---

Local Government Finance

3. Hugh Bayley (City of York) (Lab): If he will obtain data to allow a market forces factor in the local government funding formula to be examined for the City of York separately from North Yorkshire. [173981]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Phil Hope): The area cost adjustment is the element of the local government funding formula that takes account of higher wage and rate costs in each area. The new area cost adjustment is a huge improvement on the old system, which gave a top-up only to authorities in the south-east. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister uses wage data from the whole North Yorkshire area to calculate the area cost adjustment for the City of York and for North Yorkshire county council. That is to ensure that the area cost adjustment is stable and reliable from year to year.

Hugh Bayley : Wages and house prices are higher in York than in North Yorkshire, which of course is an entirely separate local authority area, but York, unlike Leeds, does not receive the area cost adjustment. Will my hon. Friend consider changing the formula so that York's costs can be calculated separately from those of North Yorkshire and we can be considered for the area cost adjustment in relation to our costs, which are different from those in North Yorkshire? Does he recognise that it is important for York to get this help after this year, in which it has faced from its Liberal Democrat council one of the highest council tax rises in the country?

Phil Hope: Currently, the funding formula is set for at least the next year, but I understand my hon. Friend's concerns and we may explore the potential for calculating the area cost adjustment at a finer geographical level. I am anxious, however, to ensure that we have enough wage data to produce stable and reliable area cost factors each year. My hon. Friend is a great champion for his constituency, and he will be pleased to hear that his council in York got an increase of 6.2 per cent. in grant from the Labour Government, and an extra £10.5 million in specific grant. I therefore share his concerns that Liberal Democrats in York raised their council tax by 8.5 per cent. The fact is that Liberal Democrat councils cost more.

Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York) (Con): I hope that the market forces provision will recognise not only that, as the hon. Member for City of York (Hugh Bayley) said, wages are lower in North Yorkshire than in the City of York, but that residents living in villages such as Nun Monkton in North Yorkshire will be given preference over travelling showmen trying to set up winter quarters in that area?

Phil Hope: I am not absolutely certain about the connection between the area cost adjustment and the village of Nun Monkton, but central Government funding for local government means that rural areas, like urban areas, have received substantially more grant from this Government than they ever did from the Tories.
 
19 May 2004 : Column 966
 

Mental Health Inquiry

4. Dr. Brian Iddon (Bolton, South-East) (Lab): What proportion of respondents to the social exclusion unit's inquiry into mental health was made up of people who had experienced mental health problems. [173982]

7. Dr. Doug Naysmith (Bristol, North-West) (Lab/Co-op): How many individuals with mental health problems contributed via the internet to the social exclusion unit inquiry into mental health. [173985]

The Minister for Housing and Planning (Keith Hill): Of 950 written responses to the social exclusion unit consultation, 28 per cent. were from people with experience of mental health problems. There were 33 e-mailed responses, and 11 from groups. The SEU recognises the importance of engaging directly with adults with mental health problems. That is why it arranged a series of consultation events that involved some 500 people.

Dr. Iddon : In response to that inquiry, this week, Mind published a report entitled "Not alone?", which shows that 84 per cent. of people who suffer a mental health problem feel isolated, compared with 29 per cent. of the general population. Since ready use of a telephone was cited as helpful in overcoming that isolation, does my right hon. Friend agree that local authorities should be encouraged to provide helplines, such as Bolton metropolitan borough council's careline, to help vulnerable people, and that the delivery of all public services can play a role in removing the stigma of mental health problems and the discrimination that they bring?

Keith Hill: Like my hon. Friend, I welcome the Mind report, which calls attention to a number of important issues consistent with the findings of the SEU mental health project. I congratulate my hon. Friend on introducing the careline initiative in Bolton. The forthcoming SEU report will identify actions needed to improve access to advice and support for adults with mental health problems through, for example, primary care and a lessening of the financial insecurity that can reduce use of the telephone, which is so often a lifeline and a means of escape from isolation.

Dr. Naysmith: I too congratulate the Minister and the SEU on inquiring into links between mental health problems. What the Minister said about the contribution of the internet was fascinating, and raises further interesting questions. Mind's report "Not alone?", mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, South-East (Dr. Iddon), found 72 per cent. of respondents to its survey believed online access was or could be beneficial; but 20 per cent. of those, who were either using or wishing to use the internet, did not have regular access to it. Have the Government any plans to enable people with mental health problems in particular to gain access to what is nowadays a basic communication tool?

Keith Hill: My hon. Friend is right. All the evidence suggests that those on the lowest incomes have least access to the internet. We realise that that is a particular difficulty for people with mental health problems, and
 
19 May 2004 : Column 967
 
we think it very important for them to have direct access to those making decisions on such issues. We expect the SEU report, which is about to be published, to make a major contribution to improving that access.

