House of Commons Hansard Debates for 27 Mar 1991

Community Charge

13. Mr. McKelvey : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will introduce legislation to abolish the community charge ; and if he will make a statement.

Column 951

Mr. Portillo : Yesterday we debated legislation to reduce by £140 the community charge in 1991-92.

We shall introduce at the earliest opportunity legislation to replace the community charge by a new local tax with two essential elements : the number of adults in a household and the value of the property.

Mr. McKelvey : If the basis of the poll tax element of the head-home hybrid is to be a three-person family, how will a two-person family claim a rebate and how will the additional money be collected from a four, five or six-person family?

Mr. Portillo : I do not know from where the hon. Gentleman got the assumption with which he started his question.

Mr. David Shaw : Is my hon. Friend aware that one aspect of the community charge that all sensible people like is the fact that it promotes accountability and comparability between authorities? Will my hon. Friend give an undertaking that any replacement for the community charge will have a wide base of people paying it so that we continue to have sensible accountability and central comparability and so that we can show the inefficient Labour councils for what they are--disasters compared with the efficient Conservative councils?

Mr. Portillo : It is certainly true that the present system has shown that to be the case. My hon. Friend knows perfectly well that the local tax that we are proposing contains two elements : the number of adults and the value of the property.

Mr. Clelland : Does the Minister agree that one good reason for abolishing the poll tax is the answer that the Secretary of State gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, South-East (Mr. Turner) yesterday when he said that the way in which other local electors could achieve the zero rate of poll tax now achieved in Wandsworth would be to vote Conservative? Is not that, by implication, saying to the voters of Wandsworth that the only way to retain a zero rate of poll tax or a 100 per cent. Government grant is by continuing to vote Tory? Is not that a warning to the electors of Wandsworth that they must continue to vote Tory or be bribed to vote otherwise? Is not that a most vile and corrupt expression from a Government Minister and should not he resign, along with his partners in crime?

Mr. Portillo : As was explained to the House yesterday, Wandsworth gets less grant than do a number of Labour authorities. Unfortunately, several of those Labour authorities set very high community charges. Wandsworth manages with its grant alone under the new reduction and therefore does not need to set a community charge.

Mr. Cormack : Will my hon. Friend ensure that under the new tax, which I welcome warmly, people will not be penalised for making internal improvements to their properties?

Mr. Portillo : My hon. Friend will have to wait for the publication of the consultation document. He will have seen that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has already said that he is concerned to ensure that people are not penalised because of the area in which they live, which might disproportionately affect the value of their property.

Column 952

Mr. Douglas : Will the Minister consider a bargain? Since Scotland went first in the experiment last time, can England go first next time? Scotland will experiment with a local income tax, which would be much more administratively feasible.

Mr. Portillo : My right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for the Environment, for Wales and for Scotland intend that the legislation should have effect in all three places at the same time.

15. Mr. Nellist : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what latest representations he has received about his review of the poll tax ; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Portillo : Many people have welcomed our decision to reduce headline community charges by £140 in 1991-92 and to introduce a new local tax.

Mr. Nellist : Is the Minister aware of representations made yesterday by a group of parents from Warwickshire--a Tory shire for almost an entire century--against the capping and underfunding of that Tory authority by a Tory Government? In the words of the hon. Member for Nuneaton (Mr. Stevens), the authority risks serious reductions in education provision for under-fives, the closing of homes for the elderly and the closing of facilities for people with learning difficulties. How are the people in that Tory shire to deal with the Government's financial strictures? Who is to blame for this crisis and how will it be put right?

Mr. Portillo : The criteria for capping will be applied equally to authorities of whatever colour. One thing that will affect the level of services in any place is the number of people who have been willing to pay the community charge, and the hon. Gentleman is on weak ground on that point.

Mr. Gill : Will my hon. Friend accept that true economy and proper accountability in local government will be achieved only where local authorities are made responsible for raising £1 locally for every 100p that they spend? If that means transferring major functions away from local authorities, so be it.

