| Previous Section | Home Page |
Column 204
greenhouse gases and global warming. At the very least, we have to say that the signs are so strong that it would be wrong and dangerous to ignore them.Mr. Bennett: Before the Secretary of State gets too pleased with himself, will he confirm that the Energy Saving Trust originally intended to save 2.5 million tonnes in carbon dioxide emissions but that the Government have so far found no way of financing those savings and enabling the Energy Saving Trust to operate? What is the Secretary of State going to do about that?
Mr. Gummer: I will confirm that we thought originally that we might just reach our target in 2000, and it now looks as though we shall do better than that. Originally, we were not prepared to commit ourselves to reductions after 2000, but we are now committing ourselves to reductions of between 5 and 10 per cent., so long as we can encourage others to work with us, as we are responsible for only 3 per cent. of emissions. The hon. Gentleman underlines the fact that we have done better than we promised, and we shall continue to do so.
Mr. Dafis: Does the Secretary of State agree that the use of cost- benefit analysis in developing policies to combat climate change is, at best, questionable? Is he aware that, as part of the policy development process, economists on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change currently propose to ascribe monetary values to American lives that are 10 times greater than those for third-world lives? Will the Secretary of State unequivocally reject that idea and ensure that it plays no part in any policy negotiation process on climate change?
Mr. Gummer: I think that I would want to distinguish between the two parts of the hon. Gentleman's question. I think that the cost-benefit analysis applied in those circumstances could be extremely helpful. I cannot think of anything else that would demonstrate so clearly the importance of taking the steps that we are taking and the very considerable damage that would be done to many countries around the world if the climate change that seems possible as a result of man's intervention in gas emission were to occur. It is true that any kind of change would prove very costly indeed, so the benefits of avoiding it are extremely worth while.
I cannot comment on the other matter raised by the hon. Gentleman, but it is quite clear to me that one life is as worthy as another, wherever it may be.
Mr. Ian Bruce: Does my right hon. Friend agree that many of the savings in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions have resulted from the increase in electricity production by the nuclear industry? Does he agree that we should promote the greater use of nuclear power within the United Kingdom and that we should support the spread of United Kingdom research overseas in order to establish nuclear power stations in other developed and developing nations?
Mr. Gummer: I am very proud of the nuclear industry, particularly Sizewell B in my constituency. There are many other ways in which we can ensure that we reduce gas emissions in power production. The fact is that we do not get aught for nowt, and there are disadvantages in all methods of power production. However, we must ensure
Column 205
that we produce power with as little damage to the environment as possible. That is the policy of the Government.Ms Ruddock: Is the Secretary of State aware that the Association of Small Island States--the territories most at risk from the threat of global warming--are pressing the developed countries for a 20 per cent. reduction in CO emissions by 2005? Is he further aware that the energy technology support unit of the Department of Trade and Industry believes that a 20 per cent. reduction in energy consumption in Britain is possible with no- regrets policies?
As the Government have had it so easy to date and as the Secretary of State regards himself as a leader, will he now commit the Government and this country to a 20 per cent. reduction in CO levels by 2005?
Mr. Gummer: I am interested to see that Labour party policy has changed on the issue and that the Labour party has evidently committed itself to a 20 per cent. reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2005.
Ms Ruddock: Answer the question.
Mr. Gummer: If the hon. Lady is asking me to answer the question, no doubt she has already committed her party to a 20 per cent. reduction in carbon dioxide levels by 2005. She has told the House that such a reduction would be easy and, if it is easy, she clearly wishes to achieve it. Therefore, unless she is prepared to deny in the House that the Labour party intends to go for a 20 per cent. reduction in energy use in this country by 2005, we will have to take that as Labour party policy until there is a public renunciation of her comment. According to the hon. Lady, the target is so easy that it should be accepted. Until I hear something different from her, that is what I shall be saying around the country.
Gloucestershire County Council (Budget)
13. Mr. Knapman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to visit shire hall, Gloucester, in the foreseeable future to discuss the county council's budget. [17917]
Mr. Knapman: I am sorry that my right hon. Friend is unable to visit shire hall in Gloucester, but my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester (Mr. French)--my right hon. Friend's parliamentary private secretary--will confirm that primary schools in the county are having their budgets cut by an average of between 5 and 6 per cent., and in one case, by 10 per cent., despite an increase in the standard spending assessment permitted spending of 2.6 per cent. My right hon. Friend would also find that grant-maintained schools are being top-sliced by 20.73 per cent., compared with Wiltshire, where the figure is only 16 per cent. In those circumstances, do we not owe it to the pupils of Gloucestershire either to find a more direct and effective means of funding or, sadly, to relax the cap?
Mr. Curry: I rather think that shire hall will be coming to visit us in the next few weeks, because Gloucestershire is one of the counties which we have designated for capping. Gloucestershire must tell us by the end of the month whether it accepts the cap. No doubt it will wish
Column 206
to come and explain. When it does so, the information which my hon. Friend has given will be useful when we discuss the justification for the budget.Mr. Nigel Jones: The Minister will be aware that Gloucestershire county councillors will be meeting on Monday to decide whether to appeal against the cap. Is he also aware that the budget that the council has set increases the council tax by nothing at all? It is a standstill council tax. Will he be open to persuasion by the councillors when they come to appeal to have the cap relaxed?
Mr. Curry: I hope that the county will set a budget at the cap that we have indicated. The council has the right to argue why it should be permitted to set a budget higher than the cap. When, and if, the nine local authorities involved come to argue their cases, we shall listen to what they have to say, and we shall ask some searching questions as well. At the end of the process, we shall decide whether to meet the budget that the councils have set, or whether we believe that a different figure would be appropriate.
Mr. Tony Lloyd: Why does the Minister think that he and his Government colleagues have a monopoly on the wisdom? It is not simply Labour and Liberal Democrat-controlled councils but Tory councils in Gloucestershire, Shropshire and other capped authorities which think that the Government have got it wrong. Why does not the Minister accept that the levels set for Gloucestershire and other counties are far too low to sustain decent services? The Government, not county councillors, should think again.
Mr. Curry: That doctrine is rather more dangerous in practice than it sounds in theory. The hon. Gentleman appears to be saying that local levels of taxation and local authority expenditure should be set entirely unilaterally by the authorities without the Government taking any view of what is a proper amount in the interests of the economy as a whole. That is a doctrine which even the Labour party would not wish to sustain if it ever came into office.
All Governments must take a view on the total volume of public expenditure. Local authorities contribute a quarter to that, and it is entirely proper that we should determine what we believe to be a sensible level for local authority expenditure while providing the means for authorities to argue why, in particular circumstances, they may need more or that their amount is incorrect. That is a process that we shall undertake over the next few weeks.
Construction Industry
14. Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what action he has taken within his Department to support his sponsorship of the construction industry. [17918]
Mr. Robert B. Jones: My Department enhanced its capacity and focus for the sponsorship of the construction industry at the end of 1993. Among other things we have: established with the industry the construction procurement group to help to reduce the UK's trade deficit in construction products; set up the construction benchmarking challenge under which my Department provides financial assistance towards the establishment of four benchmarking clubs; boosted the practical help that we give to UK construction companies
Column 207
which wish to pursue business overseas. Ministers led six trade missions in 1994 covering 11 countries; and, most importantly, my Department co-sponsored with the industry Sir Michael Latham's report, "Constructing the team", on the procurement and contractual arrangements of the UK construction industry. My Department has also helped set up the Construction Industry Board to implement the recommendations of the report.Mr. Clifton-Brown: I warmly welcome my hon. Friend's reply and the help that he has given to the construction industry. He will be aware that the Latham report published last year was warmly welcomed by the industry. One of the main recommendations of the report was a construction contracts Bill to oversee standard contract conditions and payment terms. When will the consultation paper for that Bill be published so that we can get that much-needed measure on the statute book?
Mr. Jones: I am grateful to my hon. Friend, and I congratulate him on being the first Member of Parliament in nine months to ask an oral question on the construction industry. That issue is extremely important for the whole industry and we will make sure, provided that there is consensus in the industry, that legislation is brought forward. I shall keep my hon. Friend informed.
Mr. Robert Ainsworth: Does the Minister accept that there is wide consensus on the Latham proposals for legislation and for the construction industry Bill? Can the Minister make a commitment to bring forward such legislation? What discussions has he had with colleagues in other Departments--particularly the Department of Trade and Industry--on whether they also will support legislation?
Mr. Jones: We consult all interested parties. At the moment, there is consensus in the industry and the Government have made it clear that we will be prepared to countenance legislation, provided that there is consensus on its form and impact.
Council Housing Repairs
15. Mr. Butler: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he is taking to ensure that councils repair properties promptly. [17919]
Mr. Robert B. Jones: On 1 April 1994, we introduced the new right-to -repair scheme, which requires councils to carry out repairs covered by the scheme quickly.
Mr. Butler: I welcome my hon. Friend's reply, and many tenants welcome the right-to-repair scheme. I invite my hon. Friend to comment on the inordinate and unnecessary delay between tenancies, when properties remain empty for weeks and sometimes months because of incompetent and inefficient local authorities. They are mainly Labour-controlled but, to be fair, some are Liberal-controlled. They seem incapable of having repairs made properly, partly because of their obsession with using direct labour organisations. Can anything be done to reduce waiting lists while cutting the number of empty properties?
Mr. Jones: My hon. Friend makes an extremely good point. We are keen to see through the housing investment programme evidence that local authorities are managing their existing housing stock properly. That includes making sure of a quick turnover of properties between
Column 208
tenants. If my hon. Friend has particular instances in mind, I will be pleased to see that they are raised when considering each local authority's HIP round.Council Tax Arrears
17. Mr. Dunn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the council tax arrears for each inner London borough; and if he will make a statement. [17922]
Mr. Gummer: Council tax arrears for the 12 inner London boroughs at 31 March 1994 totalled £95 million. The worst council was Lambeth with £29.6 million arrears. The four worst local authorities nationally were all in inner London--Lambeth, Hackney, Islington and Southwark.
Mr. Dunn: Given that Labour-controlled inner-London councils are about as effective as a dying duck in a thunderstorm, will my right hon. Friend consider the advice that he might give the people of Dartford on how to avoid the nightmare of Lambeth?
Mr. Gummer: Dartford is one of the councils with an extremely good record of debt collection, and therefore is able to provide for council tax payers and others living in the borough an extremely good service at a reasonable price. The answer is clear. If one wants authorities of the sort found in inner London, such as Lambeth, Hackney, Islington and Southwark, vote Labour. If one wants a decent authority, such as Dartford, vote Conservative.
Local Authority Staff
19. Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment he has made of the impact of delegated legislation on the numbers of staff employed by local authorities in each of the last three years. [17924]
Mr. Curry: Changes in requirements arising from transfers of responsibilities, as well as changes in costs through efficiency, are discussed with local authority associations. The consequences for staffing is a matter for councils.
Mr. Steen: Is not the whole problem that we pass legislation and expect local authorities to observe the duties that we impose on them, without properly working out how much money they need? Surely the right way forward is a cost compliance assessment of all legislation passed, such as yesterday's Environment Bill, so that we do not impose on local authorities duties that they cannot afford to observe. Is that not the nub of the problem?
Mr. Curry: My hon. Friend will be aware that there is a constant demand that we entrust local authorities to do more. There are complaints whenever it is suggested that we are asking them to do less. It is important, therefore, that when they get new responsibilities the costs of them are evaluated properly. We undertake such evaluations with the local authority associations. The SSA system is designed to enable that to be done. If responsibilities are transferred within Government, transfers will follow that. We are following my hon. Friend's injunction.
Carbon Monoxide Emissions
20. Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what current initiatives his Department is
Column 209
following to lessen carbon monoxide emissions in urban areas; and if he will make a statement. [17925]Mr. Atkins: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State published in January a statement of the Government's strategic policies for air quality management.
On the basis of those policies, national emissions of carbon monoxide are expect to drop by 36 per cent. by 2000 and by 56 per cent. by 2010, compared with present levels.
Mr. Llwyd: Is not the Minister being rather complacent? Surely it is time that the Government grasped the nettle and considered what is happening in other countries. For example, there is limited use now of private vehicles in Athens. Is it not time that the Government stopped slapping their own backs and saying that they are doing something, and started getting on with the job? We all know that pollution comes from conurbations, where often there is only one person in each car. Let us get better public transport and see an end to all that.
Mr. Atkins: Frankly, the hon. Gentleman is being complacent if he does not understand the facts of life in the context at least of air quality. The most recent figures available to us show that the World Health Organisation's standards of one hour, 30 minutes or 15 minutes on carbon monoxide were not exceeded anywhere in the United Kingdom. As the hon. Gentleman heard in my first answer, the future is just as bright.
Housing Association Dwellings
21. Dr. Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment he has made of the ability of those on low incomes to afford the rent of new housing association dwellings. [17926]
Mr. Robert B. Jones: The most recent analysis of affordability carried out by the Housing Corporation for the year 1992-93 demonstrates that, on average, tenants spent approximately 10 per cent. of their net income on rent for a newly completed housing association dwelling. Tenants who are in work spent approximately 18 per cent. of their net income on rent.
Dr. Lynne Jones: Does the Minister accept that the reduction of housing association grant to levels that even the Association of Mortgage Lenders describes as unrealistic means that many new housing association dwellings are now being let or put on offer at over £70 a week, which means that they are unaffordable for people who are not eligible for housing benefit? Is not the shift of subsidy from bricks and mortar to means-tested benefit leading to more dependency? Is that not proving more costly to the public purse in the long run?
Mr. Robert B. Jones: Of course there is a relationship between the subsidy to bricks and mortar, which on average is just under 60 per cent., and the subsidy to individuals through housing benefit. Naturally enough, where the two meet there is likely to be a problem in terms of a poverty trap. That is something that we keep under constant review. There has been no shortage of projects coming forward under the present rates. I should
Column 210
point out to the hon. Lady that all but 2 per cent. of the fall in housing association grant rates has been accounted for by falls in procurement costs.Mr. Nicholas Winterton: Will my hon. Friend accept that there is a problem? I sit on the board of the Templar Housing Society Ltd., which is implementing--it says that it is forced to do so--an increase in rents of about £34 to £35 a month. Representations have been made to me by people on the state retirement pension, who have had only a small pension increase. They say that the increase in their housing costs are likely to exceed any increase in the old-age pension. Will not my hon. Friend consider these matters a little more carefully, perhaps understand that there is a problem and say that he will consider it? Perhaps I can write to him about the housing society of which I am a member.
Mr. Jones: My hon. Friend is welcome to write to me at any time about any subject that falls within my responsibilities. It sounds to me, from the instance that he gave, as if he is talking about pensioners with private pensions in addition to their state pension. We keep those matters under review, and, as I said during the last Environment Question Time, we are in contact with other interested Departments, including the Department of Social Security, about the interplay between housing benefits and HAG rates.
Propaganda Expenditure
22. Mr. Jacques Arnold: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his policy on the spending of money by councils on propaganda. [17927]
Mr. Arnold: Is my hon. Friend aware that, immediately after the Lib- Lab pact took over Kent county council, it diverted £100,000 of the education funding to a propaganda campaign against
grant-maintained schools in the county? Is he further aware that, when I asked it how much that had cost to date, because we are two years on, it refused to divulge that figure, which may now be as high as £250,000? Does he not think that that money would be far better spent on the education of our children?
Mr. Curry: There is a real problem with the ability of district auditors in particular to keep an effective check on local authority expenditure. The rules are quite clear on what local authorities can spend money in terms of information and propaganda. The trouble is that it depends on citizens bringing a complaint to the district auditor, and then the investigation takes place retroactively. That causes some difficulties, and it would be worth while, seeing, without in any way compromising the independence of the auditors, how we could give local people a more effective survey of the way in which the local authority spends money in their name.
Mr. Skinner: Does not the Government spend a lot of money on propaganda as well? A question costs about £100 to answer, and if the Minister studies the Order Paper for any given week, he will find that, as more than
Column 211
50 Tory Members of Parliament ask planted questions, more than £5, 000 is being spent by the Government to give out information on their own behalf.Mr. Curry: In that case, it is rather curious that, whenever we answer an Opposition question by saying that it would cost a disproportionate amount to answer, Opposition Members get very indignant.
Mr. McLoughlin: Will my hon. Friend confirm that there is no standard spending assessment for local authority information departments and therefore that any money that local authorities spend on propaganda, or, indeed, information officers or press officers, is spent at the cost of the resources to other services? If county councils have that as their priority, their priority is not providing front-line services.
Mr. Curry: My hon. Friend is right. We think that it is quite right that local authorities should inform their electorates of what they are doing. That is a perfectly proper activity. Indeed, if the information is not given, it is difficult to assess the performance. We wish local people to be able to assess the performance of local authorities. We have done a great deal to place before people more evidence of performance, but at the end of the day we must depend on the good sense and integrity of local authorities to draw a sensible line between what really is information to the electorate and what is nothing less than propaganda. As I said in a previous answer, I am not yet satisfied that that line is drawn sharply or clearly enough.
Water and Sewerage Charges
23. Mrs. Helen Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment he has made of the effects of the current year's price increase for water and sewerage. [17928]
Mr. Atkins: The price increases will enable water companies to continue their investment programmes to fulfil their legal obligations to meet improved water quality and environmental standards.
Mrs. Jackson: Does the Minister recognise that this year's price increase will take more than 30 per cent. of this year's benefit increase and will therefore put people, particularly those who are on low incomes and benefit, in
Column 212
even more hardship than they were before? Will he take the opportunity today to urge water companies around the country to give a payback to their customers for the price increases over inflation that they have imposed on them, as North West Water has done this year? Will he suggest that all other water companies in the country follow its example?Mr. Atkins: I am grateful to the hon. Lady for giving me the opportunity to congratulate my own regional water company, North West Water, on the results of its efficiencies and the effects of privatisation, which have done so much, and on offering a payback to my constituents and to many other payers. I would encourage every other water company to do the same as North West Water. The hon. Lady made a point about the more vulnerable members of society, and I join her in encouraging water companies to pay as much attention as possible to the needs of those people in terms of the schemes that they offer for the payment of water costs, and where necessary in providing cheap water meters.
Mr. Dobson: Does the Minister approve of the decision of Anglian Water to raise charges for people who are not receiving metered supplies but to hold down the price that is charged to people receiving metered supplies, or do the Government approve of that effort to blackmail people into taking water meters that they would not otherwise want?
Mr. Atkins: As many hon. Members will understand, the hon. Gentleman does not appreciate what is involved in the setting of water charges. He benefits, in the Thames region, from one of the best and cheapest supplies of water anywhere in the United Kingdom. Water companies throughout the United Kingdom invest a lot of money. They appreciate that the quality of water has to be improved as a result of directives from the European Union. All that costs money, which must come from the customer as well as the marketplace.
Dame Elaine Kellett-Bowman: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: I shall take points of order after the statement. Mr. Steen rose --
Madam Speaker: I am sorry, it is too late now. It is 3.30 pm.
Column 211
| Next Section (Debates)
| Home Page |