HC Deb 03 December 1993 vol 233 cc756-8W
Ms Armstrong

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what has been the cost(a) overall, (b) to the Local Government Commission, (c) to Durham county council and (d) to the district councils of Durham to date of the inquiry into local government boundaries in the county of Durham.

Mr. Baldry

Expenditure by the Local Government Commission and by local authorities in the area is a matter for them.

Ms Armstrong

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what guidance he is issuing regarding a timetable for the reconsideration of the Boundary Commission's final proposal regarding local government boundaries in the county of Durham.

Mr. Baldry

My right hon. Friend has directed the Local Government Commission to start its further review of County Durham on 13 December 1993 and to report to him by 30 December 1994. The review will be conducted in accordance with the revised procedure guidance issued to the commission on 22 November. We will agree a target date for the report with the commission.

Mr. Milburn

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 29 November 1993 to the hon. Member for Erewash (Mrs. Knight),Official Report, column 380, whether he envisages that the same organisations and individuals will be consulted in the new review of County Durham as in the original review.

Mr. Baldry

On 22 November my right hon. Friend issued revised procedure guidance to the Local Government Commission for England. Annexe A to this revised guidance sets out the organisations which the commission is required to consult in conducting its review of an area. Except for the addition of the chief inspector, magistrates courts service, and the Lords Lieutenant for the area, this list is unchanged from that annexed to the procedure guidance issued to the commission in July 1992. The commission should also consult representative local organisations, including voluntary organisations. Others will be welcome to express their views, which will be taken fully into account by the commission.

Mr. Milburn

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 29 November 1993 to the hon. Member for Erewash (Mrs. Knight),Official Report, column 380, which local authorities in County Durham made representations about fresh proposals on the basis of the new guidance.

Mr. Baldry

Four district councils—Derwentside, Easington, Sedgefield and Wear Valley—have asked for the revised policy guidance issued to the Local Government Commission on 2 November to be applied to County Durham and have indicated their willingness to consider fresh options for change.

Mr. Milburn

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 29 November 1993 to the hon. Member for Erewash (Mrs. Knight),Official Report, column 380, what weight he will now give to local views in determining the future structure of local government in Darlington.

Mr. Baldry

It is for the Local Government Commission to conduct a further review of County Durham and make recommendations to my right hon. Friend. The Government have said that they attach great importance to local consensus and that the commission will wish to measure proposals from local authorities against expressed views from those outside local government. Once the final report has been published, there will be an opportunity for interested parties to make representations before we take decisions about the implementation of any recommendations for change.

Mr. Milburn

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 29 November 1993 to the hon. Member for Erewash (Mrs. Knight),Official Report, column 380, what has been the cost to date of the Local Government Commission's review of local government in County Durham.

Mr. Baldry

Expenditure on the review of County Durham is a matter for the Local Government Commission.

Mr. Milburn

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 29 November to the hon. Member for Erewash (Mrs. Knight),Official Report, column 380, whether the same commissioners will be reviewing County Durham.

Mr. Baldry

This is a matter for the Local Government Commission.

Mr. Milburn

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 29 November 1993 to the hon. Member for Erewash (Mrs. Knight), what are the expected costs of his decision further to review County Durham.

Mr. Baldry

The resources which we are making available to the commission, £5.124 million in 1993–94 and £8.300 million in 1994–95, should be adequate to enable it to complete all the reviews of local government structure in the shire counties of England by the end of 1994.

Mr. Milburn

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 29 November 1993 to the hon. Member for Erewash (Mrs. Knight), if he will make a statement on his reasons for not exempfing Darlington from further review.

Mr. Baldry

My right hon. Friend has directed the Local Government Commission, under section 15(6) of the Local Government Act 1992, to conduct a further review of County Durham because he is not at present satisfied that the commission's recommendations for the area meet the criteria in section 13(5) of that Act. He did not want to limit the possible options available for consideration in the further review, and there would also have been difficulties in implementing changes for part of the county in advance of the remainder. He therefore concluded that it would not be right to exclude Darlington from the area to be covered by the further review.