Mr. Portillo : I understand my hon. Friend's point, which is a powerful one. However, it is difficult to imagine that we could ever get away from a system that took account of the different needs of different areas as we make our grants to those areas. It is difficult to escape from a grant mechanism that takes account of needs.

Mr. Campbell-Savours : Does the Minister intend to apologise to the House for bothching the figures that he gave during the debate on the poll tax the other day? Before the Budget statement last week, when the £4 billion was announced, were there discussions within his Department on the position of local authorities sending out bills that were subsequently to become invalid? Were there discussions and was the Department aware of what was happening?

Mr. Portillo : Of course, and if the hon. Gentleman had read my speech, he would have seen that I explained why those decisions had to be announced in the Budget. When I gave the figure I said that if it was wrong, I would come to the House the next day with the right figure, and that I did.

Column 953

16. Mrs. Maureen Hicks : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment has been made of the number of people who will benefit from the community charge reduction scheme compared to those who benefited from transitional relief.

Mr. Key : The effect of our recent announcement is that all charge payers will benefit from a general reduction in their bills of £140. In addition, about 16 million charge payers in England will also benefit from further help from the community charge reduction scheme. This is about 9 million more than under transitional relief.

Mrs. Hicks : Is my hon. Friend aware that as a result of the generous announcement made last week, not one of my constituents will have to pay a penny over £275? In addition, several thousand already stand to benefit from the community charge reduction scheme. Is not it important, so that people can budget, that they should know as soon as possible how much they will pay? Can my hon. Friend give me a general idea of when they can expect to receive their bills?

Mr. Key : We have decided that the balance of funding of local authority services between central Government and local government should be changed. That must be welcome. The exact figures for any individual authority cannot be announced until we know what claims the authorities put into the Department of the Environment for the scheme.

Mr. Tony Banks : For the record, will the Minister make it absolutely clear that the reduction will not be £140 for all poll tax payers? Those people on income support, who pay 20 per cent., will receive only £28 and after they have spent £1,100 on VAT-charged goods and services, they will be paying for that £28. For the record, too, will the Minister tell us when the poll tax flagship turned into a Tory millstone?

Mr. Key : It must be remembered that the people saving £28 are asked to pay only 20 per cent. in the first place. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced, our intention is that people should not find this tax too heavy a burden.

Dr. Hampson : Does my hon. Friend agree that most people want a certain degree of stability and security for the future? The old rating system took no account of the anomaly of the single-person household, as distinct from a household accommodating several wage earners. Will my hon. Friend take this opportunity to make it absolutely clear that, with the further change, we shall not need to retain anything like a poll tax register?

Mr. Key : The first point that must be made absolutely clear is that we are going into consultation. My hon. Friend will have to wait a couple of weeks to discover exactly what is in our mind.

Mr. Blunkett : May we explore a little further the statement made on Monday by the Minister for Local Government and Inner Cities in the debate on the money resolution relating to the Community Charges (General Reduction) Bill? On that occasion, the Minister announced that 8 million people would benefit from the community charge reduction scheme. Less than 24 hours later, he was contradicted by the Secretary of State, who said that he was pleased to take the House a stage further

Column 954

by telling us that, as a result of the arrangements that the Government were making, 16 million, rather than 8 million, people would benefit. Was not he aware that, in January, it had been announced that 18 million people would benefit? Did not he know that the scheme that was approved overnight actually reduces the benefit that is available through the community charge reduction scheme, reduces the benefit that is available through the rebate scheme and transfers money from the poor to the rich through the VAT increase? People with second homes will receive £428, whereas those on supplementary benefit will get only £28. It is a disgrace that the rich get more and the poor get less.

Mr. Key : The only disgrace is that the hon. Gentleman does not seem to understand the arithmetic. The important point is that, whereas under the old scheme 8 million people were helped, the outturn figure is now 16 million. I should have thought that the hon. Gentleman would be delighted with that. The net extra grant to local authorities will amount to about £4.3 billion and we plan to make savings of £1.3 billion on community charge benefit and other reliefs. That has allowed us to make a number of improvements. It is increasingly strange that, in recent days, the hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Mr. Blunkett) has been more interested in preserving the status quo and protecting the vested interest lobbies of local government than in helping the people of this country.

Mr. Sayeed : Now that the abolitionists are clearly in the ascendant, will the Government turn their attention to abolition of the county council in Avon, which is the most unnatural and unloved of counties? Is my hon. Friend aware that Avon county council, on which the socialists are the largest party, has consistently increased its community charge at a rate much higher than the rate of inflation?

Mr. Key : I was in Bristol quite recently and I sympathise with my hon. Friend. This will be a matter for the local government commission that my right hon. Friend hopes to set up.

Housing Action Trusts

17. Mr. Dunnachie : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has any proposals to allow local authorities or housing associations to make use of underspending arising out of the failure to set up any of the planned housing action trusts.

Mr. Heseltine : No, Sir. Tenants are currently voting in Hull--on a proposal supported by the city council--and a ballot is due in a few months in Waltham Forest.

Mr. Dunnachie : I am disappointed in that reply in view of the current deplorable position of no housing action trusts having yet been formed. Money has been put aside, but has not been used. Will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider his decision and use that money to allow local authorities to build or renovate houses for the people of their areas?

Mr. Heseltine : The moral of the story is that a housing action trust should come into existence and take advantage of the money that is available as quickly as possible.

Column 955

Community Charge

21. Mr. Beith : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will make a statement about the conclusions of his review of the poll tax.

Mr. Heseltine : I have nothing to add at this stage to my statement to the House on 21 March.

Mr. Beith : Would the Secretary of State like to have a shot at making another statement about the replacement of the poll tax ? He did not make everybody happy with the first one and his hon. Friends might have a happier Easter if they were given a clearer picture of what his new tax will involve and whether it will be strictly related to the ability to pay, as would be the case with a local income tax. Or will it remain an arbitrary tax ?

Mr. Heseltine : The people who are unhappy about my statement are sitting on the Opposition Benches. They now realise that we have clear answers to our proposals while they have none.

Mr. Bill Walker : Is my right hon. Friend aware that those of us who made representations to him about the review are delighted with his proposals and that the people who are unhappy are those who have been encouraging individuals not to pay ? They now realise that we have proposed a scheme that will make it impossible for them to carry on with their campaign.

Mr. Heseltine : I much appreciate my hon. Friend's observation. Our new local tax will be consistent with one bill for each household. Collection will therefore be easier and more certain.

Council Homes, Bradford

22. Mr. Madden : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many council homes have been built by Bradford metropolitan district council in each of the last three years.

Mr. Yeo : Completions of new council dwellings reported by Bradford metropolitan district council were 42, 47 and nil in 1987, 1988 and 1989 respectively. Returns received for 1990 cover only the months up to August and these show no further completions of council housing.

Mr. Madden : Do not those miserable figures represent a massive indictment of the Government's failure to respond to the housing crisis that has gripped Bradford for the past 12 years ? Does the Minister recognise that that crisis is now so acute that the council is considering formally closing its housing waiting list on which there are 9,000 applicants ? When will the Government pump into Bradford the necessary funds to enable the council to build homes for the thousands of families who urgently and desperately need them ?

Mr. Yeo : In addition to the local authority council housing completions to which I referred, almost 400 housing association dwellings have been completed in the same period. Substantial estate action support totalling almost £10 million over the past three years has also been pumped into Bradford. The question that the hon. Gentleman should really be addressing is why Bradford council has kept empty 700 houses that could be used for housing the homeless, about whom the hon. Gentleman purports to be so concerned.

