| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
2 Mar 2010 : Column 1151W—continued
Mortgages
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if he will place in the Library a copy of the research report on UK mortgage arrears and repossessions commissioned by the National Housing and Planning Advice Unit from Professor John Muellbauer. [319290]
John Healey: The National Housing and Planning Advice Unit (NHPAU) is an independent advisory agency and publication is a matter for the NHPAU.
Mortgages: Government Assistance
Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much funding he has provided to assist low income homeowners in the last 12 months. [318811]
Mr. Ian Austin: Over £1 billion has been made available to local authorities through the Regional Housing Pot over the period 2008-09 to 2010-11 to help improve house conditions for the most vulnerable households as part of CSR 07. £425 million was made available for 2009-10.
Multiple Occupation: Planning Permission
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the planned timetable is for introduction of secondary legislation to require houses in multiple occupation to have planning permission. [319120]
Mr. Ian Austin: We are aiming to make the Order amending the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, which will create the HMO use class, by 8 March 2010. This order does not need to be laid before Parliament.
We are also aiming to make the Order amending the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, which will make a change from a HMO to a C3 dwelling house permitted development, by 8 March and lay it before Parliament by 15 March 2010.
Both amendments will come into effect on 6 April 2010.
Non-Domestic Rates: Ports
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government when prescription of statutory ports ended; and what the effect of ending it was on the rating of (a) port businesses and (b) port owners. [319438]
Barbara Follett: The ending of prescribed rating was enacted in the Local Government Act 2003 and the statutory port authorities (owners) were subject to conventional rating from 1 April 2005. The impact on the individual port authority was that their rateable value was ascertained by the same rules of assessment that apply to all other non-domestic property instead of by a prescribed formula.
The ending of prescribed rating had no effect on whether property occupied by other businesses within ports should be assessed separately for non-domestic rates. The principles concerning separate rateability where there is "exclusive occupation" and "paramount control" are long established. The leading case on the subject is a House of Lords decision from as far back as 1936-Westminster Council v. Southern Railway Company and W.H. Smith and Son.
The review of ports by the Valuation Office Agency is to ensure that all individual business properties within and outside ports are rated fairly to ensure that the burden of contributions to funding local government is shared fairly among businesses around the country.
The Government have listened to the concerns of businesses with significant and unexpected backdated bills, including some businesses within ports. It has legislated to enable such bills to be repaid over an unprecedented eight years rather than in a single instalment, helping affected businesses to manage the impact on their cash flows during the downturn by reducing the amount they are required to pay now by 87.5 per cent.
As at 8 October 2009, local authorities have reported that ratepayers occupying 221 properties within ports had fully discharged their backdated liability and ratepayers occupying a further 200 business properties within ports had been granted a schedule of payments.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government for how long the cumulo system of paying business rates by businesses in port hereditaments was prolonged in 2000; by what means the system was ended; when notice was given to port companies paying under the system that it would be ended; and when it was ended. [319439]
Barbara Follett: The term "cumulo" (artificial hereditament) has been used to describe where properties (hereditaments) within the same occupation that under the normal rules of rating would be shown as individual entries in the rating lists are shown as a single entry in the rating list.
The ability to create an artificial port hereditament in this way is determined by regulation 5 of the Non-Domestic Rating Miscellaneous Provisions (2) Regulations 1989 (SI 1989/2303), which provides that in certain circumstances two or more hereditaments occupied by a statutory port authority to be a single hereditament to be liable for non-domestic rates where for example the properties are split by a river.
Whether a separate occupier within a port makes a contribution to business rates through their agreement with the port authority is a contractual matter between the occupier and the port authority. The cumulo is not and has never been a method for occupations that should be separately assessed for business rates to waive their liabilities.
The review of ports by the Valuation Office Agency is to ensure that all individual business properties within and outside ports are rated fairly to ensure that the burden of contributions to funding local government is shared fairly amongst businesses around the country.
The Government have listened to the concerns of businesses with significant and unexpected backdated bills, including some businesses within ports. It has legislated to enable such bills to be repaid over an unprecedented eight years rather than in a single instalment, helping affected businesses to manage the impact on their cash flows during the downturn by reducing the amount they are required to pay now by 87.5 per cent.
As at October 8 2009, local authorities have reported that ratepayers occupying 221 properties within ports had fully discharged their backdated liability and ratepayers occupying a further 200 business properties within ports had been granted a schedule of payments.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government when the Valuation Office Agency began its work on separate assessment of port businesses in ports previously rated as a single hereditament; for what reasons the Agency decided to do this; and when the work was completed. [319444]
Barbara Follett: Valuation officers are required under Section 41 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 to maintain accurate rating lists. When they become aware that a change is needed, such as that at the ports, they must make the alteration and also specify the date from which the change should become effective for rates charging purposes.
The principles concerning separate rateability where there is "exclusive occupation" and "paramount control" are long established. The leading case on the subject is a House of Lords decision from as far back as 1936-Westminster Council v. Southern Railway Company and W.H. Smith and Son.
The VOA rated ports and properties within ports for the 2005 list based upon information supplied by the ports operators. A significant number of separate assessments appeared in the rating lists for individual port occupiers even before the following review was initiated.
It was only after the lists were compiled, through routine work to keep the lists up to date, it was found that the rating lists may not reflect all the separate properties within the ports. Port operators were advised
by letter of the ports review and its background in May 2006. While the initial reviews have been completed, many port properties change over time and the VOA continue to make alterations to individual properties as part of its statutory duty to maintain the rating lists.
The review of ports by the Valuation Office Agency is to ensure that all individual business properties within and outside ports are rated fairly to ensure that the burden of contributions to funding local government is shared fairly among businesses around the country.
The Government have listened to the concerns of businesses with significant and unexpected backdated bills, including some businesses within ports. It has legislated to enable such bills to be repaid over an unprecedented eight years rather than in a single instalment, helping affected businesses to manage the impact on their cash flows during the downturn by reducing the amount they are required to pay now by 87.5 per cent.
As at 8 October 2009, local authorities have reported that ratepayers occupying 221 properties within ports had fully discharged their backdated liability and ratepayers occupying a further 200 business properties within ports had been granted a schedule of payments.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government who decided that port companies hitherto part of one port hereditament should be separately assessed for business rates. [319445]
Barbara Follett: Valuation officers are required under Section 41 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 to maintain accurate rating lists. When they become aware that a change is needed, such as that at the ports, they must make the alteration and specify the date from which the change should become effective for rates charging purposes.
The principles concerning separate rateability, which is the rating rationale for the separate assessment of some properties within ports, where there is "exclusive occupation" and "paramount control" are long established. The leading case on the subject is a House of Lords decision from as far back as 1936-Westminster Council v. Southern Railway Company and W.H. Smith and Son.
The review of ports by the Valuation Office Agency is to ensure that all individual business properties within and outside ports are rated fairly to ensure that the burden of contributions to funding local government is shared fairly among businesses around the country.
The Government have listened to the concerns of businesses with significant and unexpected backdated bills, including some businesses within ports. It has legislated to enable such bills to be repaid over an unprecedented eight years rather than in a single instalment, helping affected businesses to manage the impact on their cash flows during the downturn by reducing the amount they are required to pay now by 87.5 per cent.
As at 8 October 2009, local authorities have reported that ratepayers occupying 221 properties within ports had fully discharged their backdated liability and ratepayers occupying a further 200 business properties within ports had been granted a schedule of payments.
Private Rented Housing
Mr. Curry: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if the Minister of State for Housing will meet representatives of First Track Solutions, formerly Social Homes, to discuss his Department's plans for local letting agencies. [319485]
John Healey: I meet from time to time with a wide range of representative bodies and other stakeholders with an interest in our proposals for the future of the private rented sector, including the 'local lettings agency' concept. I have no current plans to meet with individual commercial companies, including First Track Solutions (formerly Social Homes), on this topic.
Public Bodies: Finance
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the cost of the (a) Tenant Services Authority, (b) Homes and Communities Agency, (c) Audit Commission and (d) Standards Board is expected to be in (i) 2009-10, (ii) 2010-11 and (iii) 2011-12. [319037]
Barbara Follett: In relation to the cost of the Tenant Services Authority I refer the hon. Member to the answer to the hon. Member for Welwyn Hatfield (Grant Shapps) on June 16 2009, Official Report, column 202W.
The Standards Board's estimate of its annual budgets for 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 can be found in their corporate plan, which is available on the Standard Board's website at:
The planned budgets for the Homes and Communities Agency are set out in its corporate plan for 2009-10 and 2010-11, available on the Agency's website at:
The Audit Commission's planned income from Central Government grants as well as other sources for 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 is contained their draft strategic plan for 2010, available on the Audit Commission's website at:
It should be noted that budgets for 2011-12 have not been formally set; it is expected that this will happen as part of a comprehensive spending review during 2010.
Regional Development Agencies
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Welwyn Hatfield of 1 February 2010, Official Report, column 138W, on regional development agencies: mining, for what reasons representatives of the other regional development agencies were not invited to the English Coalfield forum meetings. [319796]
Ms Rosie Winterton: The full range of stakeholders involved in the Coalfields Forum is quite wide; it includes representatives from several regeneration organisations and Government Departments. In order to keep the number of participants at each Forum meeting to a manageable size, the decision was taken to invite Yorkshire Forward to participate on behalf of the Regional Development Agencies (RDAs). They are the only RDA with a dedicated coalfields team.
Regional Improvement and Efficiency Partnerships
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (1) how much collaborative procurement spending was directed through the Regional Efficiency Improvement Partnership in the latest period for which figures are available; [319112]
(2) how much central funding is planned to be provided to each Regional Efficiency Improvement Partnership in (a) 2009-10, (b) 2010-11 and (c) 2011-12. [319133]
Ms Rosie Winterton: In 2009-10, core funding for each of the nine Regional Improvement and Efficiency Partnerships (RIEPs) was:
| Region | Core funding (£ million) |
Indicative core funding for each RIEP in 2010-11 is the same as for 2009-10; the decision on whether to confirm these indicative allocations will be announced shortly. No decisions have been taken yet regarding core funding in 2011-12.
Core funding is intended to enable RIEPs to meet their objectives to support the successful delivery of local area agreements and achievement of councils' £5.5 billion efficiency target by March 2011. An important activity to meet these objectives will be the promotion of collaborative procurement opportunities among local authorities. Core funding is not ring-fenced, so the decision on how much of it is to be used for this purpose is for individual RIEPs to make.
RIEPs also receive grants from government departments to support specific activities; for example, in 2009-10, they shared £31.706 million from this Department's Efficiency and Transformation Fund to use in support of capital projects that aim to deliver public services in more customer-focused and efficient ways.
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many staff work for each Regional Improvement Efficiency Partnership. [319271]
Ms Rosie Winterton: We do not hold this information centrally.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |