Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Energy Efficiency

4. Mr. Robathan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he intends to take to improve the energy efficiency of housing. [3119]

Mr. Robert B. Jones: The Government operate and support a wide range of programmes and initiatives to improve and promote energy efficiency across all sectors of housing. We will continue to pursue them vigorously.

Mr. Robathan: My hon. Friend and the Department have a good record in energy efficiency in housing. Will he confirm that more than a quarter of the energy use in this country is domestic usage? Will he therefore consider a further tightening of the building regulations with regard to new housing so that new homes use less energy and are among the most energy efficient in the world?

Mr. Jones: If one adds to the energy used in the home for heating and lighting the energy used by machinery within the home and in the generation of electricity, domestic usage accounts for about half of greenhouse gas emissions, so my hon. Friend is right to highlight that point. Yes, we can do a lot with new housing, but the vast majority of housing is older housing, and we must persuade the owners and renters of it to be less complacent about energy use.

Mr. Matthew Taylor: In view of the Minister's comments, with which I entirely agree, does he recall that, in March, the Government came within one vote of being defeated--on a proposal to reduce the level of VAT on energy-reducing materials to that on energy, to encourage precisely the work that he suggests? Has the Department of the Environment made representations to the Treasury to make that reduction in the coming Budget? We were told during the debate in March that the Department would consider such a proposal.

Mr. Jones: The hon. Gentleman will not expect me to anticipate the statement of my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor in any regard, but he can be certain that we shall continue our programmes to encourage the extension of energy efficiency equipment and measures in homes.

Mr. Evennett: How seriously are local authorities taking their responsibilities in promoting home energy efficiency? Is there any more that my hon. Friend can do to encourage them to take more action?

Mr. Jones: Many authorities are doing a good job in taking forward the Home Energy Conservation Act 1995. I was fortunate to be able to present the prizes yesterday for the Home Energy Conservation Act programme, facilitated by the Energy Saving Trust with finance from

19 Nov 1996 : Column 822

the Department. Other authorities must learn from the best, and that is why we will produce best practice guides as a result of our experience.

Mr. Meacher: Before he preens himself about any improvements, will the Minister say when he will apologise for the Secretary of State's cutting of the funding of the home energy efficiency scheme by fully a third earlier this year, which knocked £31 million off home insulation grants for the poor and elderly? When will he realise that a nationwide home energy efficiency scheme--which we do not have--would save fuel, reduce carbon dioxide emissions, prevent cold-related illnesses and hypothermia and create up to 50,000 new jobs? If he and the Secretary of State do not have the imagination or the vision to introduce such a win, win, win scheme, I can tell him that we certainly will.

Mr. Jones: The hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that £30 million was added to the home energy efficiency scheme in anticipation of the second stage of VAT, which was voted down by the House--at which point that £30 million fell. The trouble with the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends is that they want to get on to the pudding even though they have refused to eat their greens.

Capital Challenge

5. Mr. Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he intends to announce which local authorities have been successful in their bids for funding under the pilot capital challenge scheme. [3121]

The Minister for Local Government, Housing and Urban Regeneration (Mr. David Curry): Before Christmas.

Mr. Hendry: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that one of the key objectives of capital challenge is to assist in the regeneration of some of our historic towns while drawing in investment from the private sector and elsewhere to make that possible? With that in mind, will he give careful consideration to the excellent scheme proposed by High Peak borough council to assist in the regeneration of the historic Georgian and Victorian parts of Buxton to prepare them for the 21st century--a plan which surely deserves success under the excellent capital challenge scheme?

Mr. Curry: I will give careful consideration to that scheme, as I shall all the schemes that have been proposed. My hon. Friend is perfectly right: our intention is to allow local authorities to nominate their own priorities so that the Government choose the authority's priority if it stands up well. My hon. Friend will be interested to know that we have received some 326 bids, and that nearly two thirds of authorities that could bid have done so. He is quite right to say that there is significant leverage. Some £1.5 billion has been bid for, but that money will pull in some £1.2 billion from other public sources and £1.3 billion from the private sector. The scheme is working alongside public and private moneys to help the priorities nominated by local communities.

19 Nov 1996 : Column 823

Business Rates

6. Mr. William O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to review the application of non-domestic rates procedure to assist businesses in difficulties; and if he will make a statement [3123]

Mr. Curry: Local authorities have the power to grant up to 100 per cent. relief to any business that suffers hardship. We will shortly commence a review of that provision, beginning with a detailed analysis of the way in which local authorities use it.

Mr. O'Brien: The Minister will be aware that rates take a large percentage of small businesses' profits and that new businesses have difficulty starting up because of the rate element. Will he extend to urban areas the relief for post offices and shops that is being implemented in rural areas? Will he also consider the problems facing small garages and public houses, which suffer an injustice because their rates are assessed on turnover rather than profit? He knows perfectly well that local authorities cannot afford to give rebates to the extent that he has suggested because of the Government's standard spending assessment; it is for the Government to find resources to help those businesses out of difficulty. Will he accept that the responsibility is his? Will he do something about it?

Mr. Curry: The hon. Gentleman will know that there are rural areas as defined in the Local Government and Rating Bill in metropolitan areas, so an area that meets the criteria will benefit from all the advantages that the Bill will bring. The local authority will have the discretion to grant relief up to 100 per cent. to pubs and other businesses, both as a hardship relief and if so doing would serve the interests of the community.

Mr. Nicholas Winterton: Does my right hon. Friend accept that rural petrol stations are a vital service and that thousands of them have closed in recent times, not least because of the business rate? Bearing in mind the fact that the Government receive the total income from the non-domestic rate, does he believe that the Government should be obliged statutorily to make provision for extra allocation to local authorities that give assistance to petrol stations in rural areas?

Mr. Curry: Under the Bill, local authorities will be able to grant discretionary relief to garages if that is necessary in the interests of the community. If the garage serves as a general store, it will get the full relief, and 75 per cent. of all discretionary relief will be paid by the Exchequer.

Rev. Martin Smyth: I appreciate the concept of discretionary relief, but the problem is that it may not be given. Should not a principle be established that, in development areas, businesses that have been hit should be re-rated immediately and we should not continue to extract from them money that they are not earning? I am thinking particularly of areas such as Sandy Row in my constituency where, for 20 years, through dithering in the Department, businesses have been hampered.

Mr. Curry: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will accept that it is always a great mistake to allow a long time to

19 Nov 1996 : Column 824

pass without revaluation. After all, before the revaluation of 1990, there were 17 years without one, which led to an enormous number of appeals when it finally took place. It is important to keep the lists up to date; then, everybody knows where they are and the changes that take place have a greater chance of being widely accepted.

Mr. Pickles: Does my right hon. Friend remember a time when businesses in trouble removed roofs to avoid penal rates of local taxation imposed by the Labour party? When the economy started to improve, those factories were in no position to provide jobs, leaving civic leaders to whinge about the number of cinemas in their towns, as the hon. Member for Sheffield, Attercliffe (Mr. Betts) did earlier.

Mr. Curry: I do indeed remember those circumstances; there was a migration of business from some of the places that most needed the revenues, jobs and the income they bring. That is why the Government changed the business rating system to give businesses a chance even where local councils were not prepared to give them one.


Next Section

IndexHome Page