| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Highways Agency
Mr. Patrick Thompson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he plans to amend the Highways Agency's 1996-97 key business plan targets. [18334]
Mr. Watts: I have reviewed the Highways Agency's key targets and decided that the business plan should be amended to reflect decisions taken during the year.
The following 1996-97 targets are deferred, reflecting the new timing or priority of these schemes. They should be deleted from annex D of the plan: "Roads Programme Completion, Starts and Other Milestones":
Milestones which are added to annex D are:
A copy of the Highways Agency business plan 1996-97 is in the Library.
Sir Irvine Patnick:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 14 February, Official Report, column 319, what estimate he has made of the effect of the further £20 million in credit approvals on the South Yorkshire supertram, on council tax rates of Sheffield, Rotherham, Barnsley and Doncaster following his announcement; and if he will make a statement. [17511]
Mr. Curry:
The £20 million supplementary credit approval offered to South Yorkshire passenger transport authority will allow it to set a lower levy in 1997-98. We estimate that each £20 million in the levy is equivalent to around £56 in council tax for band D two-adult households in each of the four South Yorkshire districts.
Mr. Alfred Morris:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the effect of and implications for Wythenshawe of the announcement made by the Minister of State for Local Government, Housing and Urban Regeneration in Manchester on 18 February in relation to round 2 of the estates renewal challenge fund; and if he will publish in the Official Report the text of the announcement. [17289]
27 Feb 1997 : Column: 298
Mr. Curry:
My announcement of the successful bids for funds from round 2 of the estates renewal challenge fund is good news for the residents of Wythenshawe. Manchester have been allocated almost £21 million towards the costs of the regeneration of 7,000 properties in the Wythenshawe area. If the tenants agree, their homes will transfer to a new local housing company and will then benefit from an estimated additional £64 million of investment, beyond what would be possible if the housing stayed with the council. This area is already a successful bidder for Government support under the single regeneration budget so the estate transfer will enable a comprehensive area renewal policies to be pursued by public-private sector partnership. The text of the announcement on the estates renewal challenge fund has been published in the Official Report. I refer the hon. Member to column 420 on Monday 17 February.
Mr. Tony Banks:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the licences issued in 1996 by his Department for the destruction of wild birds. [17836]
Mr. Clappison:
Details of licences issued by my Department to kill wild birds are contained in the report by the United Kingdom to the European Community on derogations under article 9 of the directive on the conservation of wild birds, 79/409/EEC. The latest report for which figures are available covers 1995. Figures are not yet available for 1996, but when the report has been prepared a copy will be placed in the Library of the House.
Mrs. Peacock:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assistance he intends to provide towards the costs of clearing up after the terrorist attacks on London docklands and Manchester city centre on 9 February 1996 and 15 June 1996. [18142]
Mr. Curry:
The Local Government Finance (England) Special Grant Report No. 26 has today been laid before the House. The report provides for grant--up to a total of £2.5 million--to be made available to the London borough of Tower Hamlets, Manchester city council and Greater Manchester Police Authority towards the costs of dealing with the aftermath and loss of income suffered as a consequence of the terrorist attacks of 9 February 1996 on south quay on the Isle of Dogs and of 15 June 1996 on Manchester city centre.
Subject to the approval of the House, grant will be payable on those costs necessarily incurred by each authority in the six months following the explosions as a direct result of responding to and clearing up after the incidents. The authorities will also receive some recompense for loss of income during the same period directly or indirectly attributable to the explosions. Insurable expenditure or loss of income will not, however, be eligible for grant; nor will costs which are eligible for other grants or credit approvals.
Mr. Sykes:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the response of Wolverhampton metropolitan borough council to the
27 Feb 1997 : Column: 299
notice served on it on 11 September 1996 in respect of its decision to assign highway maintenance, winter maintenance and street lighting work to its direct labour organisation. [18141]
Sir Paul Beresford:
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has considered the response made by the authority on 10 October. He has today served a direction on the authority because it still appears to him that the authority acted in an anti-competitive manner in assigning work to its direct labour organisation. He took this view because of the way in which the authority undertook the evaluation of bids. The effect of the direction is to require the authority to seek consent if, when it retenders the work at the end of the current assignment, it wishes to continue to carry it out in-house.
Mr. Whittingdale:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what response was received to the consultation paper on proposed changes in the treatment of granny annexes and similar self-contained units of accommodation when they form part of a larger property.[18376]
Mr. Gummer:
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales and I proposed changing the ways in which council tax is assessed for self-contained units of accommodation when they form part of a larger property. We consulted with local authorities and organisations representing the elderly and disabled. The list of responses received has been placed in the Library of the House. The responses were overwhelmingly positive. We have accepted the views of many respondents that our objectives can be achieved more simply by means of an exemption.
We now propose that from 1 April 1997 any part of a property, such as an annexe, which is occupied by a dependent relative of the family in the other part of the building, will be an exempt dwelling, where "dependent" means:
These changes will apply in England and in Wales.
Mr. Devlin:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what action he proposes to take in the light of the Law Commission's report, "Landlord and Tenant: Responsibility for State and Condition of Property Law", Com. No. 238. [18377]
Mr. Clappison:
I am grateful to the Law Commission for its very full and helpful analysis of this area of the law in England and Wales.
27 Feb 1997 : Column: 300
Of the commission's four main recommendations for change, we agree that the law should be amended so that, in respect of new leases, etcetera created after the commencement of the new provisions:
A650 Hard Ings Road Improvement: (Public Inquiry)
A40 Gypsy Corner Improvement: (Award of Contract)
A40 Western Circus Junction Improvement: (Award of Contract)
London Primary Route Signing Project: (Award of Contract)
A30/A36/A46/A303: (DBFO Tender Invitation).
A1 Tempsford Junction Improvement: (Publication of Orders).
(a) aged 65 years or more,
and "relative" means: spouse, parent, grandparent, child, stepchild, grandchild, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew or niece, or the parent or child of such a relative, including a relationship by marriage and of the half-blood.
(b) severely mentally impaired within the meaning given in paragraph 2 of schedule 1 to the Local Government Finance Act 1992, or
(c) substantially and permanently disabled (whether by illness injury, congenital deformity or otherwise).
there should be implied into every lease, subject to the exceptions listed below, a covenant that the landlord shall keep the premises in repair, to a standard which is appropriate having regard to the age, character and prospective life of the premises and to their locality. This would not apply to a lease of a dwelling house for a term of less than seven years; to a lease of an agricultural holding; to a farm business tenancy; or to an oral lease. Nor would it apply in cases where there was an express repairing covenant in the lease, or the implied covenant was expressly excluded in the lease. Where the premises which are leased form part only of a building, and the landlord has an interest in other associated premises within the building, a similar repairing covenant would apply in respect of the associated premises.
a court should have a power to decree specific performance of a repairing obligation in any lease or tenancy
the law of waste should not longer apply in most cases, and the implied covenant that a tenant will use premises let to him in a tenantlike manner should be abolished. Instead, an implied statutory covenant or duty should be created by which any tenant or licensee would undertake to take proper care of the premises, including any common parts of the building; to make good any damage wilfully done to them by him or by others with a right to be on the premises; and not to carry out works to the property which would be detrimental to the landlord's or licensor's interest.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |