---

Admiralty Arch

Dr. David Clark: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what consideration his Department has given to the future of Admiralty arch; which estate agent was employed to consider the sale of Admiralty arch; which independent advisers were involved in this decision; and if he will make a statement. [8992]

Sir Paul Beresford: Prior to, and since the relocation from the majority of the building by the Ministry of Defence, my Department has actively been canvassing use by other Departments and agencies. No estate agents have been employed to consider the sale of Admiralty arch but consultants, Knight Frank, have been commissioned to advise on the possible future uses of the property, including any private finance initiative opportunities. Their report is awaited.

Non-domestic Rates

Mr. Byers: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to amend the Non-domestic Rating (Unoccupied Property) Regulations 1989 (S.I. 1989 No. 2261) so that the benefit of the rate reduction can only be claimed by a landlord; and if he will make a statement. [9519]

Sir Paul Beresford: Liability for rates attaches to the beneficial occupier of the hereditament; or if it is empty, whoever is entitled to occupy it. Any benefit arising from empty property relief should therefore go to the same person who is liable for the rates, whether it be the owner, landlord, lessee or tenant.

We have no plans to change this.

Local Government Reorganisation

Mr. John Greenway: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what resources he will make available to authorities that have been or are to be reorganised on 1 April 1995, 1996, or 1997 for reorganisation costs incurred by them in 1996-97; and if he will make a statement. [9667]

15 Jan 1996 : Column: 367

Mr. Curry: On 20 October I invited authorities that have been or are to be reorganised on or before 1 April 1997 to submit estimates of the amount of expenditure they expect to incur on transitional costs of reorganisation in 1996-97. On the basis, inter alia, of the information provided by the authorities, I have decided the maximum amounts to allocate towards such costs in 1996-97. I have given priority to authorities to be reorganised in 1996. The majority of authorities to be reorganised in 1997 asked for allocations in respect of redundancy to be deferred until the mid-year review in October 1996 and the allocations listed, for those authorities, are not intended to cover redundancy costs.

The amounts are as follows:

Maximum amounts: £ thousand rounded

Authority	1996-97	Cumulative total 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97
1995 Reorganisation
Isle of Wight Council	500	4,437
1996 Reorganisations
Hartlepool Borough Council	2,150	5,898
Redcar and Cleveland Council	3,400	6,037
Middlesbrough Borough Council	2,750	5,104
Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council	3,250	6,678
North West Somerset Council	3,000	6,250
South Gloucestershire Council	3,500	5,300
North Lincolnshire Council	3,500	5,300
North East Lincolnshire Council	4,000	5,900
North Yorkshire County Council	400	1,400
Selby District Council	100	610
1997 Reorganisations
Bedfordshire County Council	300
Luton Borough Council	3,250
Milton Keynes Borough Council	2,500
Derbyshire County Council	300
Derby City Council	2,500
Bournemouth Borough Council	2,500
Poole Borough Council	2,500
Durham County Council	300
Darlington Borough Council	2,500
East Sussex County Council	300
Brighton Borough Council	350
Hove Borough Council	350
Hampshire County Council	300
Portsmouth City Council	2,500
Southampton City Council	2,500
Staffordshire County Council	300
Stoke on Trent City Council	2,500
Wiltshire County Council	100
Thamesdown Borough Council	2,500

Buckinghamshire and Dorset county councils did not submit bids. The councils of the East Riding of Yorkshire, Hull City, Bristol City, Bath and North-east Somerset and York district are being asked to reconsider whether the reorganisations in their area could be implemented more economically. If they submit revised bids by the end of January, they will be considered and allocations made during February.

15 Jan 1996 : Column: 368

I shall make a further announcement about allocations to authorities for which reorganisation orders have not yet been made.

Housing Association Tenants

Mr. Dunn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the results of the consultation exercise on the Government's proposals in respect of right-to-buy and purchase grants for tenants of housing associations and independent social landlords. [9698]

Mr. Curry: Following the publication of the housing White Paper, "Our Future Homes", over 3,000 copies of the consultation paper on purchase grants for housing association tenants were sent out to interested parties, and 341 responses have been received.

I have carefully considered the views of many housing associations that future HAG-funded properties should not be subject to the new right to buy. But the Government continue to believe that tenants ought to have this new right, and provision for this will appear in the forthcoming Housing Bill.

I have, however, decided to make a number of changes to the schemes as originally proposed in the light of the responses received. These changes are:

the exemption from the schemes of properties in all rural communities of less than 3,000 population, because of the particular difficulties in providing replacement properties;
replacement properties need not be new-build, but could be either rehabilitated existing stock or bought on the open market if this represents the best value for money;
associations will be allowed to offer tenants alternative properties from their stock, for which purchase grant will be available;
Housing Association grant repayment may be waived on all receipts from sales to tenants on condition that they go into the ring-fenced fund to provide replacement properties;
Large-scale voluntary transfer associations will be treated in the same way as other associations--that is they will not have to bear the burden of grant themselves, as originally proposed;
in the statutory scheme, associations--and other independent social landlords--will not be required to sell properties where the outstanding private sector debt is greater than the market value;
in the voluntary scheme, participating associations will not be required to sell where:
the property was built entirely by private donation or funds;
properties are subject to restrictive legal covenants or agreements;
the costs of acquisition and improvement (but not repair), or the outstanding private loan debt on the property, are greater than the market value.

I have deposited a list of responses to the consultation paper in the Libraries of both Houses, and copies of individual responses are available through them.

Red Lion Fireworks

Mr. Burden: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment to what destination the three container loads of Red Lion fireworks were re-exported on 23 September, referred to in his answer of 6 November, Official Report, column 602. [8923]

15 Jan 1996 : Column: 369

Sir Paul Beresford: The Red Lion fireworks were re-exported on 23 September to Dublin.

Mr. Burden: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment he has made of the performance and effectiveness of the Health and Safety Executive regarding the import of dangerous fireworks following the case of Kanash Ltd. and Red Lion. [8922]

Sir Paul Beresford: I consider that the Health and Safety Executive took appropriate enforcement action: Kanash complied fully with all the prohibitions placed upon it, and HSE ensured, subsequently, that all the recalled Red Lion brand fireworks were destroyed.

Inner-city Shops

Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what plans he has to zero-rate inner-city shops; [8590]

(2) if he will make it his policy to select Hillfields in Coventry as a pilot area for zero-rating. [8595]

Sir Paul Beresford: The Government have no plans to zero rate inner-city shops.

Mr. Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many vacant shops there are in inner-city areas in (a) the United Kingdom and (b) Coventry. [8592]

Sir Paul Beresford: We do not hold such information for England centrally.

As part of our advice on planning town centres and retail developments in planning policy and guidance note No. 6--PPG6--we advise local authorities to monitor vacant properties in their town centres. I understand that Coventry city council will shortly be publishing information about vacant shops in its unitary development plan.

The information relating to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are matters for my right hon. Friends, the Secretaries of State for Wales, for Scotland and for Northern Ireland.

Mr. Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many representations he has received from organisations concerned with the blighting of inner-city areas and shopping centres. [8591]

Sir Paul Beresford: We occasionally receive correspondence about blight. Most of my correspondence on shopping centres relates to the damaging effects on them of out-of-centre and out-of-town shopping developments.

Mr. Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment he has made of the difficulties of letting vacant shops in inner-city areas. [8594]

Sir Paul Beresford: None. This is primarily the responsibility of local regeneration partnerships, including local authorities.

15 Jan 1996 : Column: 370

Mr. Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many vacant shops have been deliberately damaged to avoid paying the business rate levy in the last two years. [8596]

Sir Paul Beresford: This information is not available.

---