Tony Baldry (Banbury) (Con): If I were writing about mental health, I would be inclined to write to the Secretary of State for Health. It is currently rather difficult to know what is happening in mainstream Whitehall Departments, what policy is being drawn up in Cabinet Office units, and what policy is being drawn up in units in the Minister's Department. Could the Minister help us by reminding us in writing what units exist in the ODPM and what policies they are working on? That is a genuinely helpful question. It is particularly important for us to know when the SEU is to deal with new policies, so that we know when to make representations on them.

Keith Hill: I agree that joined-up government, as they say, is important in all aspects of government, and especially important in this context. The SEU report will go some way towards achieving a more seamless approach to mental health problems across Government, but I undertake to write to the hon. Gentleman explaining what routes are appropriate.

Lynne Jones (Birmingham, Selly Oak) (Lab): I was pleased to learn this morning that the SEU is employing people with direct experience of being at the receiving end of mental health services. Does my right hon. Friend agree that one good way of combating the stigma and social exclusion suffered by people with mental health problems is to set a good example in terms of staff recruitment and retention? What are my right hon. Friend and the SEU doing to disseminate best practice in enlightened parts of the public service, and in private sector organisations such as BT?

Keith Hill: The purpose of the SEU report will be to improve dissemination of best practice. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for acknowledging the unit's determination to involve people with mental health problems. As she said, a member of the SEU's mental health team has experience of enduring mental health problems.

Regional Assemblies

5. Mrs. Louise Ellman (Liverpool, Riverside) (Lab): What effects a directly elected assembly for the north-west will have on business. [173983]

The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr. John Prescott): Improving the economic performance of the region will be at the heart of the objectives of an elected regional assembly in the north-west. If the three northern regions improve their productivity to the current southern region average, they will be nearly £35 billion a year better off—and most of that increase will be in the north-west, which is the largest region of the three. A directly elected assembly for the north-west will put responsibilities for releasing that potential in the hands of the people of the region, not the civil servants in Whitehall.
 
19 May 2004 : Column 968
 

Mrs. Ellman: Does my right hon. Friend agree that good transport links are essential for successful businesses? Although there are significant transport powers in the proposed assemblies, can he offer any strengthened powers so that good transport can be developed for successful business in the north-west and elsewhere?

The Deputy Prime Minister: My hon. Friend makes a major point on the importance of transport and economic development. Certainly the regions will play a major part in decisions on transport infrastructure, but she will also realise that in the north-west alone there are two passenger transport executives, which have a considerable influence on transport investment in the regions. The Secretary of State for Transport has already made it clear to the House that he thinks that more of those decisions should be taken in the regions. That will no doubt be reflected in the Bill that we will introduce.

Mr. Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley) (Con): We do not have any oyster bars in the north-west of England, but we have a number of other businesses. I spoke this morning to the chairman of the CBI in the north-west, Damien Waters, who is very concerned that the costs of the regional assembly will be borne by his members. They have seen what has happened in Scotland, with the fiasco of the palace that is being built costing 10 times more than was estimated, and the same has happened in Wales, with the building costing much more than was estimated in the White Paper. Why should those business people trust what this Government are saying about the costs of the new regional assemblies?

The Deputy Prime Minister: I think that the hon. Gentleman looks more like a kipper than an oyster. I note what he says about the costs of the assemblies, but does that mean that his party is now committed to abolishing the Scottish Parliament? Does it mean that it is committed to abolishing the Welsh Assembly? It promised to do that, but has now changed its mind. If the hon. Gentleman is concerned about the cost, is he also concerned that his Front-Bench team are committed to abolishing the regional development agencies that will make a real difference to economic development?

Mr. Bernard Jenkin (North Essex) (Con): No one believes the right hon. Gentleman's bluster. He is talking a load of cod. He is talking about investment in transport, but an extra layer of politicians and bureaucrats with no new money and no new powers, as Jeff Rooker has said in the House of Lords, will mean that there will not be the resources to improve transport. How does the right hon. Gentleman explain the fact that business is overwhelmingly opposed to elected regional assemblies? The Lancashire chamber of commerce has voted against them, as has the Manchester chamber of commerce. The Hull chamber of commerce, in the right hon. Gentleman's own constituency, has voted against elected regional assemblies. How does he explain that?

The Deputy Prime Minister: I have to tell the hon. Gentleman that at the hearings that we have been holding, the chambers of commerce and the CBI have
 
19 May 2004 : Column 969
 
been expressing views that have changed from those that the hon. Gentleman suggests they held early on in the debate—[Interruption.] Well, reference has already been made to Newcastle's The Journal, which has said that business is quite clearly moving towards a more favourable position. At the end of the day, however, the people will make the decision—we are giving them that right. The hon. Gentleman spends so much time complaining about the hearings, but we are there explaining to people what we are intending to do. All the polls show that those hearings are having an effect in raising awareness, although we must wait to see what the vote is. The hon. Gentleman should not spend all his time asking stupid questions here on the cost of the hearings—questions with a total cost of £7,000, which is the same as the cost of one hearing with 200 people. We prefer to consult the people, and at the end of the day, they will make the decision.

---