§ Mr. Andrew TurnerTo ask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to his answer of 11 March 2004,Official Report, column 1710W, on local government finance (Isle of Wight), what his grant to the Isle of Wight Council was for 2003–04; and what his grant would have been for (a) 2003–04 and (b) 2004–05 had he not accepted the Isle of Wight's argument about the New Earnings Survey sample size. [164435]
§ Mr. RaynsfordThe Isle of Wight Council received £96.318 million in formulae grant in 2003–04.
At the 2003–04 provisional settlement, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister calculated the area cost adjustment (ACA) for the Isle of Wight separately from that of Hampshire. As a result the Isle of Wight had an ACA factor of one. Had the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister continued to calculate the ACA in this way for the 2003–04 and 2004–05 settlements, it is likely that the Island would have continued to receive an ACA factor of one. And correspondingly they would have received less revenue support grant in 2003–04 and 2004–05.
However, precisely quantifying the effect of changing the ACA used in the 2003–04 and 2004–05 settlement can be done only at disproportionate cost. This is because it would require the re-calculation of the 2003–04 and 2004–05 ACA and the 2003–04 and 2004–05 settlements including the floor and ceiling calculations. This is a lengthy process.
§ Mr. PoundTo ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made in the balance of funding review of the impact on London local authorities of a local income tax. [164461]
§ Phil HopeThe Balance of Funding Review Steering Group heard evidence from the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy on 4 March on the pros and cons of a local income tax. Their evidence included some assessment of the effect of different models of local income tax on different parts of the country.