---

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I do not agree with the noble Lord's second observation. Far from it being the case, I am sure that the Prime Minister has great confidence in the team that he has assembled around him. It does a very good job. I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Birt, provides very valuable information to the Prime Minister and other Ministers, and that his role in that regard is no different from that of other specialist and unpaid advisers appointed by previous governments.

Lord Taylor of Blackburn: My Lords, is it not a fact that many of us, from all parts of the Chamber, give advice to the Prime Minister? The question is whether the Prime Minister takes note. I am constantly giving him advice, but he does not take any notice of it.

Noble Lords: Oh!

Lord Taylor of Blackburn: Is that not the true position?

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the noble Lord will be reassured if I say that I am sure that the Prime Minister takes very careful account of what he says.

Lord McNally: My Lords, all parts of the House would consider missing advice from the noble Lord, Lord Taylor, as an opportunity missed. However, is there not a more serious matter here? The noble Lord, Lord Birt, was supposedly going to give "blue-sky thinking" advice to the Prime Minister. There is now very clear evidence that he is interfering directly in matters before Cabinet and Parliament; I refer to the charter of the BBC. What guarantee do we have that the new BBC charter will not be drawn up on that famous Downing
 
23 Feb 2005 : Column 1211
 
Street sofa—so roundly condemned by the noble Lord, Lord Butler—by the noble Lord, Lord Birt, Mr Alastair Campbell, who is now back in 10 Downing Street, and other unpaid and unaccountable advisers who have no responsibility to either Parliament or Cabinet?

There is a constitutional issue about which, if I were any self-respecting Minister in the Cabinet, I would be extremely worried. This Parliament should be worried about it, too.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I am not sure that there was a question among the noble Lord's observations—and observations they were. They were observations based in the main, I can only comment, on idle press speculation. I am not prepared to respond to that.

Lord Barnett: My Lords, I declare an interest as a former vice-chairman of the BBC who had some responsibility for appointing the noble Lord, Lord Birt, as director-general.

Noble Lords: Oh!

Lord Barnett: My Lords, may I ask my noble friend to suggest to the noble Lord that it might be in his own best interests and the national interest if his reports were published? If they are not, we get only the media version, and the media do not seem to like him.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I rather suspect that we ought to approach that last observation with some delicacy. We should not always seek to follow the media's agenda. As to the noble Lord's point about published reports, the noble Lord, Lord Birt, obviously provides blue-sky thinking, advice and support to the Prime Minister and a number of other Ministers, and works very closely with the Strategy Unit in No. 10. The majority of its reports are published documents and in the public domain; they make a valuable contribution to policy thinking and public debate.

Council Tax

Lord Greaves asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they intend to adjust council tax bands to take account of inflation and other factors before the revaluation of properties takes effect in 2006.

The Minister of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Lord Rooker): My Lords, the Local Government Act 2003 provides for the revaluation of all English domestic property on 1 April 2007 using the 1 April 2005 property values. The independent inquiry into local government funding headed by Sir Michael Lyons, which is due to report by the end of this year, will inform decisions by Her Majesty's Government on council tax bands.

Lord Greaves: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply and note that he has confirmed that the
 
23 Feb 2005 : Column 1212
 
report will come out at the end of this year. But is it not the case that the revaluation will seriously affect millions of people—millions of poorer people if Wales is anything to go by? There, four times as many people found that their council tax went up, as opposed to those who found that it went down, as a result of the revaluation. Is it not the case that taxation will be a major issue in the coming general election and that council tax is a major part of that? People want to know where this Government stand and whether their council tax will go up or down. Why will the Government not tell us now what they intend to do about the banding and the council tax system?

Lord Rooker: My Lords, I gave the reason in my original Answer—that is, the Government have set up an independent inquiry chaired by Sir Michael Lyons, who has impeccable credentials on this issue. He is due to report by the end of 2005, following which, if action needs to be taken, there will need to be a full public consultation and parliamentary debate. That will inform decisions taken by the Government. We are not going to make decisions on the hoof as we go along. That is why we have set up an independent inquiry.

Earl Attlee: My Lords, does the Minister agree that it would be quite wrong to increase pensioners' council tax by more than the rate of inflation after the election?

Lord Rooker: My Lords, I shall not go down the road of answering questions on issues that might be raised after the election—presumably questions asked of a Labour government, which is quite an admission. As I said, we have set up an independent inquiry, and local government has been flooded with money from central government. All local authorities have had inflation-led or higher than inflation-led grants for this year and, since 1997, local government has had a 33 per cent real terms increase in funding. So we do not expect any substantial or unreasonable council tax increases this year.

Lord Marsh: My Lords, does the Minister agree that a dangerous and serious situation surrounds this issue? I live in a village where a high proportion of the houses are former farm workers' cottages. They are selling at £350,000 plus and they have been handed down through the families. The people who live there could not afford to sell their houses because, first, they would have to find somewhere else to live and they would not find anywhere else cheaper and, secondly, they could not afford to pay the tax and the agents' fees. We have the absurd situation whereby people are assessed for tax on an asset which they cannot get rid of.

Lord Rooker: My Lords, these are the very issues that we expect Sir Michael Lyons to inquire into. He is not limited to looking at the present mechanism of council tax. We all understand the reason for the council tax: it was a substitute for the poll tax. Nothing in the legislation of the early 1990s required a revaluation of the council tax figures. It is true that the business rates are revalued, but not domestic property.
 
23 Feb 2005 : Column 1213
 
The situation has changed since then. The very issues raised by the noble Lord, Lord Marsh, will be dealt with and considered by the Lyons review.

Lord Tebbit: My Lords, the Minister suggested that this matter would require a long period of discussion, a long period of consultation and then proper extended parliamentary consideration. In view of events in the other place today, is that not a rather unfashionable view for a Minister in this Government?

Lord Rooker: My Lords, I am an unfashionable Minister.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that some people who have experience of local government are not very happy with government money flooding to local authorities and believe that local authorities should have the power to raise more of their own money? In conjunction with the report on the investigation into revaluation, can he say whether the Government would consider returning responsibility for the business rate to local authorities and whether they should find other forms of income which would help them to balance their books rather than be beholden to the Government?

Lord Rooker: My Lords, I imagine that all the points raised by my noble friend—he is still my noble friend— would naturally be covered by the independent review, to which people will probably submit evidence to that effect. I am not pronouncing on that, but the review goes much wider than simply considering council tax bands. It is much more open than that. Sir Michael Lyons can come forward with any and every suggestion that is practical, and he will do that because of his experience. Nothing is ruled out in that sense.

We have said that taxation on property is cheap to raise, and that was always said about the old rates system. It is very cheap to collect because property does not move. But it has other consequences because it is not based on ability to pay in the normal sense. As the noble Lord, Lord Marsh, said, and for historical reasons that we all understand, people can end up living in very expensive properties but with a very low income.

---