| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
TREASURY
Private Finance Initiative
Mr. Chris Smith: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the impact on the public sector borrowing requirement (a) in the current year and (b) in subsequent years, of a letter of comfort provided to financial institutions by the Secretary of State for Health underwriting outstanding liabilities of a private finance initiative hospital project in the event of the demise of the hospital trust undertaking it. [11253]
Mr. Waldegrave: No letter of comfort has been issued in support of private finance initiative hospital projects. A letter of explanation has been provided which gives details of the Secretary of State's responsibilities in respect of trusts that run into financial difficulties. If a trust is dissolved, the NHS (Residual Liabilities) Act 1996 provides for the transfer of the trust's residual liabilities to another health body or to the Secretary of State for Health.
The public sector borrowing requirement measures the public sector's net cash transactions with the rest of the economy. As such, contingent liabilities have no effect on the PSBR.
Public Sector Borrowing Requirement
Mr. Michael Brown: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his policy with regard to the level of funding of the public sector borrowing requirement. [12014]
Mr. Waldegrave: The Government's annual financing objective is to sell sufficient gilts of any maturity, Treasury bills and National Savings products to finance the central Government borrowing requirement, plus maturing gilts and any net increase in the foreign exchange reserves. The Treasury's published gilts remit to the Bank of England for 1996-97 states that the bank should aim to sell gilts at a broadly even pace through the year. Within-year fluctuations in the pattern of central Government expenditure and revenue will be met by other financing means, including changes to the weekly Treasury bill tender.
Mr. Brown: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the Government's policy in respect of the use of Treasury bills to finance the public sector borrowing requirement; and what assessment he has made of the impact of this policy on inflation. [12029]
Mr. Waldegrave [holding answer January 1997]: As stated in the Treasury's debt management report for 1996-97, there is no intention that net Treasury bill issuance should contribute to the financing of the central Government borrowing requirement in 1996-97. However, the monthly pattern of issuance will fluctuate
31 Jan 1997 : Column: 421
in the light of the needs of money market management. This policy will have minimal impact on annual monetary growth.
Pools Betting Levy and National Lottery
Mr. Fisher: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much tax revenue has been raised by (a) the pools betting levy and (b) the national lottery in each year since 1994-95. [13206]
Mr. Oppenheim: The information requested is given in the table.
| 1994-95 | 1995-96 | |
|---|---|---|
| £ million | £ million | |
| Pool betting duty(30) | 341.6 | 190.8 |
| Lottery duty(31) | 103.9 | 611.9 |
Notes:
(30) The following rates of duty were applicable to pool betting during those financial years.
(31) The first draw of the national lottery took place on 19 November 1994.
| Rate Percentage | Date of introduction |
|---|---|
| 37.5 | 17 August 1991 |
| 32.5 | 6 May 1995 |
| 27.5 | 3 December 1995 |
The rate was further reduced to 26.5 per cent. on 5 May 1996.
Dorneywood
Mr. Flynn: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what were the running costs of Dorneywood in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement. [13616]
Mr. Kenneth Clarke: Dorneywood is financed and administered by the Dorneywood Trust, a private trust for which I am not responsible.
Mr. Flynn: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many days he spent in residence at Dorneywood in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement. [13617]
Mr. Clarke: The amount of time that I spend at Dorneywood depends on the constraints of my diary, but since I became Chancellor in 1993 I have resided there on numerous occasions.
Privatised Companies
Mr. Salmond: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportion of ownership of each of the privatised utilities and companies the Government retain. [13905]
Mr. Jack: The Government have sold the vast majority of its residual holdings in the privatised utilities and other companies. Other than the relatively small numbers of shares required to be held to meet future bonus share entitlements of retail investors in previous privatisations, the Government retain disposable shareholdings in only two companies: BT--0.18 per cent. of share capital; and the Mersey Docks and Harbour Company--13.89 per cent. of share capital.
31 Jan 1997 : Column: 422
Privatisation Proceeds
Mr. Salmond: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will calculate the revenues raised from the privatisation of each of the privatised utilities and companies expressed in 1996-97 prices. [13904]
Mr. Jack: I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to the hon. Member for Cunninghame, North (Mr. Wilson) on 8 July 1996, Official Report, column 36. That answer included a cumulative total for privatisation proceeds to the end of 1995-96, in 1996-97 prices, of £83.86 billion. Estimated proceeds this financial year are £4.5 billion, taking the cumulative total, in 1996-97 prices to £88.36 billion.
Cash Limits
Mr. Matthew Banks: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what changes are proposed to the cash limit and net running costs limit for the Government Actuary's Department for 1996-97. [14199]
Mrs. Angela Knight: The net running costs limit for the Government Actuary's Department within class XVI, vote 13, will be decreased by £184,000 from £389,000 to £205,000 and the cash limit will be reduced by £201,000 from £6,396,000 to £6,195,000. The decreases arise from the imposition of penalties following the breaches of the net running costs limit and cash limit in the previous year, 1995-96. The Government Actuary's Department has reported that its systems and procedures have been reviewed to prevent a recurrence of the breach.
Mr. Banks: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what changes are proposed in the cash limit and running cost limit for 1996-97 for Customs and Excise. [14214]
Mr. Oppenheim: Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class XVI, vote 3, will be increased by £23,050,000 from £827,572,000 to £850,622,000 and the running cost limit for Customs and Excise by £23,057,000 from £720,093,000 to £743,150,000.
The increase in the running cost limit arises from the take up of £23,000,000 of the end-year flexibility entitlement, £30,000 running costs provision transferred from the Department of the Environment to meet the costs of the Security Facilities Executive's advisory service, £29,000 running costs provision transferred from the Home Office as the Department's share of the seized assets fund, and an additional £7,000 related to the recovery of input VAT on other business activities. The supplementary estimate also serves to provide an additional £9,000 from running costs for a contribution to the central drugs co-ordination unit, and £7,000 appropriations-in-aid provision related to the recovery of input VAT on other business activities. The increase will be charged to the reserve and will not, therefore, add to the planned total of public expenditure.
Mr. Banks:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what changes are proposed to the cash limit and running costs limit for the Office for National Statistics for 1996-97. [14215]
Mrs. Knight:
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class XVI, vote 12--Office for National Statistics--will be
31 Jan 1997 : Column: 423
increased by £231,000 from £112,600,000 to £112,831,000 and the running costs limit will be increased by £165,000 from £106,939,000 to £107,104,000.
This reflects an increase in running costs provision of £165,000 and in capital provision of £66,000. These sums cover work formerly carried out by the Employment Department which has been transferred to the Office for National Statistics. The increases will be offset by transfers and will not, therefore, add to the planned total of public expenditure.
Mr. Banks:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what changes are proposed to the cash limit and running costs limit for 1996-97 for the Inland Revenue. [14216]
Mr. Jack:
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class XVI, vote 4 will be increased by £40,027,000 from £1,607,569,000 to £1,647,596,000 and the running costs limit will be increased by £39,020,000 from £1,654,535,000 to £1,693,555,000.
The vote is eligible for a cash limit increase of £39,000,000 running costs and £507,000 capital in respect of end year flexibility entitlement as announced by my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 12 July 1996, Official Report, columns 326-31.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |