| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. John McAllion (Dundee, East): As the Minister is comparing trips abroad with cuts in public spending at home, how does he justify the Minister responsible for housing in Scotland going to Atlanta to watch the Olympic games, after imposing one of the worst ever housing settlements on Scotland and making more vicious cuts in housing expenditure? What connection is there between the Olympic games and housing in Scotland?
Mr. Kynoch: The hon. Gentleman failed to remind the House that my hon. Friend is also the Minister responsible for sport in Scotland, and one of his functions is to ensure good and successful sporting activity. The meetings that
he held in Atlanta contributed to his current thinking about the future of sport in Scotland. I should have hoped that the hon. Gentleman, who I thought was a football fanatic, would appreciate the fact that my hon. Friend was taking a healthy interest in his subject.
What badminton in Hong Kong or a rose exhibition in Rome had to do with Glasgow city council, however, I fail to understand.
Sir Hector Monro (Dumfries):
Does my hon. Friend agree that had the Minister responsible for sport in Scotland not gone to Atlanta to support Scottish competitors in the Olympic games, all hell would have broken loose among the Opposition? We like our Ministers to represent Scotland at major sporting events, as I did at the Commonwealth games.
Mr. Kynoch:
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. As he is a former Sports Minister and was once a successful rugby player, he knows only too well the need for the best possible information about sport.
I do not wish to be diverted too far on the issue of sport. Let me return to Glasgow city council.
Mr. Tony Worthington (Clydebank and Milngavie)
rose--
Mr. Kynoch:
If it is on Glasgow city council, I shall give way to the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. Worthington:
I really must appeal to the Minister to treat the matter with great seriousness. We have lost hundreds of jobs throughout Scotland, services have been cut and there have been massive increases in council tax. If we have a successful economy in Scotland, why can we not afford the same services this year as last year?
Mr. Kynoch:
The hon. Gentleman talks about treating the matter seriously. I consider it to be exceedingly serious, and that is why I have had meetings with councils and with right hon. and hon. Members. I am disappointed by the fact that it was apparent at those meetings that hon. Members had not understood the councils' intentions. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman should know that if we did not have capping, as is Labour policy, Glasgow city council would not be asking for a 22 per cent. increase in council tax. The council would go to council tax payers and ask for a 62 per cent. increase. That is a disgraceful way in which to run a council--it is attempting to increase expenditure by more than 11 per cent.
Mr. Jimmy Wray (Glasgow, Provan):
Does the Minister really understand local government finance? It is obvious that he does not understand the city of Glasgow, which has been eroded and become riddled by years of Conservative government, crime, drugs and homelessness. Medical reports such as the Black report show that the infant mortality rate in Glasgow is the worst in Europe. That is the Government's record. The Minister does not understand finance. In his letter to the provost, he wrote about "aggregate finance", "specific needs" and "needs and resources elements". He aggregated those elements, and it cost Glasgow millions of pounds.
Mr. Kynoch:
I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman takes that view, because he showed a singular lack of
Dr. Norman A. Godman (Greenock and Port Glasgow):
Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Kynoch:
Conservative Members are responsible, and they attempt to ensure that taxpayers' hard-earned funds are spent wisely, to achieve cost-effective service delivery within local government.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow):
Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Kynoch:
I give way to the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell).
Madam Speaker:
Order. Too many hon. Members are attempting to intervene at the same time. Only one hon. Member should be on his feet at a time, and that is the Minister, unless he gives way.
Mr. Dalyell:
If I have heard the Minister wrongly, forgive me. I thought that, in his outburst, he referred to busting the conditions of the Burrell bequest. Would this be an appropriate moment to ask what the Government's policy is on the very difficult matter of the Burrell bequest? Are the Government really in favour of "busting" its conditions?
Mr. Kynoch:
As I understood the position--although I shall attempt to clarify it--the conditions attached to the Burrell bequest are a responsibility of the trustees, not of the Government. However, I am concerned that Glasgow city council is attempting to break the conditions of the Burrell bequest and, in doing so, incurring expenditure of up to £500,000 of council tax payers' funds. If that is the case, I question whether that is funding well spent, at a time when Glasgow is--
Mr. John Maxton (Glasgow, Cathcart):
Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Kynoch:
I should like to move on, but I am happy to see such healthy interest on the Opposition Benches. I shall give way.
Mr. Maxton:
I wonder where the Minister gets the figure of £500,000, whereas the council says that, at the maximum, it is £90,000? That is the sum. Why is the Minister trying to tell us that it is £500,000 when it is not?
Mr. Kynoch:
I very carefully said "up to £500,000", and I hope that the figure--if anything--would be
Would hon. Members representing areas covered by the other new local authorities in the former Strathclyde region--East Ayrshire, East Dunbartonshire, East Renfrewshire, North Ayrshire, North Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire and South Lanarkshire--be happy for an extra £50 million to be taken from their funding, to go to Glasgow? That is what the Glasgow councillors were arguing to me. They said that the distribution of funds did not favour Glasgow adequately and that more money should come from those areas outside Glasgow.
Dr. Godman:
Clause 4 of the Merchant Shipping and Maritime Security Bill places additional responsibilities on fire authorities to deal with emergencies at sea. What discussions have there been between the Scottish Office and the Department of Transport about that additional burden to be placed on our fire authorities? Was there any discussion about the funding of training of firemen for the extra duties and the provision of extra equipment?
Mr. Kynoch:
The grant-aided expenditure on fire has been increased considerably. There are always discussions with the authorities to ensure adequate funding.
I allowed myself to be slightly diverted by the detail of Glasgow. I wanted to conclude by saying that local government has been treated favourably in last year's public expenditure survey.
Mrs. Ray Michie (Argyll and Bute):
I was waiting for the Minister to move on from talking about Glasgow. How does he account for the fact that Argyll and Bute council is facing £8.5 million of cuts as it tries to meet the commitments inherited from Strathclyde regional council? Some £3.5 million of those cuts are in education. We are facing the closure of three more schools, two of which are on an island. Why can the Minister not help Argyll and Bute?
Mr. Kynoch:
I am able to do something for Argyll and Bute. The hon. Lady will be aware that there has been disagreement among the local authorities about the disaggregation of the former Strathclyde budget. The Scottish Office has always said that it was for the local authorities to decide about that distribution. After a lot of effort in trying to persuade West Dunbartonshire council to accept an independent arbiter--a point raised by the hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall) when he came with a council delegation to see me--I am delighted to say that the arbiter has worked incredibly quickly and has come up with a figure, which I believe has been agreed with Argyll and Bute and West Dunbartonshire. Argyll and Bute should be able to spend more than £500,000 extra this year within its capping limit. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will announce that officially to the council later this afternoon.
At the recent meeting of the Scottish Grand Committee in Montrose, my right hon. Friend challenged any Opposition Member who thought the settlement inadequate to say which Scottish Office programmes they would cut to give more to local government. Predictably, Labour Members ran a mile to avoid answering. They could not answer, because the right hon. Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown) has decreed that there will be no increase in public expenditure, and therefore no extra expenditure in Scotland on local government.
I understand that the hon. Member for Hamilton, who will be opening for the Opposition, is now considering how to redistribute funding. I should delighted if he is really talking about getting his Labour councils to start looking at making themselves more cost-effective, and spreading local authority expenditure away from the centre, the bureaucracy and administration, and out to the front-line delivery of service, because that is what we believe in. We believe in cost-effective delivery of service.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |