COMMENCING ON THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY IN THE FORTY-SIXTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OF HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II
FIFTH SERIES
VOLUME DCXXII
THIRD VOLUME OF SESSION 2000--01
House of Lords
Monday, 12th February 2001.
The House met at half-past two of the clock: The CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES on the Woolsack.
Prayers--Read by the Lord Bishop of Lincoln.
Local Government Finance White Paper
Lord Bowness asked Her Majesty's Government:
- When they intend to publish their White Paper on local government finance.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Lord Whitty): My Lords, we are currently considering over 16,000 responses to the local government finance Green Paper. We shall announce our decisions on the reform of local government finance in a White Paper to be published later this year.
Lord Bowness: My Lords, I thank the Minister for his Answer. I note that he mentioned "later this year". A similar reply was given previously by his noble friend Lady Farrington. Does the Minister agree that any changes, whether to council tax bands or in the nature of a revaluation, will give rise to large numbers of winners and losers--indeed, considerable losers in London and in the South East? In the interests of householders, does the Minister agree that the sooner the Government's intentions are known the better?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, bearing in mind that local government finance is an extremely complicated area and the fact that, whatever you do, there will almost certainly be winners and losers, noble Lords will understand why we are taking our time over this consultation. Indeed, 16,000 people have bothered to respond, so there is much interest in the matter.
We shall assess that response in relation to council tax banding. Although that aspect was not specifically covered in the consultation, we have received responses in that respect and in relation to the other strategic issues outlined in the Green Paper.
Lord Taylor of Blackburn: My Lords, does not my noble friend the Minister think it worth while to take some time over this consultation rather than rushing into a process and introducing something like the poll tax that the previous Conservative government introduced some time ago?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, as happens so frequently with my noble friend, he has left me with the feeling that I wish I had said that. My noble friend is correct in what he says. This is an extremely complicated area; indeed, the poll tax saga was an indication of the difficulties involved. I believe that we are right to take our time to get the matter right.
Baroness Hanham: My Lords, can the Minister tell the House why the concept of floors and ceilings, which I understand is part of the Green Paper, has been introduced as part of this year's settlement process before any adequate assessment could be made of the consultation replies?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the Government's responsibilities in the matter are clear under local government finance provisions. In order to avoid major changes that would impact on council tax payers, we felt it necessary to introduce floors and ceilings in relation to this year's settlement. This has been done in the interests of stability and in order to avoid sudden changes to council tax payers.
Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, in the interests of clarity, as well as the fairness to which the noble Lord, Lord Bowness, referred, does the Minister agree that it is important to ensure that local authorities have the right degree of independence and the opportunity to take decisions about their communities? If the
Minister so agrees, does he also agree that for the Government to increase a specific grant at the expense of general funding--in other words, ring-fencing and reducing local discretion--is not the right direction in which to move?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, one of the themes of the Green Paper is to look at ways in which local authorities should be able to extend their flexibility and make choices for themselves on how they spend the money available to them. In general, I agree with the noble Baroness's first point. However, there are particular areas of government policy where clear objectives are needed and where ring-fenced grants may continue to be appropriate--that is as well as, and not instead of, providing increased flexibility to local authorities.
Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the rise in specific grants in the last settlement is higher than the rise in revenue support funding? Does that support what the noble Lord is now saying?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, in my naivety, I thought that the noble Baroness was addressing the subject matter of the Question--namely, the forward pattern of local authority finance. If the noble Baroness is addressing history, then clearly there are parts of government policy under the present system where it is best to achieve objectives through ring-fenced financing; for example, on nursery education, which would not have been possible had we not extended the ring-fenced facilities over the past year and, indeed, during this current year. However, in the longer run, my previous answer stands.
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, should not government grants to local authorities always be ring fenced? Surely that would leave the raising of money from community charges to be dealt with as local authorities decided.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, that seems to me to indicate a degree of centralisation in the approach to local government finance, such as was endemic at various times during the term of the previous administration and from which we wish to move away. We do not wish to see the rigidity applied whereby central government lay down specifically and precisely how local government should spend its money. As I said, there are specific objectives in respect of which we must do so, but, in general, we believe that local authorities are responsible for making their own decisions within the allocation given to them by the Government and as regards the money raised through their own resources.
Lord Campbell of Alloway: My Lords, as a matter of clarification, is the Minister saying that the ring-fenced grant is always separate from, and additional to, the general grant so that it in no way detracts from the general grant? I am not quite sure on that point.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, under past policies elements within the general grant have been ring-fenced. The intention is to move to a broader, pooled budget under the general grant to which future ring-fenced finances would be separately allocated.
Lord Elton: My Lords, when the noble Lord says "ring fence", does he mean what I mean when I say "hypothecated"?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I am not sure what the noble Lord means when he says "hypothecated". When I say "hypothecated" I tend to refer to central taxation which the Treasury on occasion--very rarely--allows individual departments to allocate for specific purposes. Ring-fencing relates to the control or otherwise which central government have over local government allocations.
Female Genital Mutilation
2.43 p.m.
Baroness Rendell of Babergh asked Her Majesty's Government:
- In the light of the report by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Population, Development and Reproductive Health on female genital mutilation, when they will take steps to implement some or all of the 12 recommendations in the report.
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I was pleased to participate in the launch of the all-party group's report in November and to underline the Government's commitment to help stamp out this appalling practice. We are working actively to this end, both in the United Kingdom, where the practice is outlawed, and in our international development work. The report contains a great many detailed recommendations and useful suggestions which are consistent with work that we are already doing and will continue to do in the future.
Baroness Rendell of Babergh: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that encouraging Answer and declare an interest as patron of the London Black Women's Health Action Project. Is my noble friend aware that the public in this country know virtually nothing about female genital mutilation and its disastrous and long-term effects? Does she agree that a campaign might be mounted to raise public awareness?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, first, I congratulate my noble friend on constantly bringing this issue to the attention of the House as a patron of a London women's health group. I agree with my noble friend that raising public awareness is very important. The only way that FGM will eventually be eradicated is through a continuous programme of education and information aimed at the grass roots level. The Government are taking steps to promote that kind of work, for example, through FORWARD, an NGO actively working with communities to bring an end to this practice.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |