturn 1986–87 £'000 Final Outturn 1987–88 £'000 Final Outturn 1988–89 £'000 Provisional Outturn 1989–90 £'000 Budget Estimate 1990–91 £'000
Suffolk 197,896 218,200 230,942 254,492 276,116 318,718
Babergh 3,061 2,520 3,088 3,557 3,534 4,636
Forest Heath 2,540 1,968 1,983 2,275 3,031 3,781
Ipswich 7,934 8,865 10,292 10,997 14,982 17,782
Mid Suffolk 3,010 2,807 3,274 3,368 3,783 6,064
St. Edmundsbury 3,181 3,296 3,283 2,546 4,095 5,020
Suffolk Coastal 4,101 3,978 4,758 4,744 6,300 9,081
Waveney 5,244 5,275 5,874 6,574 7,230 8,229

Provisional outturn 1989–90 £'000s Budget estimates 1990–91 £'000s
Stockport 141,575 168,761
Trafford 107,869 130,610
Sefton 146,770 179,143
Wirral 191,520 218,160
Coventry 192,636 218,115
Sandwell 187,208 223,558
Bradford 297,477 331,843
Leeds 358,442 422,348
City of London 76,160 67,873
Camden 147,683 180,685
Greenwich 99,721 221,596
Hackney 135,825 236,000
Islington 127,107 195,118
Kensington and Chelsea 65,004 117,458
Lewisham 117,997 207,292
Southwark 159,513 231,020
Tower Hamlets 124,538 212,471
Wandsworth 92,579 242,772
Westminster 106,317 173,617
Barking and Dagenham 85,292 99,852
Barnet 150,595 169,842
Bexley 118,358 124,602
Brent 228,953 238,444
Bromley 134,747 150,238
Croydon 165,362 189,838
Ealing 197,583 222,964
Enfield 153,003 170,417
Harrow 112,640 126,455
Havering 119,620 133,290
Hillingdon 138,020 155,194
Kingston-Upon-Thames 76,805 83,679
Merton 91,290 117,016
Newham 204,721 213,940
Redbridge 114,644 132,619
Richmond-Upon-Thames 81,034 90,376
Sutton 91,909 105,360
Waltham Forest 167,193 183,019

In 1990–91 information for capped authorities shows the position after capping.

Information is not yet available from Hammersmith and Fulham, Lambeth, Haringey and Hounslow.

Mr. Irvine

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, what was(a) the capital expenditure and (b) the revenue expenditure of (i) Baleigh district council, (ii) Forest Heath district council, (iii) Ipswich borough council, (iv) Mid-Suffolk district council, (v) St. Edmundsbury district council, (vi) Suffolk Coastal district council, (vii) Waveney district council and (viii) Suffolk county council in each year from (1) 1985–86 and (2) to 1990–91.

Mr. Key

The information is as follows:

Gross capital expenditure 1985–86 to 1990–91
1985–86 £'000 1986–87 £'000 1987–88 £'000 1988–89 £'000 1989–1990 £'000 1990–91 £'000
Suffolk 18,079 24,605 24,703 35,173 34,995 44,330
Babergh 3,792 4,999 2,736 5,814 7,149 7,146
Forest Heath 2,112 2,474 4,217 5,117 7,669 6,653
Ipswich 15,486 14,615 10,203 18,993 22,549 17,193
Mid Suffolk 6,007 6,237 6,757 6,834 8,650 7,712
St. Edmundsbury 8,821 7,391 8,183 7,304 12,956 14,100
Suffolk Coastal 3,250 4,789 6,298 6,897 9,166 6,084
Waveney 5,306 5,991 6,771 8,333 8,343 11,114
1Total expenditure as defined in the rate support grant system.
2Net revenue expenditure as defined in revenue support grant system.

Mr. Irvine

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will detail the amounts received by(a) Baleigh district council, (b) Forest Heath district council, (c) Ipswich borough council, (d) Mid-Suffolk district council, (e) St. Edmundsbury district council, (f) Suffolk coastal district council, (g) Waveney district council, (h)

Rate Support Grant 1985–86 to 1989–90
1985–86 £'000 1986–87 £'000 1987–88 £'000 1988–89 £'000 1989–90 £'000
Suffolk 71,583 70,640 75,740 78,863 71,898
Babergh 2,212 2,456 2,318 2,182 1,096
Forest Heath 1,748 1,820 1,818 1,684 1,761
Ipswich 4,834 4,778 3,482 3,027 3,384
Mid Suffolk 2,086 2,312 2,269 2,115 2,134
St. Edmundsbury 2,341 2,445 2,489 2,363 2,390
Suffolk Coastal 2,833 3,137 2,807 2,289 2,663
Waveney 4,221 4,528 4,606 4,721 4,927

Relevant Specific Grant 1985–86 to 1989–90
1985–86 £'000 1986–87 £'000 1987–88 £'000 1988–89 £'000 1989–90 £'000
Suffolk 16,629 19,098 21,485 23,787 25,564
Babergh 787 821 863 1,003 1,013
Forest Heath 273 287 332 332 368
Ipswich 1,984 2,139 2,573 2,558 2,811
Mid Suffolk 669 754 818 885 1,013
St. Edmundsbury 524 555 664 677 828
Suffolk Coastal 1,240 1,310 1,531 1,583 1,844
Waveney 1,578 1,749 2,048 2,119 2,367

Domestic rates 1985–86 to 1989–90
1985–86 £'000 1986–87 £'000 1987–88 £'000 1988–89 £'000 1989–90 £'000
Babergh 8,814 10,724 11,596 12,882 14,428
Forest Heath 5,367 6,601 7,086 7,933 9,108
Ipswich 14,438 17,013 18,956 20,757 24,102
Mid Suffolk 7,853 9,646 10,599 11,778 13,544
St. Edmundsbury 9,312 11,312 12,395 13,908 15,353
Suffolk Coastal 13,394 16,433 18,403 20,590 22,858
Waveney 11,275 13,549 15,058 16,529 18,379

Non-domestic rates 1985–86 to 1989–90
1985–86 £'000 1986–87 £'000 1987–88 £'000 1988–89 £'000 1989–90 £'000
Babergh 6,321 7,531 8,044 8,743 9,725
Forest Heath 4,818 5,845 6,401 7,160 8,142
Ipswich 18,102 20,965 22,806 24,731 28,445
Mid Suffolk 5,513 6,586 7,129 7,817 8,913
St. Edmundsbury 9,524 11,287 12,344 13,649 14,985
Suffolk Coastal 10,276 12,397 13,628 15,568 17,185
Waveney 7,409 8,721 9,575 10,524 11,618

Suffolk county council by way of (i) rate revenue support grant, (ii) specific grants, (iii) non-domestic rates and (iv) domestic rates and community charge in each year from (1) 1985–86 to 1990–91.

Mr. Key

The information is as follows:

1990–91 Revenue support grant £'000 Specific grants within AEF £'000 Community charge income £'000 Income from non-domestic rate pool £'000
Suffolk 0 29,169 0 0
Babergh 8,409 124 19,666 17,525
Forest Heath 5,366 113 11,740 9,902
Ipswich 14,458 255 40,682 26,633
Mid Suffolk 8,403 103 19,582 16,976
St. Edmundsbury 9,623 173 22,556 20,192
Suffolk Coastal 11,272 142 30,208 22,253
Waveney 11,894 256 28,297 23,966

Notes:

1. Domestic rates gross of rate rebates but net of rate relief grant.

2. Community charge income gross of charge benefits and transitional relief grant.

3. Income from the non-domestic rate pool is distributed in proportion to relevant population (£292.51 per adult). It is not comparable with income from non-domestic ratepayers in earlier years.

Ms. Harman

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish a table showing the relationship of community charge to rates in the manner of his answer to the hon. Member for Ealing, Acton (Sir G. Young) on 19 June,Official Report, column 480, using actual rates of community charge set by local authorities.

Mr. Key

The analyses already provided offer the most valid illustration of the distributional effects of the introduction of the community charge system. Use of actual community charges would not provide a proper comparison with 1989–90 rates since increases in local authority spending mean that the community charge is raising 30 per cent. more revenue than was raised by domestic rates.