Local Government Finance (Hansard, 28 January 1994)

§ Mr. Straw
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what staff and other resources, expressed in full-time equivalents and in cash value, were devoted to the review of standard spending assessments in 1993; and what levels of resources he expects to use to review standard spending assessments in 1994.

§ Mr. Gummer
In the financial year 1993–94 my Department will have devoted about 10 man years' work to the review of standard spending assessments. This represents a pay cost of about £300,000. It is difficult to assess precisely the value of the other resources devoted to the review, but the non-pay running costs involved are in the region of £45,000 in 1993–94. Officials in other Government Departments were also involved in the review.
In the financial year 1994–95, my Department plans to devote six man years to development work on the standard spending assessments system.

§ Mr. Straw
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) how many authorities have made(a) written responses to and (b) requests for a meeting with Ministers about his proposals for local government finance for 1994–95;
(2) if he will list those authorities which have made oral representations to Ministers as part of the consultation on his proposals for local government finance for 1994–95, showing in each case the Minister seen by the authority, the duration of the meeting and the main topics raised;
(3) if he will place in the Library his Department's notes of each of the delegations received by Ministers as part of the consultation on his proposals for local government finance for 1994–95.

§ Mr. Gummer
During the consultation period on my proposals for the local government finance settlement for 437W 1994–95, which ended on 10 January, we received representations from 143 local authorities and authority groupings, and 60 requests for meetings.
The table shows the meetings held by each Minister. Also shown are four meetings which it was not possible for a Minister to attend, and at which delegations made oral representations to officials. No records are kept of the duration of meetings.
Such meetings are private, having been requested by individual authorities, and it is not my Department's custom to publish details of what was discussed at them.

Local authorities seen during the consultation period

Seen by the Secretary of State

Birmingham City Council

Seen by the Minister for Local Government and Planning

ADC major cities group

Bournemouth borough council

Burnley borough council

Coventry city council

Cumbria county council

Derbyshire county council

Dorset county council

Hereford and Worcester county council

Lancashire county council

Liverpool city council

London borough of Brent

London borough of Lambeth

London borough of Hammersmith and Fulham

London borough of Merton

London borough of Hounslow

London borough of Haringey

London borough of Hackney

London borough of Greenwich

London borough of Lewisham

Manchester city council

Norfolk county council

Northamptonshire county council

Nottinghamshire county council

Rotherham metropolitan borough council

Sheffield city council

Shropshire county council

Somerset county council

Wear Valley district council

Seen by the Minister for Housing, Inner Cities and Construction

Kirklees metropolitan borough council

West Yorkshire fire and civil defence authority

Thanet district council

Devon county council

Northampton borough council

Slough borough council

South Yorkshire fire and civil defence authority

Seen by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment

Avon county council

Blackburn borough council

Blackpool borough council

Gedling borough council

Harlow district council

Havant borough council

Ipswich borough council

Isle of Wight county council

Knowsley metropolitan borough council

Leicester city council

London borough of Newham

Luton borough council

North Yorkshire county council

Pendle borough council

Salford city council

Sefton metropolitan borough council

Solihull metropolitan borough council

York city council

Seen by officials

West Yorkshire police authority
438
Cornwall county council

Bradford city council

Merseyside fire and civil defence authority

§ Mr. Straw
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment which issues arising from the responses to his proposals for local government finance for 1994–95 will be discussed with the local authority associations as possible changes to the system of local government finance for 1995–96; and if he will make a statement on the continuing review of standard spending assessments.

§ Mr. Gummer
We are willing to discuss any issues which the local authority associations may wish to raise arising from the proposals for local government finance for 1994–95. As part of the usual round of discussions on standard spending assessments, we will wish to consider the treatment of the police element in the light of the changes in financial arrangements to take place for 1995–96. The associations will, no doubt, wish to bring forward their own agenda for discussion.

§ Mr. Straw
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what are the latest available figures of capital receipts, including receipts set aside to meet credit liabilities, for each local authority, and in total for England.

§ Mr. Gummer
Capital receipts information falls into two categories: receipts received during the financial year, and usable receipts held at a particular time, usually the end of the year. Receipts received during the year are divided into usable and reserved parts. The reserved parts are set aside as provision to meet credit liabilities and once set aside are no longer distinguishable from other amounts set aside, such as, for example, the statutory minimum amount set aside each year from the revenue account.
The latest forecast of gross receipts received in 1993–94, based on local authorities' first quarter returns, is £2.2 billion. Of this amount £1.8 billion is forecast to be usable and £400 million reserved.
The balance of usable receipts held at 31 March 1993 was £1 billion.
The latest estimate for the total amount held by local authorities as provision for credit liabilities is £6.1 billion as at 31 March 1993. As indicated, this figure will include, among other things, a notional amount of capital receipts which have been set aside but not yet used to redeem debt.
I am arranging for the latest available figures for each local authority to be placed in the Library of the House.