HC Deb 23 January 1995 vol 253 cc32-4W
Mr. Blunkett

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what was the spending on the youth service in each local education authority for(a) 1991–92, (b) 1992–93, (c) 1993–94 and (d) 1994–95.

Mr. Boswell

The table sets out net recurrent expenditure by LEAs in England on the youth service for 1991–92 and 1992–93, the latest year for which figures are available. These figures are in actual terms and are drawn from LEAs' own returns of their expenditure to the Department of the Environment.

Youth Service
£000
LEA Net recurrent expenditure 1991–92 Net recurrent expenditure 1992–93
Corporation of London 46 16
Camden 2,015 1,791
Greenwich 1,613 2,746
Hackney 2,549 3,565
Hammersmith 1,771 1,635
Islington 2,748 2,311
Kensington and Chelsea 1,712 2,063
Lambeth 1,937 1,850
Lewisham 992 1,464
Southwark 2,747 2,208
Tower Hamlets 4,639 4,217
Wands worth 3,047 3,116
Westminster 2,816 2,623
Barking 593 1,107
Barnet 1,295 1,272
Bexley 1,076 1,108
Brent 2,224 2,733
Bromley 875 981
Croydon 1,595 1,657
Ealing 1,137 1,007
Enfield 1,142 1,108
Haringey 915 804
Harrow 515 621
Havering 1,067 1,240
Hillingdon 904 1,850
Hounslow 1,836 2,036
Kingston upon Thames 782 820
Merton 783 889
Newham 1,670 1,770
Redbridge 1,176 1,311
Richmond upon Thames 723 748
Sutton 765 1,055
Waltham Forest 1,761 1,866
Birmingham 2,987 5,673
Coventry 1,600 1,802
Dudley 1,022 1,181

Youth Service
£000
LEA Net recurrent expenditure 1991–92 Net recurrent expenditure 1992–93
Sandwell 1,070 964
Solihull 528 656
Walsall 3,116 1,110
Wolverhampton 2,302 2,420
Knowsley 2,124 1,473
Liverpool 3,107 3,635
St. Helens 733 131
Sefton 1,352 1,331
Wirral 2,082 2,352
Bolton 1,231 1,401
Bury 851 1,088
Manchester 2,874 3,057
Oldham 897 1,096
Rochdale 1,507 1,408
Salford 1,096 937
Stockport 892 1,024
Tameside 2,000 2,255
Trafford 1,038 1,141
Wigan 1,314 1,289
Barnsley 468 960
Doncaster 2,054 1,832
Rotherham 1,358 1,842
Sheffield 4,464 4,423
Bradford 3,518 3,494
Calderdale 710 1,384
Kirklees 2,961 3,380
Leeds 7,457 3,199
Wakefield 1,252 1,252
Gateshead 804 880
Newcastle upon Tyne 823 3,035
North Tyneside 659 608
South Tyneside 462 527
Sunderland 1,836 1,688
Isles of Scilly 1 2
Avon 5,548 5,875
Bedfordshire 1,914 2,302
Berkshire 3,830 4,236
Buckinghamshire 4,174 4,849
Cambridgeshire 3,120 3,497
Cheshire 3,565 3,328
Cleveland 4,460 4,590
Cornwall 1,336 1,638
Cumbria 1,371 1,671
Derbyshire 10,956 10,666
Devon 3,882 3,854
Dorset 3,071 3,605
Durham 1,749 4,901
East Sussex 1,748 2,009
Essex 7,405 8,150
Gloucestershire 2,388 2,816
Hampshire 3,654 3,871
Hereford and Worcester 1,891 2,136
Hertfordshire 4,122 4,257
Humberside 5,499 6,158
Isle of Wight 603 752
Kent 5,660 5,372
Lancashire 7,941 8,510
Leicestershire 3,783 5,318
Lincolnshire 1,558 1,860
Norfolk 2,765 2,902
North Yorkshire 2,527 3,146
Northamptonshire 2,328 2,258
Northumberland 2,949 3,139
Nottinghamshire 6,780 6,504
Oxfordshire 1,919 2,267
Shropshire 2,512 2,608
Somerset 1,416 1,788
Staffordshire 5,746 8,104
Suffolk 1,102 1,155

Youth Service
£000
LEA Net recurrent expenditure 1991–92 Net recurrent expenditure 1992–93
Surrey 3,712 4,081
Warwickshire 1,469 1,209
West Sussex 2,623 2,861
Wiltshire 2,647 4,089
England Total 251,739 273,850

Mr. Blunkett

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans she has to place the funding of the youth service on a statutory footing.

Mr. Boswell

No further legislation is planned. In the case of the youth service, local authorities have a need to decide, within the resources available to them, the appropriate level of provision in order to fulfil their duties deriving from sections 41 and 53 of the Education Act 1994. The Government do not determine this cenally.