Column 956

Mr. John Greenway : Does my hon. Friend agree that the people who want low-cost houses to rent in Bradford would do better if their local authority were to copy Ryedale district council in transferring its housing stock to a housing association? My hon. Friend's reply to the hon. Member for Bradford, South (Mr. Madden) shows that housing associations are now the proper route for the provision of homes to rent. As the people of Bradford once had the good sense to vote in a Conservative council, does my hon. Friend agree that if the council in Bradford were to consult the people of Bradford, as Ryedale district council consulted in Ryedale, it would receive a strong and positive answer to any request to do that?

Mr. Yeo : I agree entirely with my hon. Friend and take this opportunity of saying how much we welcome the transfer of Ryedale's council housing stock in its entirety to a housing association, which was approved only a week of two ago. The effect of that transfer is to bring in substantial funds from the private sector, some of which are available to Ryedale council for any other housing needs in its area. I commend the same process not only to Bradford, but to a great many other Labour-controlled authorities, because I have no doubt that the tenants in all those areas would benefit enormously if their councils were willing to follow the example that has been set by Ryedale.

Local Authorities (Capital Receipts)

23. Mrs. Dunwoody : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he had any plans to relax the controls imposed on local authorities making use of capital receipts for housing purposes.

Mr. Key : No, Sir.

Mrs. Dunwoody : Is the Minister aware that more than 800 families on the urgent waiting lists in my constituency desperately need new housing? If the hon. Gentleman were genuinely concerned about those social problems, would not he allow local authorities to use money which is being legitimately raised, under his instruction, to build new houses for those desperately in need?

Mr. Key : I understand the hon. Lady's concern. Every hon. Member has housing problems in his constituency, but relaxing the debt redemption rules would not mean that more resources were available for housing. It would mean that resources were available in the wrong places--where receipts arise rather than where new investment is needed.

BALLOT FOR NOTICES OF MOTIONS FOR MONDAY 22 APRIL Members successful in the ballot were :

Mr. Lawrence Cunliffe

Dr. Keith Hampson

Mrs. Alice Mahon.

BILLS PRESENTED

Established Church

Mr. Michael Latham presented a Bill to abolish the General Synod of the Church of England, on a date to be appointed ; to provide for the creation of a Church of England Assembly, consisting of a house of all diocesan, suffragan and assistant bishops, and a joint house of clergy

Column 957

and laity, to be directly elected by all Anglican clergy and lay persons on parochial electoral rolls ; to empower the Assembly to decide on all appropriate matters, except those within the legal responsibilities of the Church Commissioners, without further reference to Parliament ; to provide for the election of new bishops by members of the house of bishops, saving the right of final approval of the chosen candidate by the Crown ; to abolish the Ecclesiastical Committee ; to abolish the automatic places of bishops in the House of Lords ; to permit ordained clergy of the Church of England, with the consent of a diocesan bishop, to seek election to the House of Commons ; and for connected purposes : And the same was read the First time ; and ordered to be read a Second time upon Friday 26 April and to be printed. [Bill 126.]

Column 958

Leasehold Reform

Mr. Terry Lewis, supported by Mr. Tony Lloyd, Mr. Keith Bradley, Mr. Doug Hoyle, Mr. Ron Davies, Mr. Gareth Wardell, Mr. Peter L. Pike, Mr. Lawrence Cunliffe, Mr. Ian McCartney, Ms. Dawn Primarolo and Mr. George Howarth, presented a Bill to amend the Leasehold Reform Acts 1967 and 1979 ; to prevent the establishment of further 999 year leasehold agreements ; to establish new formulae for calculating the sale value of an existing lease to an occupier of long lease residential property ; to remove from existing leaseholders the obligations to seek permission of the ground landlord when carrying out improvements to the property ; to establish the right of long leaseholders to manage their property in a manner of their own choice ; and for connected purposes : And the same was read the First time ; and ordered to be read a Second time upon Friday 26 April and ordered to be printed. [Bill 127.]

Next Section (Debates)

Home Page