| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
26 Jun 2003 : Column 900W—continued
Local Authority Cabinets
Mr. Laurence Robertson: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether cabinets of local authorities have responsibilities for staffing matters; and if he will make a statement. [116135]
Mr. Raynsford: The legislation provides that local authority cabinets cannot be responsible for the appointment and dismissal of staff. A cabinet's views must, however, be taken into account when senior staff are being appointed or dismissed. No offer of appointment of the head of paid service, a chief officer, or deputy chief officer may be made where the executive leader or elected mayor has made a well founded and material objection.
Cabinet members may be involved in staffing matters relating to assistants to political groups appointed under Section 9 of the Local Government Act 1989. Regulations also provide for a directly elected mayor to appoint an assistant.
Local Elections
Tony Wright: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what evaluation he has made of the effect of Comprehensive Performance Assessments on the latest local election results. [114556]
Mr. Raynsford: A range of issues affects the results of elections, and the performance of a council will be a significant factor for many local people. Comprehensive Performance Assessments (CPAs) are now beginning to provide clear and consistent information to local people, as well as to councils and central Government, on the performance of local government. All county councils and single tier authorities were assessed under the CPA process in the past year. District councils will be assessed in the course of the next 18 months. Half of the councils which have received a CPA were subject to elections in May this year.
The trend between the 2002 CPA categories and 2003 local government election results tends to support the view that the performance of the council has an influence on the outcome of the election. 45 per cent. of weak and poor councils where elections were held changed overall control. In comparison this happened in just 29 per cent. of the excellent and good councils where elections were held.
Local Government Finance
Mrs. Brooke: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what evaluation he is carrying out of the impact of the new financial formula determining the Government settlement on local councils on (a) councils in the south-west region, (b) Dorset county council, (c) Poole borough council and (d) Purbeck council. [115092]
Mr. Raynsford: In the following table are the changes in formula spending shares and formula grant (after floors and ceilings) for 2003–04 on a like-for-like basis with 2002–03 for the areas requested.
26 Jun 2003 : Column 901W
In 2003–04, every council received at least a 3 per cent. increase in formula grant on 2002–03 on a like-for-like basis, which is above the level of inflation.
Paddy Tipping: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the average council tax was for each local authority in England in 2003–04. [115481]
Mr. Leslie: The information requested is available in the Library of the House.
Janet Anderson: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will review the Standard Spending Assessment of Rossendale borough council and other local authorities within whose areas there are a proportionately large number of walls, bridges, roads and culverts requiring repair and where the ownership cannot be established. [116127]
Mr. Raynsford: The Government announced its intention to freeze the Formula Spending Shares methodology (which replaced Standard Spending Assessments in 2003–04) until at least 2006–07 in the White Paper 'Strong Local Leadership, Quality Public Services' in order to provide stability and predictability for local authorities. In any case the responsibility for maintaining roads lies with the highway authority, in this case Lancashire county council. The White Paper made clear that the Government would be prepared to provide additional financial assistance only in certain very limited circumstances, which would be unlikely to include repairs of this kind.
May Elections
Mr. Rosindell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what steps he has taken to increase voter turnout in the May 2003 local elections. [110694]
Mr. Leslie: Low turnout in elections is caused by a number of different factors, and no single solution will solve it. However, one of the most important ways in which we can help is to make voting more straightforward and accessible to all voters. In conjunction with the independent Electoral Commission and Local Government Association, we are promoting a programme of electoral pilots to test new methods of voting, which are aimed at increasing the opportunity for voting. These include various electronic voting techniques (including the use of the internet, telephone, SMS text messaging and interactive digital television), as well as all-postal ballots.
At this year's local elections the 33 all-postal pilot elections recorded an average turnout of 49.5 per cent. One pilot authority achieved a 61 per cent. turnout in its pilot, while another more than doubled its turnout compared to the last comparable election. The Electoral Commission's evaluation of these pilots should provide
26 Jun 2003 : Column 902W
us with more details about how they worked. Initial indications are that the new methods of voting are having a positive effect on voter turnout.
Millennium Dome
Nick Harvey: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the running costs of the Millennium Dome were in each of the last six months. [115999]
Mr. McNulty: Final cost figures are not yet available for March and April 2003, as English Partnerships are awaiting a number of outstanding invoices. However, EP's management, maintenance, security and staff costs 1 incurred for the six months up to February 2003 was £1.477 million. This is made up of the following monthly breakdown:
| Month | Cost (£) |
|---|---|
| September | 242,000 |
| October | 241,000 |
| November | 262,000 |
| December | 253,000 |
| January | 250,000 |
| February | 229,000 |
| Total | 1,477,000 |
These costs, and others incurred by English Partnerships since they took over responsibility for the Dome in July 2001 will be recovered from sale proceeds.
- 1 Monthly costs include rates, utilities, security and maintenance, and English Partnerships' staff costs on management and maintenance of the Dome. Costs are calculated on an accruals basis and may be subject to reassessments, by the relevant authorities, of rates or other charges included in the cost of managing and maintaining the Dome.
Angela Watkinson: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the cost of maintaining the Millennium Dome has been since its closure; and what plans he has for its future use. [116485]
Mr. McNulty: The New Millennium Experience Company (NMEC) was responsible for maintaining the Dome from its closure on 31 December 2000 to end of June 2001. English Partnerships (EP) took over responsibility in July 2001. In total £6.9 million was incurred from the Dome's closure on 31 December 2000 to February 2003: £1.9 million by NMEC from January 2001 to end of June 2001 and £5.0 million by EP from July 2001 to February 2003. EP's final cost figures are not yet available for March and April 2003, as it is awaiting a number of outstanding invoices.
EP and MDL signed contracts on 29 May 2002, to develop much of the Greenwich Peninsula, including a new use for the Dome. The deal is conditional primarily on securing planning permission satisfactory to the contracting parties.
26 Jun 2003 : Column 903W
On 23 December 2002 a planning application was submitted to the London Borough of Greenwich (LEG), for a 26,000 capacity arena inside the Dome, with associated facilities, and a new masterplan covering 190 acres of the Greenwich Peninsula.
LBG's Planning Committee considered the planning application on 16 April 2003 and resolved that it is minded to grant permission subject to a number of conditions and resolution of section 106 negotiations. As part of the normal planning process, the application was referred by LEG to the Mayor and my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister on 29 May 2003.
Planning and Compulsory Puchase Bill
Mr Clifton-Brown: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how the transition will take place, and over what timescale, when county councils lose their strategic planning role under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill. [114014]
Mr. McNulty: The proposed abolition of the structure plan function does not mean that counties will no longer have any strategic planning role. The Government expect that the expertise of counties will be an important resource in the preparation and revision of Regional Spatial Strategies and we will make regulations to prescribe counties as statutory consultees in this process. Counties will remain responsible for the preparation of mineral and waste planning strategies. Structure plans will be 'saved' for a three-year period from commencement of the relevant provisions in the Planning and Compulsory Bill unless structure plans are replaced by Regional Spatial Strategies during that period.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |