---

17 Nov 2003 : Column 533W—continued

Elected Regional Assemblies

Mr. Hammond: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made of whether the proposed referendums on elected regional assemblies give people living in the regions affected an opportunity for their regions to have similar powers to those of (a) the Scottish Parliament and (b) the Welsh Assembly. [139126]

Mr. Raynsford: Elected assemblies will be given powers over key regional issues, such as jobs, planning, housing, transport, culture and economic development. The Regional Governance White Paper, "Your Region, Your Choice: Revitalising the English Regions", sets out the Government's proposals and takes into account the functions that are best dealt with at a national, regional or local level. As the proposals relate to the English regions, the powers of the Greater London Authority are also a relevant consideration.

There are no plans to revisit the package as a matter of course, but there may be changes in the way some central Government functions are delivered. In developing policies, the Government will consider the opportunities offered by the creation of elected assemblies. For example, the Fire White Paper, "Our Fire and Rescue Service", announced that regional fire and rescue authorities will be established in those regions that choose to have elected assemblies.

Expenses and Allowances

Mr. Flook: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the advice given by the inland revenue on tax and national insurance issues in the guidance to local councils on the expenses and allowances payable to mayors and district councils. [138830]

Mr. Raynsford: Guidance relating to local authority members' allowances was issued to all local authorities in July 2003. This contains guidance on the tax and national insurance treatment of expenses and allowances for all members of local authorities, including mayors.

Graffiti

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the extent of the

17 Nov 2003 : Column 534W

problem of graffiti; and how much he estimates was (a) lost by businesses through dealing with the problem of graffiti and (b) spent by local authorities in dealing with graffiti in 2002–03. [138286]

Yvette Cooper: Local authorities budgeted to spend £456 million on street cleaning and litter in 2002–03. The detailed information requested is not held centrally, and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

The Local Environmental Quality Survey for England, prepared by Environmental Campaigns (ENCAMS) on behalf of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), indicates graffiti is not a major problem over the whole of the country, but those areas where it is a problem suffer particularly badly.

Homeless People

Mr. Hepburn: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what funding has been allocated to reduce the number of homeless people in the UK since 1997. [128713]

Yvette Cooper: A variety of investment streams contribute to tackling and resolving homelessness but these have wider housing and social objectives too, and it is not possible to identify specific homelessness elements within all of them.

In March 2002, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister published "More than a Roof", a report into tackling homelessness, which identified the problems and the steps that were needed in order to tackle homelessness in England. The Homelessness Directorate was established in the previous Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (DTLR) in March 2002 and brought together the Rough Sleepers Unit, the Bed and Breakfast Unit and a new team to ensure effective implementation of new homelessness legislation and to assist local authorities (and voluntary agencies working with them) in the development of their strategies to tackle homelessness.

The Homelessness Directorate invested £114.5 million in 2002–03 and has a £260 million budget over 2003–04 to 2005–06.

Local authorities also receive funding for their homelessness responsibilities through the local government finance settlement. The funding is paid as general grant and it is for local authorities to decide on their spending priorities taking into account their statutory responsibilities and the wishes of their electorate.

Between 1997–98 and 2001–02, the following net current expenditure on homelessness incurred within the General Fund Revenue Account:

	£ million
1997–98	123
1998–99	150
1999–2000	171
2000–01	203
2001–02	186

Much of this expenditure is on the provision of temporary accommodation for homeless households for which authorities claim housing benefit subsidy In relation to general capital investment for housing, the

17 Nov 2003 : Column 535W

total budget for housing capital investment in 1997–98 was £1.7 billion and £4.3 billion for 2003–04. These budgets provide new affordable housing and improvements to existing housing, both of which can help to prevent and resolve homelessness.

Future funding will complement increases in investment in affordable housing and the funding available from 1 April 2003 for services to help homeless people under the Supporting People programme. Provision for support relating to homelessness within the Supporting People budget totalled over £353 million this year—a fifth of the £1.8 billion grant for the 2003–04 programme. This expenditure would have previously come from a variety of programmes including housing benefit and Supported Housing Management Grant, but was not identified separately for homeless client groups within these programmes.

Housing

Mr. Gardiner: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will amend total cost indicators in the grant system for housing associations so that it is more profitable for them to build homes with three and four bedrooms. [138589]

Keith Hill: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer given on 6 November 2003, Official Report, column 796W. The Housing Corporation's Total Cost Indictor (TCI) framework is designed to be cost neutral across all types of homes irrespective of size.

Mr. Gardiner: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment his Department has made of how to increase the construction by housing associations of (a) two, (b) three and (c) four bedroom homes in an economically viable way while meeting his Department's targets to increase the density of new housing developments. [138590]

Keith Hill: The Housing Corporation has recently announced its bidding round for social housing grant for 2004–05 and 2005–06. It has identified a number of ways of achieving better value for money through, for example, partnering arrangements. The detailed programme will reflect priorities identified in Regional Housing Strategies and the funding recommendations made by Regional Housing Boards. Bids from registered social landlords should reflect the local needs that they are aiming to meet.

The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister believes that it is possible to achieve net development densities of up to 50 dwellings per hectare with a mix of different types and sizes of housing. Registered social landlords are already providing homes at an average of about 48 dwellings per hectare.

Housing Stock

Mr. Byers: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what action he proposes to take to ensure that regional government offices monitor the activities of local authorities to ensure that they comply with the requirements laid down by the Government in relation to the disposal of council housing stock. [138893]

17 Nov 2003 : Column 536W

Keith Hill: The Government Office for the Regions already work with all local authorities on housing matters, including where the authority is considering a housing transfer. In addition the Office's Community Housing Task Force work with authorities to help them deliver housing transfers within the framework set out by Government.

The Government Offices will continue to work with an authority post transfer on its strategic and statutory housing roles.

London Boroughs (Council Tax)

Simon Hughes: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to his answer of 29 October 2003, Official Report, columns 302–04W, on London boroughs (council tax), how much and what proportion of council tax was collected in the London boroughs in each year from April 1993 to April 1996. [139216]

Mr. Raynsford: The following table shows the amount of council tax collected in each London borough and the City of London, irrespective of the financial year to which they relate, in each year from 1993–94 to 1996–97.

Amounts of council tax collected⁽²⁴⁾

	1993–94	1994–95	1995–96	1996–97
Inner London
City of London	0.960	1.255	1.331	1.417
Camden	36.770	38.940	37.056	43.630
Greenwich	29.507	27.851	29.234	36.751
Hackney	18.279	18.444	20.781	23.071
Hammersmith and Fulham	24.866	26.463	30.740	35.882
Islington	23.214	24.288	26.040	31.335
Kensington and Chelsea	27.995	33.732	34.281	37.334
Lambeth	26.532	34.831	31.512	31.924
Lewisham	26.490	30.637	30.418	32.537
Southwark	22.624	26.374	26.694	34.584
Tower Hamlets	13.870	15.588	15.380	18.419
Wandsworth	13.269	13.777	27.209	35.719
Westminster	16.255	19.703	22.708	25.260
Total Inner London	280.631	311.883	333.384	387.863
Outer London
Barking and Dagenham	15.750	18.044	17.906	19.475
Barnet	53.655	60.553	62.897	68.042
Bexley	34.491	36.091	38.328	40.037
Brent	34.785	30.199	27.083	27.051
Bromley	51.307	52.726	55.687	60.924
Croydon	47.509	52.063	56.216	57.745
Ealing	43.256	40.727	42.784	45.009
Enfield	42.630	46.643	44.005	46.958
Haringey	30.843	32.875	33.226	35.330
Harrow	35.137	37.151	(25)—	39.659
Havering	36.414	36.550	39.055	42.674
Hillingdon	37.479	41.379	41.846	43.968
Hounslow	34.119	35.052	35.478	39.162
Kingston upon Thames	24.433	27.118	28.585	30.454
Merton	26.018	28.624	34.447	37.134
Newham	20.025	21.304	19.112	20.040
Redbridge	34.742	34.778	37.513	39.582
Richmond upon Thames	32.595	41.291	47.754	51.112
Sutton	29.333	31.906	33.569	35.534
Waltham Forest	27.583	29.897	32.313	36.215
Total Outer London	692.104	734.971	(25)—	816.105

⁽²⁴⁾ Amount of council tax due received by the end of the financial year as a percentage of the net collectable debit for the year.

⁽²⁵⁾ n/a

The following table shows the in-year council tax collection rates for each London borough and the City of London for each year from 1993–94 to 1996–97. The collection of council tax continues after the end of the

17 Nov 2003 : Column 537W

financial year to which it relates. This means that the percentage of council tax ultimately collected for any financial year is greater than that shown in the table.

In-year council tax collection rates⁽²⁶⁾

	1993–94	1994–95	1995–96	1996–97
Inner London
City of London	97.7	96.3	99.0	98.1
Camden	81.4	82.0	83.7	87.7
Greenwich	84.3	86.9	89.4	91.4
Hackney	67.5	75.5	78.8	79.4
Hammersmith and Fulham	86.1	85.7	87.4	87.6
Islington	69.3	81.2	80.8	83.0
Kensington and Chelsea	87.6	89.2	93.2	94.9
Lambeth	48.4	56.4	71.8	78.6
Lewisham	82.5	81.2	81.5	84.8
Southwark	73.1	79.9	83.7	84.7
Tower Hamlets	84.3	84.6	87.3	87.2
Wandsworth	88.0	89.3	88.6	87.9
Westminster	84.6	91.3	93.6	92.6
Average Inner London	75.6	80.0	84.4	86.7
Outer London
Barking and Dagenham	93.1	94.6	95.4	94.9
Barnet	92.7	93.5	94.4	94.7
Bexley	95.4	95.7	96.4	96.2
Brent	84.4	85.8	87.0	87.6
Bromley	97.0	96.9	97.4	97.2
Croydon	94.3	92.8	93.4	92.1
Ealing	86.9	90.4	92.9	94.3
Enfield	86.2	88.5	90.8	91.8
Haringey	74.0	81.9	81.4	84.7
Harrow	94.4	(27)—	(27)—	96.4
Havering	95.0	95.8	96.5	96.7
Hillingdon	92.9	93.8	93.9	94.3
Hounslow	91.1	90.1	88.8	92.7
Kingston upon Thames	97.5	98.2	97.3	97.1
Merton	91.6	92.9	96.9	94.4
Newham	73.4	72.8	76.9	81.0
Redbridge	94.1	94.6	94.7	95.6
Richmond upon Thames	95.2	95.4	96.4	97.0
Sutton	97.5	97.9	98.3	98.0
Waltham Forest	82.2	86.2	88.9	91.5
Average Outer London	90.4	91.8	92.9	93.8
Average Greater London	85.6	88.0	90.1	91.4

⁽²⁶⁾ Amount of council tax due received by the end of the financial year as a percentage of the net collectable debit for the year.

⁽²⁷⁾ n/a

---