|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|1.||228 Belfast Road, London N16|
|2.||Stonebridge Lock, Tottenham Marshes, London E8|
|3.||Essex Filter Beds, Lea Bridge Road, London E8|
|4.||Lee Valley Sports Centre, Eastway, Leyton|
|5.||Shoreditch Town Hall, Annexe and car park, Old Street. EC1|
|6.||Northgate/Hearn Street, London EC2|
|7.||210 Hertford Road, Hackney, London Nl|
|8.||Shoreditch Town Hall, Annexe and car park, Old Street, EC1|
|9.||Betty Laywood School, Clissold Road, London N16|
|10.||Park Lodges, Hackney|
|11.||9 Amhurst Park, Hackney N16|
|12.||Land at Church Walk, 46 Clissold Road, N16|
This figure has been estimated from the 200405 Subjective Analysis Return (SAR), part of the Revenue Outturn (RO) suite of forms collected by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) from local authorities. The SAR is a sample survey and collects information from 121 authorities in England. The data have been grossed up to provide estimates for England as a whole and are presented on a Financial Reporting Standard 17 (FRS17) basis.
Mr. Kemp: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what estimate he has made of the cost of implementing the single status national pay and conditions agreement for each (a) local authority and (b) region by 2007. 
Mr. Woolas: No such detailed estimates have been made. The Government are committed to ensuring that local authorities can continue to deliver effective services without imposing excessive increases in council tax. We have established a work programme with the Local Government Association to analyze pay pressures including the Single Status Agreement.
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will rank shire counties in England by the (a) percentage increase and (b) cash increase in formula grant awarded
9 Jan 2006 : Column 267W
in the Local Government Finance Settlement for (i)200607 and (ii) 200708. 
9 Jan 2006 : Column 268W
|Local authority||Change in 200607||Net change in 200607|
|Change||Percentage change||Change||Percentage change|
|Shire counties||£ million||Rank||%||Rank||£ million||Rank||%||Rank|
|Local authority||Change in 200708|
|Shire counties||£ million||Rank||%||Rank|
Mrs. Spelman: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to the answer of 14 December 2005, Official Report, column 1962W, on local government finance, if he will break down by main budget heading (a) the £45 million of costs that will be of potential use in the future and (b) the £15 million of costs that cannot be recouped or redeployed. 
The £45 million will be of use in supporting the 1993 valuation lists and also for other
9 Jan 2006 : Column 269W
valuation work on domestic property which the VOA undertakes within its statutory remit. This sum includes:
Peter Luff: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the average percentage change was in formula grant for each shire county (a) with and (b) without responsibility for the fire and rescue service in each of the 10 years to 200708. 
Mr. Woolas: The following table shows the average percentage increase in formula grant on a like-for-like basis over the period 199798 to 200708 for shire counties with fire responsibilities in 200607 and for shire counties without fire responsibilities in 200607. Please note that for the period 199798 to 200304, the combined shire fire authorities were levying bodies. For this period therefore the formula grant for authorities without fire responsibilities in 200607 included an amount for fire.
Shire counties with fire responsibilities
|Shire counties without fire responsibilities|
Peter Luff: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the average percentage change was in formula grant for (a) each West Midland metropolitan district council and (b) the city councils of (i) Birmingham, (ii) Coventry and (iii) Wolverhampton in each of the 10 years to 200708. 
Mr. Woolas: The following table shows the average percentage increase in formula grant on a like-for-like basis over the period 199798 to 200708 for all West Midland metropolitan district councils and the cities of Birmingham, Coventry and Wolverhampton.
|West Midlands district councils||Birmingham||Coventry||Wolverhampton|
Mr. Woolas: In 199899, Central Support Protection Grant was introduced for the first time. This grant protected authorities from cash decreases in their formula grant for the first time. In 200102, Floor Damping was introduced for authorities with education and social service responsibility. The following year, i.e.200203, this was introduced for all authorities.
Under the floor damping regime, the floor is self-financing within each of the authority groups covered by the scheme. This means that it is not possible to set the floor above the level of the average grant increase for that group on a like-for-like basis. When setting the level of the floor Ministers take into account a number of factors including the level of inflation expected for the period covered by the grant, the average grant increase for the group, and the scaling factor imposed on authorities above the floor. The measure of inflation used in deciding at what level the floor should be set is the GDP deflator, as this measure is forecast by Treasury, and hence is available for the period covered by the grant.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|