§ Lord Beaumont of Whitleyasked Her Majesty's Government:
How the £230 million transitional fund to allow the completion of housing schemes dependent on the local authority social housing grant was calculated; whether they are confident that it is adequate, whether it is ring-fenced; and why they will not defer abolition of the grant to April 2004, when capital receipts will be pooled. [HL2094]
§ The Minister of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Lord Rooker)The transitional funding figure was an estimate made on the basis of information provided by the Housing Corporation as to normal levels of commitments by authorities at year end. I have since extended the transitional arrangements to support investment in housing of up to £550 million in 2003–04, which is higher than in any previous year. The money will be ring-fenced in the first instance to cover schemes that could have gone ahead in 2003–04 if local authority housing grant (LASHG) had continued. Details are set out in my Answer to Lord Jordan (WA 109–110) on 5 March 2003.
The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister consulted local authorities on the principle of abolishing LASHG last autumn. In the light of work on the Communities Plan, it was decided to make this reform quickly, provided transitional funding arrangements were in place to ensure that well advanced, good quality schemes were able to go ahead. It would be indefensible now to retain a funding mechanism that 45WA does not allocate resources to areas where they are most needed, has consistently underspent nationally, and has given unfair advantage to one category of local authorities.