Examination of Witnesses (Questions 340-351)
RT HON
KEITH HILL
MP, RT HON
NICK RAYNSFORD
MP, MR JOE
MONTGOMERY AND
MR ANDREW
WELLS
19 OCTOBER 2004
Q340 Chairman: Apart from housing and
some of the administration, actually the Department is going to
have less money to spend, is it not, over the next period?
Mr Raynsford: Housing is a very
important part of the Department's budget.
Q341 Chairman: I accept that housing
plays a part, so the other is not important at all?
Mr Raynsford: The local government
side technically is not ours, but there has been provision for
a real-terms growth of 2.7% above inflation in the Spending Review
period. That is growth in a huge budget, significantly larger
than the housing one. As I say, it does not count as ODPM because
the individual elements score against separate responsible departments.
Q342 Sir Paul Beresford: Can I take a
slightly different approach. In the 2½% per year real-terms
efficiency savings, is there any part of your Department which
is actually making money savings, in those terms?
Mr Raynsford: Yes. We have ourselves
made very significant efficiency savings and I have no doubt that
Mavis McDonald and Peter Unwin would have been able to give you
considerable details about that when they appeared before you.
Q343 Chairman: They did not convince
us, may we say?
Mr Raynsford: Certainly I will
ask the Permanent Secretary to write, because we have given a
very close look indeed at the administrative expenditure within
our own Department and apply very much the same rules to ourselves
as we do to others.
Q344 Sir Paul Beresford: Would it be
fair to say that, at the end of the day, the net budget will not
show anything like a 2½% reduction?
Mr Raynsford: The overall budget
will not show a 2½% reduction because there has been substantial
additional investment in key services such as housing, and, quite
rightly, that is providing more homes for people in need, and
improving the quality of homes, but our administrative expenditure
has been very, very carefully pruned to ensure that we do meet
our efficiency savings expectations.
Q345 Sir Paul Beresford: At the end of
the day, the net effect is going to be an increase in expenditure?
Mr Raynsford: Unlike the period
when your Party was in Government, we believe that there is merit
in increasing investment in housing and other public services
in order to improve the infrastructure of the country and to improve
the lives of people who depend on public services.
Q346 Sir Paul Beresford: Some of us also
have respect for the taxpayer.
Mr Raynsford: Indeed, so do we.
That is why we have taken an extremely robust line in relation
to those areas of expenditure, whether it is our own expenditure
or local government expenditure, where there does not appear to
have been a proper concern about efficiency savings.
Q347 Sir Paul Beresford: Will we be able
to get a note on the total net savings in various areas within
your budget?
Mr Raynsford: Within the ODPM
budget, we have been absolutely rigorous in cutting back on unnecessary
administrative spending to meet our efficiency targets. We apply
a similar logic towards local government, where we are promoting
improved services but against a background of a 2½% efficiency
saving expectation.
Q348 Sir Paul Beresford: We can expect
a note on that, can we?
Mr Raynsford: I did undertake
to ask the Permanent Secretary to let you have a note on the efficiency
savings we have achieved within our own Department, yes.
Q349 Chairman: Mr Hill, when you came
before us about gypsies in the summer, you told us that the review
the Department was carrying out on gypsy and traveller accommodation
was expected to report in the summer of 2004. I am not quite sure
whether the summer of 2004 has finished yet but can you tell us
where we are up to with the review?
Mr Hill: We expect to conclude
and publish the review now in a matter of a very few weeks, but
you will have noticed in the meantime that we have been able to
lay amendments to the Housing Bill in the House of Lords on the
subject of gypsies and travellers.
Q350 Chairman: That is very welcome,
but it would be very nice if also you were to add a statutory
duty to local authorities to provide sites, would it not?
Mr Hill: We have debated this,
as you know, Chairman, and it is the Government's view that, in
fact, the old requirement to provide gypsy sites was not universally
observed, and where observed was often defective. We believe that
our new approach, which is to seek to mainstream the provision
of gypsy and traveller accommodation, to place it firmly within
the context of the local housing needs assessment of local authorities
which will feed into the regional spatial strategy, is likely,
along with other provisions, to produce the sorts of results that
I think we all wish to see.
Q351 Chairman: Do you expect the review
to recommend that?
Mr Hill: I think the fact that
we have made these moves with regard to the Housing Bill kind
of implies that is the finding it will come up with.
Chairman: On that note, can I thank you
very much for your evidence.
| 
