| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
10.15 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. James Clappison): I welcome this opportunity to respond to a debate on an important subject and to explain the importance of the landfill tax in terms of our strategy for waste management, as well as dealing with some of the comments of the hon. Member for Littleborough and Saddleworth (Mr. Davies) about the impact of the tax on local government.
The landfill tax is to be introduced in October and will be the first tax to be introduced with essentially environmental objectives--something that the hon. Gentleman was able to bring himself to admit at least at one point in his speech. On reflection, he may want to reconsider his avowed belief that environmental considerations are not a priority as regards the tax. Clearly, that is not correct; it is an environmentally driven tax.
The tax marks an important step in extending the use of economic instruments to protect and enhance environmental objectives. The central purpose of the new tax is to ensure that landfill costs reflect the full costs of the environmental impact of activity. By doing that, business and consumers are encouraged, in a cost-effective and non-regulatory manner, to produce less waste, to recover value from more of the waste that is produced, and to dispose of less waste in landfill sites.
The introduction of the tax will not result in an additional burden on industry and commerce. As part of the Government's policy to shift the burden of taxation from employment to activities that have a detrimental effect on the environment, the Chancellor of the Exchequer has announced that he intends to reduce the main rate of employer's national insurance contributions by 0.2 per cent. from April 1997. The rates of tax, which my right hon. and learned Friend announced in his November Budget statement, take into account the environmental impact of landfilling different types of waste. The standard rate of tax will be £7 per tonne and the lower rate, which will apply to inactive waste, will be £2 per tonne. Those rates take into account research sponsored by my Department into the environmental impacts of landfill disposal operations, which are not at present reflected in the price charged for land filled.
The Government have recently consulted interested parties about the list of wastes that should be subject to the lower rate of tax. We are considering the responses to consultation and will announce our conclusions in due course.
Local authorities are responsible for the collection and disposal of household waste. The cost of the tax in respect of such waste will fall on them. Authorities already have an important part to play in helping to achieve the goals for sustainable waste management set out in our White Paper, "Making Waste Work". The tax will increase the incentive for them to encourage practices that reduce the amount of waste disposed of to landfill, for example by providing more recycling facilities and introducing kerbside collection schemes. The tax will also provide a further incentive for local authorities to bring home to local taxpayers the need to participate in that process.
The local government finance settlement was debated and approved in the House on 31 January. We have allowed a 3.3 per cent. increase in total standard spending--the overall level of provision for local authority spending next year. We accept that it will be a tough settlement for some councils, but within the limited resources we have given priority to education, as we said we would do. We believe that the settlement is fair and that authorities have sufficient resources to carry out their functions.
It is too easy for an authority to draw up a wish list or to add up all the new demands that it faces and ask taxpayers to pick up the tab. The Government have sought to put an end to that approach once and for all. Every council must ask what it can save as well as what else it needs to spend. The more efficient an authority is, the better services it will be able to provide.
During consultation on the settlement, we received many representations about the increased costs of the landfill tax. The net impact of the landfill tax will, of course, depend on individual local authorities' waste disposal policies and on the effect of the offsetting reductions in employer's national insurance contributions that my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor is making.
Some authorities have asked that the landfill tax be disregarded for capping purposes. Our capping criteria and capping limits are, of course, still provisional as final decisions are not announced until after local authorities have set their budgets. However, I should point out that we have not adjusted local authorities' base budgets to reflect the fact that they are no longer responsible for waste regulation. That has given authorities an additional £26 million of spending power in 1996-97.
Of course we do not expect local authorities to change their practices overnight. The hon. Gentleman was pitching it a little too high when he said that the announcement of the landfill tax should not have taken councils by surprise, suggesting that it had taken them by surprise this year. My right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor announced that he intended to introduce a tax on landfill waste disposal in his 1994 Budget.
Mr. Chris Davies:
I speak more in sorrow than in anger. Perhaps I am in a minority among Opposition Members in holding these views, but I believe that the current Secretary of State for the Environment is a committed environmentalist whose views are perhaps the most green among Conservative holders of that position. I re-emphasise that the landfill tax, the principle of which is not disputed, is warmly welcome. I welcome the tax,
Mr. Clappison:
It would be churlish of me not to thank the hon. Gentleman on behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment for the glowing and well deserved tribute to his environmental credentials. I am afraid that I shall now have to strike an unhappier note by diverging from the analysis that the hon. Gentleman has just made. He suggested that the tax has taken councils by surprise and that not enough thought has been given to recycling.
The announcement of landfill tax was made in 1994. As waste collected by local authorities represents a significant proportion of controlled waste, and as some 90 per cent. of local authority waste goes to landfill, which is above the average for controlled waste as whole, at 70 per cent., it could reasonably be inferred that it would be important for local authorities to respond to the landfill tax. It should have been in their purview to have considered other waste management options such as recycling, re-use and waste minimisation, which is at the top of the waste hierarchy. It was within the purview of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, who clearly believes in those options and hopes that local authorities would follow such practices. Local authorities must now respond by implementing recycling--they have to respond to the landfill tax in the same way as industry and other generators of waste.
Mr. Chris Davies:
How does a waste disposal authority--in Greater Manchester, for example--encourage local authorities to devote more expenditure to recycling when they are locked into five-year or seven-year contracts with landfill sites, and when the money that they could use to encourage recycling schemes is being taken away by central Government for their own purposes through the landfill tax scheme?
Mr. Clappison:
The hon. Gentleman knows that central Government carefully considered this issue in taking decisions on the local government settlement. Local authorities must make long-range plans. They have had two years' notice, going back to 1994, of the landfill tax--they should have used that time to change their waste disposal policies. We are aware that the link between the costs of landfill tax and the levels of household waste are not as strong as in the case of business. At present, local taxpayers pay for waste disposal as an undifferentiated sum within their council tax bills.
Many other countries have different arrangements, where household waste collection and disposal is charged for directly, often by weight or by volume. Such arrangements may have practical difficulties, but we are continually reviewing the evidence to see whether such measures have a material impact on the amount of waste generated and on the extent of beneficial use.
Every year we have to set the demands of local authorities in the context of what the country can afford. Local government spending accounts for a quarter of all
public spending and no Government can afford to ignore it. Public spending decisions are made in the context of the medium-term financial strategy to promote sustained economic growth and thus ensure higher living standards. The best way in which we can protect local government services is to ensure that the national economy is strong and that inflation is under control. To this end, we must continue to make better use of existing public spending and to keep control of public sector wage bills. Both local and central government have essential parts to play in bringing about these benefits.
I am aware that local authorities are concerned that fly tipping may increase as a result of the landfill tax. In November, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced further measures to combat fly tipping when the tax is introduced. Although the current waste management licensing system and the duty of care for waste provide a strong regulatory framework to support the tax, it is intended to take further steps to avoid an increase in fly tipping. In particular, the Environment Agency will be asked to give a high priority to the prevention of fly tipping, and the financial gains made by perpetrators will be drawn to the attention of the courts.
I hope very much that local authorities will look on the introduction of the landfill tax as a further incentive to promote the use of more sustainable waste management practices in their areas. There will be considerable incentive for both tiers of local government to work together to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill and to encourage greater use of more sustainable waste management options as part of the waste planning process. As I have said, the tax will ensure that waste disposal to landfill is properly priced. In so doing, it will
increase the awareness of local authorities of the advantages to be obtained by reducing the amount of waste generated in their areas by diverting waste from landfill and putting it to productive use through reuse or recycling.
I hope that what I have said will reassure the hon. Gentleman that the Government are fully aware of the impact of the task on local government and have taken account of all new burdens on local authority budgets in taking decisions about the overall level of provision for local authority spending in 1996-97. I draw my speech to a conclusion by going back to the starting point of the hon. Gentleman's speech: this is first and foremost an environmental tax. We have to make this a successful and effective tax, and the framework is in place for it to be successful.
Mr. Clappison:
The hon. Gentleman has intervened twice and I would like to draw my remarks to a conclusion. It is important for local authorities, for industry, for commerce and for householders to play their part in making this important environmental initiative the success that it deserves to be. The Government have laid the framework and it is now for others to rise to the challenge, as I am sure they will do, without becoming obsessed with the sorts of issues raised by the hon. Gentleman.
Question put and agreed to.
29 Feb 1996 : Column 1105Adjourned accordingly at twenty-nine minutes past Ten o'clock.
| Index | Home Page |