HC Deb 11 December 2001 vol 376 cc792-3W
Mr. Andrew Mitchell

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (1) what was the average cost associated with(a) job losses, (b) removal costs, (c) informing the resident population of the change, (d) changes to records, (e) administration costs and (f) election costs incurred by the establishment of the new unitary authorities in 1996; [21634]

(2) what responsibility (a) local and (b) central Government have for the costs associated with changes in (i) finance structure and (ii) administration structure when setting up a new unitary authority. [21635]

Dr. Whitehead

These costs were met by the local authorities concerned and this information is not held centrally. The Government expected local authorities being reorganised to take the opportunity to cut costs and improve efficiency. So supplementary credit approvals (SCAs) were given for authorities to borrow money to meet the one-off indirect costs of reorganisation until the savings and receipts arising from the process were realised. The SCAs provide a rough proxy for the transitional cost of reorganisation, though they do not necessarily capture all local authorities' expenditure. The total for the 1995–96 authorities was £143.8 million.

Mr. Andrew Mitchell

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (1) how many unitary authorities are buying in services from neighbouring authorities; and what the net effect is on expenditure for each authority of this action; [21411]

(2) what research has been commissioned investigating the cost saving benefits of unitary authorities buying in essential services from neighbouring authorities; and if he will publish the results. [21410]

Dr. Whitehead

The Government do not collect any local authority trading information centrally.

However, we recently commissioned research for the Byatt Review of Local Government procurement which showed that 42 per cent. of authorities overall have joint contract arrangements with other authorities, that is 98 authorities. 17 of the 30 unitary authorities responding to this question have joint arrangements with other local authorities. Many of these joint arrangements are facilitated through buying consortia.

We believe that a truly mixed economy of service provision is the best way to ensure genuine innovation and true competition. We want to see partnerships that are public-public, public-voluntary and public-private. This could involve the best in-house providers using their expertise in wider markets within the public service.

We envisage laying orders before Parliament in the new year to allow local authorities to be able to use the new trading powers proposed in the consultation paper "Working With Others To Achieve Best Value".

Mr. Sanders

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will publish the total amount of Government funding to the unitary authority of Torbay since its creation. [21697]

Revenue grants paid into general fund revenue account (GFRA) and capital grants
£000
1998–99 outturn 1999–2000 outturn 2000–01 outturn 2001–02 Budget
Specific grants inside AEF 4,215 3,880 111,597 10,664
Revenue support grant 45,489 46,700 46,209 48,886
Redistributed non-domestic rates 29,087 31,366 35,416 34,910
Revenue grants paid into GFRA 78,791 81,946 93,222 94,460
Capital grants 1,159 1,670 15,798 1,682
Total 79,950 83,616 99,020 96,142
1 Includes extra funds to support a Private Finance Initiative (PFI) project.

Back to