Local Government Finance Bill

David Amess Excerpts

Tuesday 24th January 2012 Commons Chamber

The Committee proceeded to a Division.

[The Temporary Chair (Mr David Amess)]

I ask the Serjeant at Arms to investigate the delay in the Aye Lobby.

--- Later in debate ---

[John Healey]

On a point of order, Mr Amess. The Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Andrew Stunell), wound up the previous debate for the Government, but I am not certain that Hansard will record exactly how he voted. Now he has rejoined the Front Bench having gone absent for a little while, perhaps he could tell us.

[The Temporary Chair (Mr David Amess)]

I am afraid I have to tell the right hon. Gentleman that that is not a point of order. The Committee will have heard what he said and will draw its own conclusions.

[Mr Tom Harris (Glasgow South) (Lab)]

Further to that point of order, Mr Amess. I wonder whether you could clarify a rule of which many of us were unaware. Is it in fact possible to run into the wrong Lobby and avoid your name appearing in Hansard by not actually voting? I have been in the House for 10 years, but I was not aware that that route was open to us.

[The Temporary Chair]

It is perfectly in order, whether it be unusual or not for the Minister to have done what he did.

[Mr Dave Watts (St Helens North) (Lab)]

On a point of order, Mr Amess.

[The Temporary Chair]

Is it on the same point?

[Mr Watts]

It is on a different point. Is it possible, Mr Amess, to extend the time of this debate by 15 minutes, bearing in mind that we have lost 15 minutes because a Minister was locked in the wrong Lobby?

[The Temporary Chair]

I must tell the hon. Gentleman that I have no powers to do so. Any more points of order would obviously reduce the time further.

New Clause 5

Re-set of the system

‘The Secretary of State shall establish a mechanism to allow local authorities to make representations on whether they believe a re-set of the system is required. The Secretary of State shall, prior to the publication of the Local Government Financial Report in any year, give consideration to any representations he has received and must lay before the House of Commons a report detailing—

(a) any representations he has received from local authorities on whether it would be appropriate to re-set the system, and

(b) his or her decision on such representations and the reasons for that decision.’.—(Helen Jones.)

Brought up, and read the First time.

[Helen Jones]

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Temporary Chair]

With this it will be convenient to discuss new clause 7—Resets of the non-domestic rates retention system

‘(1) The Secretary of State shall be required to make arrangements for a “reset” of the non-domestic rates retention system every three years.

(2) Any such reset must include consideration of—

(a) relative spending needs of each authority,

(b) relative resources available through council tax income,

(c) relative resources available through non-domestic rates.

(3) The assessment of relative need shall be determined in full consultation with local government.’.

[Helen Jones]

It is nice to see the Minister in his place after the time he spent quivering with fear in the Lobby.

Having convinced a junior Minister of the value of new clause 2, I hope to convince the rest of them of the values of new clauses 5 and 7. The new clauses attempt to tackle the difficult problem of how often the system should be reset by requiring a reset every three years and by establishing a mechanism to allow local authorities to make representations on resets.

All hon. Members accept that there must be a balance between having stability in the system and coping with change, but a system that leaves it too long without a reset will simply increase the disparities between local councils and penalise those in greatest need. The long gap that the Government want will increase the dislocation between the resources available and the funding needed for local services, which we have discussed. There is therefore a possibility that service provision will become a postcode lottery depending on the demands made on a local council and on whether it has been successful in attracting new business.