19 December 2001
Best Value
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions if he will abolish the best value regime. [23366]
Dr. Whitehead:
No. It is clear that many authorities have used best value to make
substantial improvements in services and savings. We want to make it
even better which is why my right hon. Friend initiated a three month
review of best value in October. The review has brought in expertise and
experience from a wide range of bodies with an interest in improving
public services. We aim to produce new guidance in early 2002.
18 December 2001
Local Government Reform Oral Questions
Mr. Malcolm
Moss
(North-East Cambridgeshire):
Last year, three quarters of local authorities spent above their SSA for social
services, with a total overspend of £183 million. Based on this year's
financial settlement, local government bodies are already saying that the
overspend could be nearly £1 billion. No amount of tinkering with local
government reform will substitute for the proper funding of local authorities to
provide the necessary level of social services to the old, vulnerable and
weakest in their societies. Does not the Secretary of State have any shame that
his Government are presiding over the near collapse of social services, over bed
blocking on a massively debilitating scale and over a cruel and insulting level
of services for elderly people?
Mr. Byers:
Well, this is the party that introduced the poll tax into local government and
that decimated council services year after year by cutting spending. This is the
party that, when electors voted for Labour councils, abolished those councils
because it could not tolerate real local democracy. The reality is that this settlement gives 6.4 per cent. to personal social
services, which is way above the rate of inflation. In addition, my right hon.
Friend the Secretary of State for Health is providing an extra £200 million
specifically to deal with bed blocking in the national health service, from
which many local authorities will benefit. That is what the Government are
doing, and we will continue to deliver good services, whether it be for the
elderly or children at risk who know that for too long they have been denied the
level of service that should be theirs. This Government are delivering. The
people out there know that we believe in local democracy and local government,
which is why we are providing the resources to ensure that services are
delivered at last to those in greatest need.
18 December 2001
Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions if he has responsibility for civil contingency facilities
underneath the QE2 Conference Centre.
Dr. Whitehead:
No.
Council Tax
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions what is the anticipated average percentage increase in Band D
council tax across England for 2002-03, based on this year's local
government finance settlement. [23365]
Dr. Whitehead:
I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 3 December 2001, Official
Report, column 30W.
17 December 2001
Postal Votes
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions how many votes were cast by post during the 2000 Greater London
Authority elections (a) in absolute terms, (b) as a
percentage of all valid and non-valid votes cast and (c) as a
percentage of the London electorate. [23367]
Dr. Whitehead:
There is no central figure for the number of votes cast by post during
the 2000 GLA elections.
Contingency Planning
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what
representatives from (a) devolved Administrations, (b)
local authorities and (c) London have been invited to sit on the
(i) Civil Contingencies Committee and (ii) the Sub-Committee on UK
Resilience. [19591]
Mr. Blunkett:
I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the
Prime Minister on 5 November 2001, Official Report, columns 6-8W,
about the terms of reference and composition of the Civil Contingencies
Committee (CCC) and its sub-committees. The hon. Member will also be
aware of the letter I wrote to individual Members of this House on 9
November explaining how the Civil Contingencies Secretariat is
exercising its support responsibilities.
10 December 2001
Landfill
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
what impact she anticipates (a) the increase in landfill tax in (i)
2001 and (ii) 2002, (b) national recycling targets for local
authorities, (c) the implementation of the EU directive on fridge
recycling, (d) the implementation of the EU directive on
end-of-life vehicles and (e) the implementation of the EU
directive on landfill will have on the level of council tax in English
local authorities; and if she will make a statement. [19594]
Mr. Meacher:
The amount of council tax individual authorities choose to raise is a
matter for individual councils to decide. Spending Review 2000 looked at
pressures on local authority services funded through the Environment,
Protection and Cultural Services (EPCS) block, which included increases
in landfill tax and the 2003-04 statutory targets for recycling and
composting of household waste. SR2000 provided an increase in EPCS
Standard Spending Assessment of £1.1 billion over the period covered by
the spending review. Regarding the cost of managing waste fridges, my Department has
announced an extra £6 million in the local government finance
settlement. This will help local authorities with the extra costs of
handling fridges to the end of this financial year. It has not yet been decided how the
take-back and treatment of end-of-life vehicles under the directive will
be funded between 2002 and 2007. The Government are now assessing the
responses to their consultation on options for implementing the
directive, and will take these into account when deciding the way
forward. Spending Review 2000 will establish future levels of local authority
funding for 2003-04 to 2005-06 with regard to the pressures they will
face.
6 December 2001
Best Value
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will
estimate the cost in the latest available year of the best value regime
to (a) his Department and (b) police authorities.
Mr. Denham:
The best estimate of costs falling to the Home Office in 2000-01 is in
the region of £500,000. This covers estimated staff time based on
average salary costs. It also includes travelling and subsistence costs
for Her Majesty's Inspectors of Constabulary when they are carrying out
best value inspections. The costs of implementing best value, which falls to police authorities,
is not collected centrally.
5 December 2001
White Papers
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions if he will make a statement on the date of publication of the (a)
Regions White Paper and (b) the Local Government White Paper.
Dr. Whitehead:
As the Deputy Prime Minister announced to Parliament on 2 July, the
Government's White Paper on regional governance in England will be
published when it is ready. The local government White Paper will be published shortly.
Flood Prevention
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
what impact she anticipates (a) flood clean-up expenditure and (b)
flood prevention expenditure will have on level of council tax in
English local authorities in the next financial year; and if she will
make a statement.
Mr. Morley:
Through the Bellwin arrangements, Government expect to contribute some
£26 million to the costs incurred by local authorities affected by
flooding in 2000. Standard Spending Assessments (SSAs) for flood defence
for English local authorities were announced on 4 December. Government
provide grant which covers some three quarters of SSA with the remainder
assumed to be raised from the standard level of council tax.
The Government's expenditure under Bellwin, coupled with their meeting a
major proportion of the SSA, will substantially mitigate the effect on
council tax bills arising from flooding, though the actual effect will
depend on each local authority's spending decisions across all its
functions.
4 December 2001
Metropolitan Police Funding
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the impact
of the level of central Government funding of the Metropolitan Police
Authority in (a) 2001 and (b) 2002 on the expected
increase in the MPA element of the GLA precept on council tax in London
in 2002-03; and if he will make a statement. [19595]
Mr. Denham:
It is not Government policy to make such predictions. Decisions on the
level at which the police precept for 2002-03 is set is a matter for the
Greater London Authority after consultation with its local electorate
and taxpayers. The level at which the precept is set will be influenced not only by
levels of revenue support grant, re-distributed non-domestic rates and
police grant for 2002-03 but also by the use of any financial reserves
the Metropolitan Police Authority puts towards its budget. Details of
the provisional police funding settlement for 2002-03 will be announced
shortly.
London Civil Contingencies Committee
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions whether the London Resilience Sub-Committee referred to by Lord
Rooker on 5 November 2001, Official Report, House of Lords, column 5, is
the same body as the London Civil Contingencies Committee mentioned in a
DTLR press release of 10 October.
Dr. Whitehead:
Yes.
3 December 2001
Best Value
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions what was the estimated cost in the latest available year of the
best value regime to (a) central Government Departments, (b)
local government, (c) fire authorities and (d)
non-department public bodies and executive agencies. [19892]
Dr. Whitehead:
(a) For the financial year 2001-02, £1,751,000 has been
allocated for administrative costs associated with best value in central
Government. (b) £52 million has been allocated in 2001-02 by DTLR to cover
the cost of best value audit and inspection in England. £21.7 million
of this will be paid as grant to the Audit Commission and the remainder
has been distributed through the Revenue Support Grant to cover the cost
of audit fees charged to local authorities. No reliable estimates exist
as to the other administrative costs incurred by authorities in
complying with their duty under the Local Government Act 1999. (c) Fire authorities precept from county councils and are thus
included in the figures. (d) The Audit Commission is the only NDPB with a formal role in
best value. Their costs are met by DTLR as indicated.
Council Tax
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions if he will make a statement on the anticipated average
percentage change in Band D council tax in England in 2002-03. [19889]
Dr. Whitehead:
Decisions on council tax are for local authorities to take, after
consulting with their local electorate and taxpayers.
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions what assessment he has made of the likely use of his reserve
powers to regulate council tax set by English local authorities in
2002-03.
Dr. Whitehead:
Decisions on council tax are for local authorities to take, after
consulting with their local electorate and taxpayers. This Government do
not operate a system of crude and universal pre-announced capping.
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions if he will make a statement on the circumstances in which the
Government would use its reserve powers to regulate the Greater London
Authority council tax precept.
Dr. Whitehead:
Decisions on the GLA council tax precept are for the GLA to take, after
consulting with their local electorate and taxpayers. This Government do
not operate a system of crude and universal pre-announced capping.
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions what impact the heightened state of alert against terrorism will
have on the level of council tax in English local authorities in the
context of increased civil defence and emergency planning expenditure;
and if he will make a statement.
Dr. Whitehead:
Decisions on council tax levels are a matter for local authorities after
consulting with their local electorate and taxpayers. My right hon.
Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has last week made available an
additional £30 million towards the extra security pressures on police
authorities in England and Wales for 2001-02.
20 November 2001
Local Government (Consultation) Oral Questions
Mr. Malcolm
Moss
(North-East Cambridgeshire):
Does not the Minister realise that there is considerable public concern that the
executive structures are far more secretive than the old committee system, a
fact confirmed by his predecessor last December, when she said:
Does not that, combined with a delay until 2005 of the Freedom of Information
Act 2000 coming into force, mean that Labour's control-freakery has made local
government less open in order to hide Labour-run councils' failures?
Dr. Whitehead:
I am not sure that the hon. Gentleman can make a very good case by comparing new
constitutional arrangements with previous systems of local government. The new
arrangements ensure that executives can make decisions crisply and in the
interests of local electors. They also ensure transparency: decisions will be
properly reported and, above all, properly scrutinised in public. That is how
the new constitutions are working throughout the country.
19 November 2001
Metropolitan Police (Administrative Costs)
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will publish
the administrative costs of the Metropolitan Police Authority for (a)
last year and (b) this year.
Mr. Denham:
The Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) inform me that the cost of the
MPA secretariat in 2000-01 was £2.6 million and that the latest
forecast outturn for 2001- 02 is also £2.6 million. In addition, the MPA are responsible for the Metropolitan Police Service
internal audit for which I understand costs are: 2000-01, £1.6 million;
2001-02, £1.7 million.
6 November
2001
Regional Chambers
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions what was the total budget for each regional chamber in England
by region for (a) the last financial year and (b) this
financial year; and what the projected figure is for next year.
Dr. Whitehead:
The regional chambers have been established voluntarily by bodies
representing the interests of each region. Their budgets are a matter
for the chambers and their members. The Government have however
allocated £500,000 this year to each regional chamber, with an
additional £1 million for chambers to use collectively, to help them
establish a stronger strategic and scrutiny role within the regions.
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions what proportion of funding for regional chambers in England came
from central Government for (a) last year and (b) this
financial year; and what the projected apportionment is for the next
financial year. [12524]
Dr. Whitehead:
The Government provided no funding to the regional chambers in 2000-01.
For 2001-02 we have allocated £500,000 to each regional chamber, with
an additional £1 million for chambers to use collectively, to help them
establish a stronger strategic and scrutiny role within the regions. As
the total budgets of the chambers are a matter for the chambers
themselves, information on the proportion represented by Government
funding is not available centrally.
Regional Co-ordination Unit
Mr. Moss:
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what was the budget of the regional
co-ordination unit (a) last year and (b) this year; and
what the projected figure is for next year. [12522]
Mrs. Roche:
The regional co-ordination unit's (RCU) budget for administrative
running costs is £9.716 million in 2001-02. Funding for 2002-03 has yet
to be finalised, but is expected to be in the region of £9.116 million.
The RCU was formed during 2000-01 and overall expenditure on the RCU and
its predecessor unit, the Government office co-ordination unit (GOCU)
for that year totalled £5.55 million.
A large element of the budget of the RCU and its predecessor unit is for
funding that is managed centrally on behalf of the Government office
network as a whole, such as for IT and communications systems. For the
current financial year, £6.689 million is in respect of centrally
managed budgets.
23 October 2001
Regional Government Oral Questions
Mr. Malcolm
Moss
(North-East Cambridgeshire):
When the right hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) was shadow Secretary of
State for the Environment, he promised in 1997 that regional assemblies would go
ahead only if independent auditors certified that no overall increase in public
spending would ensue. Do the Government stand by that pre-election manifesto
pledge, or are they determined to bury our shire counties through vindictive
political dogma?
Mr. Byers:
I stand by the 2001 Labour party manifesto. [Interruption.] Unlike the
Conservatives, who set policies based on dogma in stone and never change them,
we are prepared to listen to people's views. We want to act on the demand in
some regions for elected assemblies. However, we have said that they will be
introduced in areas of predominantly unitary authorities. We will thus overcome
the problem that an additional tier of government would cause, and thereby
ensure that public expenditure implications are limited.
19 October 2001
Regional Government Oral Questions
Mr. Malcolm Moss
(North-East Cambridgeshire):
When the right hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) was shadow Secretary of
State for the Environment, he promised in 1997 that regional assemblies would go
ahead only if independent auditors certified that no overall increase in public
spending would ensue. Do the Government stand by that pre-election manifesto
pledge, or are they determined to bury our shire counties through vindictive
political dogma?
Mr. Byers:
I stand by the 2001 Labour party manifesto. [Interruption.] Unlike the
Conservatives, who set policies based on dogma in stone and never change them,
we are prepared to listen to people's views. We want to act on the demand in
some regions for elected assemblies. However, we have said that they will be
introduced in areas of predominantly unitary authorities. We will thus overcome
the problem that an additional tier of government would cause, and thereby
ensure that public expenditure implications are limited.
28 June
2001
Food Supply Oral
Question
Mr. Malcolm
Moss
(North-East Cambridgeshire):
Does the Secretary of State agree with her right hon. Friend the Prime
Minister that the supermarkets are not playing fair? The right hon.
Gentleman recently told farmers that
Is it not perverse to break up Milk Marque but leave the supermarkets
untouched? How much does the dairy industry in this country have to
decline before the Government do something?
Margaret Beckett:
I am interested to learn that it is Conservative policy to take on the
supermarkets; I am sure that they will be even more interested to learn
that. I remind the hon. Gentleman that the Competition Commission looked
at those matters recently. Although it concluded that the industry was
broadly competitive, it identified a number of practices about which it
had concerns and which it felt, adversely affected some suppliers and
smaller retailers. I hope that the hon. Gentleman is aware that the
commission recommended that the best way to deal with those issues was
to have a binding code of practice for the larger supermarkets. Although
that is a matter for the DTI rather than my Department, I anticipate
that we shall see such a code of practice in the near future.
5 Apr 2001
Agricultural Imports Oral Questions
Mr. Malcolm
Moss
(North-East Cambridgeshire):
The Minister's officials confirmed last year that the outbreak of
classical swine fever was caused by illegally imported meat. It would
now seem that lightning has struck twice, with the preliminary finding
that imported meat was the probable source of the current foot and
mouth disease outbreak. How many times does disaster have to strike
the agricultural industry before the Government do something about
illegal meat imports?
Ms Quin:
I am disappointed that the hon. Gentleman, who knows better, should
present such an over-simplified version of events. He knows well that
we suspect that imported meat was the cause of the outbreak of
classical swine fever, but we do not have absolute proof. Quite
rightly, investigations are taking place into the current outbreak.
Although it is certain that some kind of imported product must have
been the origin of it, another attached problem is that that product
may have been inadequately treated in pigswill. That is why the
Government are proposing in their consultation to end the use of
pigswill.
The Government have responded to
recommendations about improving and eliminating the undesirable
feeding of certain mammalian products to animals in a way that the
hon. Gentleman's Government did not. My right hon. Friend the Member
for Copeland (Dr. Cunningham) made that point very clear in last
week's debate.
8 March 2001
Fisheries Oral Questions
Mr. Malcolm
Moss
(North-East Cambridgeshire):
Does the Minister realise that his trumpeting of his success regarding
the economic links regulations for fishing vessels in the British
fisheries sector will be exposed as both futile and worthless given
the crisis that is facing the British fishing industry? Without his
immediate financial intervention to offset the North sea cod closure
area, the UK fleet, particularly that in Scotland, faces financial
disaster. Is it now the Government's policy to stand idly by and
witness a substantial UK fleet reduction, which will make it easier,
as has been pointed out, for vessels from southern EU countries to
gain access to our northern waters after the common fisheries policy
review in 2002?
