You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Hansard > Commons Debates > Commons Debates by date > Commons Debates - previous sessions > Bound Volume Hansard - Written Answers
Previous Section Index Home Page

4 Dec 2002 : Column 882W—continued

Local Government Finance

Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister by how much total expenditure would be increased if all parish and town councils in England increased the maximum £3.50 per elector multiplier as specified in section 137(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 up to £5.00 as specified in the draft Local Government Bill; and by how much audit best value and other compliance costs for parish and town councils have increased in each of the last two years. [84421]

Mr. Leslie: The maximum expenditure by English parish and town councils currently permitted under section 137(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 is estimated to be about £45 million per year. It is estimated that this would increase to about £65 million per year as a result of the maximum amount increasing from £3.50 to £5.00 per elector.

Not all parish and town councils make full use of the existing £3.50 amount, but we are increasing it because it has been in place since 1990, and consultation responses to the XModernising Local Government Finance" green paper have shown that it has been inhibiting expenditure for some councils.

The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister does not hold information on the total cost of financial audit for parish and town councils. For parish councils, the Audit Commission's 'lighter touch' regime aims to develop a proportionate audit approach as well as a reduction in audit fees for most councils.

The exact costs of best value are not known. However, the duty of best value should not have added excessive costs when a council is well organised and managed. Any additional costs should have been offset by gains in economy, efficiency and effectiveness and by the new opportunities provided by innovative service delivery through for example by partnership arrangements. Councils would have been free to plough back the savings made into core and other services.

Moreover, the Government announced in the local government white paper XStrong Local Leadership—Quality Public Services" that it will pay a grant of £30,000 per year to Best Value Town and Parish Councils to cover the costs of audit and the corporate costs of carrying out work relating to best value, such as preparation of performance plans and the management of reviews.

No other compliance costs for parish and town councils are believed to have increased in the last two years.

Lynne Jones: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what plans he has to allow local authorities to charge a punitive level of council tax on long-term voids. [84968]

Mr. Leslie: On 19 November, my right hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (Mr. Raynsford) announced we would be giving English local authorities the discretion to reduce or remove the current 50 per cent. council tax discount on long-term empty property. The Office of the Deputy Prime

4 Dec 2002 : Column 883W

Minister has included the necessary provision in the Local Government Bill and, subject to parliamentary approval, we aim to implement this change on 1 April 2004.

We have no plans to allow local authorities to charge more than the full council tax.

Mr. Reed: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what representations he has received about removing council tax exemption to student houses in multi-occupancy; and if he will make a statement. [85029]

Mr. Leslie: Since August 2001, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has received 12 representations from members of the public about the council tax exemption for premises occupied by students. Nine of those believed that landlords should be made liable for the council tax in properties occupied only by students, while three suggested that students should be made liable for the council tax.

The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has no plans to change or remove the exemption from council tax of dwellings occupied only by students.

Fire Service

Ms Walley: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of the Fire Cover Review and its recommendations; and when he intends to give his response. [83437]

Mr. Raynsford: The report on the Fire Cover Review was commissioned by the Central Fire Brigades Advisory Council and it is for the council to decide whether or not to endorse the report and publish its findings. It was expected that the council would discuss the report at a meeting on 12 November2002, but this was cancelled as a result of the fire service pay dispute. The next meeting is currently scheduled to take place on 12 February 2002. If the Council endorses the report a copy will be placed in the Libraries of the House. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will give a response to the report in the light of the discussion in the Council and after wide consultation.

Green Goddesses (Cinderford)

Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister when he will reply to two letters from the Chairman of the

4 Dec 2002 : Column 884W

Gloucestershire County Council requesting further assistance for extra Green Goddesses and crew to man them for Cinderford, Gloucestershire. [85181]

Mr. Raynsford : A senior official from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister responded to the substance of both letters from the Chair of the Fire Authority on 11 November 2002.

Local Government (Discretion)

Mr. Pickles: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what recent legislation has allowed greater discretion to be exercised by local councils and authorities. [84718]

Mr. Leslie: The Local Government Act 2000 provided considerable additional discretion to local authorities through the introduction of a new power to promote or improve the economic, social or environmental well-being of their areas unless prohibited elsewhere in legislation. I also refer the hon. Member to the written statement given by my right hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (Mr. Raynsford) on 26 November concerning a package of measures to devolve power to local authorities, including recent and proposed changes to legislation.

Local Performance Indicators

Mr. Pickles: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister (1) if he will list the local performance indicators monitoring the activities of specific local authorities in (a) 2001–02 and (b) 2002–03, for each local authority with local performance indicators. [84908]

Mr. Leslie: Local authorities employ a wide variety of indicators to measure their performance across a range of activities, and no central record is kept of them.Where indicators are prescribed by Government under the Local Government Act 1999, these are published annually following consultation with local government and others. The attached table summarises the number of such indicators in 2001–02 and 2002–03 by type of authority. Full details are contained in SI 2001 No 724 and SI2002 No 523, copies of which can be found in the library of the House. A similar number of indicators was previously prescribed by the Audit Commission: these were replaced entirely in 2001–02 by those prescribed by Government under the 1999 Act.

National BVPIs and ACPIs 2000–01National BVPIs 2001–02Percentages decrease from 2000–01 to 2001–02National BVPIs 2002–03Percentages decrease from 2000–01 to 2002–03Percentages from 2001–02 to 2002–03
Unitaries/Met Boroughs18912335974921
London18912136945022
County Councils (including fire)13410522.8636.18.
District Councils916529514422
Fire18180 19N/aN/a

Note:

BVPIs, ie indicators prescribed by Government under the 1999 Act.

ACPIs, ie. Indicators prescribed by the Auidt Commission under the Local Government Act 1992, consolidated into the Audit Commission Act 1998.

4 Dec 2002 : Column 885W

Neighbourhood Renewal

Mrs. Calton: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what criteria are applied to give an area neighbourhood renewal status; and where such areas are located, broken down by constituency. [84183]

Mrs. Roche: The information requested is not broken down by constituency but the Neighbourhood Renewal Fund is allocated to local authority districts that fall within the 50 most deprived authorities on any of the six district level summary measures of the ward level Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD 2000). The six measures are:


This brings in a total of 81 authorities. In addition, there are transitional arrangements in place for seven other authorities that were among the 50 most deprived on the previous measure of deprivation, but which do not appear among the 50 most deprived authorities on the IMD 2000.

The following lists the 88 authorities currently receiving NRF funding.

Local authorities in receipt of NRF


4 Dec 2002 : Column 886W

4 Dec 2002 : Column 887W

Next Section Index Home Page