asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list in the Official Report the rate poundage, the total estimated annual expenditure, and the total amount of rate support grant for each metropolitan district council and each non-metropolitan county council in England and Wales for 1975–76, and the percentage increase that each of these amounts represents on the comparable figures for 1974–75.
The figures of rate poundage shown below are those set by the councils concerned, that is, average rates for district purposes are shown for metropolitan districts and average county precepts for non-metropolitan counties.The expenditure figures are based on estimates for 1975–76 and 1974–75 given in returns made to the Department of the Environment. There are no strictly comparable figures for rate support grant for 1975–76 and 1974–75. The table below shows the current grant entitlements for 1975–76, resulting from the Rate Support Grant (No. 2) Order 1974, compared with the final entitlements for 1974–75 resulting from the Rate Support Grant (Increase) Order 1975. The total grant for
| 1975–76 rate poundage | Increase over 1974–75 | 1975–76 expenditure | Increase over 1974–75 | 1975–76 RSG | Increase over 1974–75 | |||
| p | % | £m. | % | £m. | % | |||
| METROPOLITAN DISTRICTS: | ||||||||
| GREATER MANCHESTER | ||||||||
| Bolton | … | … | 41·2 | 12 | 38·5 | 30 | 30·3 | 17 |
| Bury | … | … | 40·1 | 6 | 22·9 | 34 | 18·2 | 14 |
| Manchester | … | … | 62·0 | 26 | 104·2 | 27 | 64·3 | 10 |
| Oldham | … | … | 51·6 | 28 | 33·8 | 32 | 26·5 | 17 |
| Rochdale | … | … | 54·4 | 30 | 33·7 | 32 | 27·3 | 22 |
| Salford | … | … | 46·3 | 24 | 40·0 | — | 32·1 | 16 |
| Stockport | … | … | 39·3 | 11 | 37·2 | 19 | 28·8 | 15 |
| Tameside | … | … | 49·0 | 14 | 34·9 | 45 | 26·7 | 19 |
| Trafford | … | … | 51·9 | 15 | 34·4 | 31 | 18·8 | 26 |
| Wigan | … | … | 44·9 | 22 | 44·4 | 33 | 36·8 | 19 |
| MERSEYSIDE | ||||||||
| Knowsley | … | … | 54·5 | 3 | 32·2 | 9 | 25·2 | 14 |
| Liverpool | … | … | 42·0 | −6 | 106·3 | 33 | 69·9 | 6 |
| Saint Helens | … | … | 43·1 | 13 | 26·8 | 25 | 21·2 | 18 |
| Sefton | … | … | 34·9 | 12 | 42·1 | 31 | 33·0 | 18 |
| Wirral | … | … | 44·2 | 15 | 52·1 | 29 | 39·9 | 19 |
| SOUTH YORKSHIRE | ||||||||
| Barnsley | … | … | 49·3 | 19 | 34·7 | 36 | 29·1 | 16 |
| Doncaster | … | … | 57·1 | 37 | 44·5 | 21 | 37·8 | 24 |
| Rotherham | … | … | 53·7 | 44 | 36·7 | 20 | 32·4 | 22 |
| Sheffield | … | … | 53·1 | 20 | 91·8 | 36 | 62·1 | 18 |
| TYNE AND WEAR | ||||||||
| Gateshead | … | … | 56·0 | 34 | 36·3 | 38 | 28·9 | 20 |
| Newcastle upon Tyne | … | … | 69·7 | 32 | 59·6 | 43 | 35·6 | 18 |
| North Tyneside | … | … | 53·7 | 19 | 32·3 | 34 | 27·1 | 18 |
| South Tyneside | … | … | 53·9 | 19 | 31·5 | 44 | 25·0 | 18 |
| Sunderland | … | … | 49·6 | 26 | 47·7 | 37 | 39·9 | 17 |
| West Midlands | … | … | ||||||
| Birmingham | … | … | 49·8 | 26 | 163·7 | 20 | 108·0 | 18 |
| Coventry | … | … | 48·2 | 30 | 52·9 | 24 | 36·1 | 20 |
| Dudley | … | … | 34·2 | 20 | 36·9 | 32 | 24·6 | 21 |
| Sandwell | … | … | 48·0 | 33 | 48·3 | 29 | 26·1 | 21 |
| Solihull | … | … | 39·2 | 3 | 25·7 | 22 | 19·0 | 21 |
| Walsall | … | … | 38·6 | 37 | 38·6 | — | 24·8 | 20 |
| Wolverhampton | … | … | 38·1 | 16 | 39·4 | 36 | 24·1 | 22 |
| WEST YORKSHIRE | ||||||||
| Bradford | … | … | 59·5 | 36 | 76·2 | 24 | 63·8 | 20 |
| Calderdale | … | … | 50·3 | 29 | 31·3 | 36 | 25·6 | 20 |
1974–75 allows increases in pay and prices up to March 1975, while that for 1975–76 is related to November 1974 pay and price levels. The 1975–76 figures are therefore subject to adjustment by possible increase orders.
Only the needs element of the rate support grant is payable to non-metropolitan county councils, although they also receive part of the resources element payable to their districts indirectly through their precepts. Metropolitan districts, on the other hand, receive all three elements—needs, resources and domestic—of the rate support grant but part of their resources element entitlements is effectively transferred under precept to the county councils. It would therefore be misleading to make a comparison between metropolitan districts and non-metropolitan counties on the figures in the table.
1975–76 rate poundage
| Increase over 1974–75
| 1975–76 expenditure
| Increase over 1974–75
| 1975–76 RSG
| Increase over 1974–75
| |||
p
| % | £m. | % | £m. | % | |||
| Kirklees | … | … | 47·7 | 13 | 55·7 | 30 | 46·8 | 16 |
| Leeds | … | … | 41·2 | 8 | 95·6 | 20 | 78·4 | 14 |
| Wakefield | … | … | 60·5 | 27 | 49·9 | 27 | 39·4 | 21 |
| NON-METROPOLITAN COUNTIES: | ||||||||
| ENGLAND | ||||||||
| Avon | … | … | 52·2 | 17 | 137·1 | 64 | 46·3 | −4 |
| Bedfordshire | … | … | 61·8 | 31 | 83·4 | 41 | 24·9 | −3 |
| Berkshire | … | … | 46·5 | 29 | 105·9 | 38 | 36·7 | −11 |
| Buckinghamshire | … | … | 54·0 | 37 | 83·6 | 35 | 25·4 | −11 |
| Cambridgeshire | … | … | 49·0 | 15 | 81·3 | 31 | 26·1 | −6 |
| Cheshire | … | … | 58·0 | 30 | 147·6 | 30 | 46·8 | 0 |
| Cleveland | … | … | 55·9 | 8 | 101·1 | 22 | 38·9 | 4 |
| Cornwall | … | … | 45·2 | 24 | 53·6 | 33 | 18·5 | −2 |
| Cumbria | … | … | 44·5 | 24 | 76·3 | 29 | 30·3 | −7 |
| Derbyshire | … | … | 49·0 | 23 | 132·4 | 35 | 44·7 | −1 |
| Devon | … | … | 47·3 | 24 | 123·1 | 24 | 41·7 | −6 |
| Dorset | … | … | 53·0 | 33 | 82·3 | 36 | 24·3 | −4 |
| Durham | … | … | 55·8 | 16 | 97·7 | 34 | 33·1 | 3 |
| East Sussex | … | … | 48·1 | 19 | 89·5 | 28 | 28·8 | −3 |
| Essex | … | … | 44·0 | 20 | 204·8 | 32 | 72·3 | −11 |
| Gloucestershire | … | … | 51·3 | 22 | 71·1 | 34 | 24·6 | 0 |
| Hampshire | … | … | 49·2 | 22 | 210·6 | 29 | 70·0 | −5 |
| Hereford and Worcester | … | 52·5 | 22 | 85·5 | 27 | 28·3 | −7 | |
| Hertfordshire | … | … | 48·8 | 36 | 151·6 | 24 | 56·7 | −8 |
| Humberside | … | … | 49·0 | 22 | 129·3 | 55 | 49·0 | 5 |
| Isle of Wight | … | … | 53·0 | 26 | 15·8 | 32 | 4·6 | −2 |
| Kent | … | … | 46·2 | 28 | 209·5 | 38 | 73·7 | −10 |
| Lancashire | … | … | 49·0 | 22 | 209·9 | 38 | 73·9 | 2 |
| Leicestershire | … | … | 51·0 | 23 | 129·2 | 32 | 43·6 | 0 |
| Lincolnshire | … | … | 52·0 | 24 | 84·4 | 35 | 27·2 | −5 |
| Norfolk | … | … | 49·5 | 16 | 98·4 | 33 | 30·1 | −4 |
| Northamptonshire | … | … | 54·0 | 26 | 84·4 | 44 | 24·7 | 1 |
| Northumberland | … | … | 51·0 | 17 | 49·6 | 36 | 18·0 | −8 |
| North Yorkshire | … | … | 45·0 | 22 | 101·9 | 36 | 35·7 | −10 |
| Nottinghamshire | … | … | 50·0 | 16 | 156·7 | 35 | 53·1 | 1 |
| Oxfordshire | … | … | 48·5 | I8 | 81·1 | 29 | 25·1 | −9 |
| Salop | … | … | 47·5 | 19 | 54·6 | 38 | 18·3 | −4 |
| Somerset | … | … | 49·5 | 25 | 57·3 | 32 | 18·3 | −6 |
| Staffordshire | … | … | 51·5 | 20 | 150·9 | 34 | 49·8 | −3 |
| Suffolk | … | … | 48·5 | 27 | 79·8 | 33 | 24·5 | −6 |
| Surrey | … | … | 45·9 | 36 | 141·6 | 24 | 43·7 | −7 |
| Warwickshire | … | … | 49·8 | 21 | 72·0 | 34 | 23·8 | −1 |
| West Sussex | … | … | 45·0 | 20 | 83·2 | — | 28·3 | −3 |
| Wiltshire | … | … | 48·0 | 22 | 80·0 | 39 | 26·7 | −6 |
| WALES | ||||||||
| Clwyd | … | … | 54·5 | 24 | 60·1 | 32 | 19·7 | −1 |
| Dyfed | … | … | 55·6 | 28 | 53·8 | 30 | 20·7 | −7 |
| Gwent | … | … | 55·0 | 16 | 72·5 | 48 | 24·9 | 0 |
| Gwynedd | … | … | 60·0 | 26 | 38·0 | 28 | 14·6 | −5 |
| Mid-Glamorgan | … | … | 63·6 | 30 | 92·4 | 29 | 28·9 | 0 |
| Powys | … | … | 51·7 | 19 | 21·1 | — | 10·6 | −4 |
| South Glamorgan | … | … | 52·0 | 20 | 63·3 | 28 | 22·2 | −2 |
| West Glamorgan | … | … | 63·0 | 31 | 62·7 | 27 | 19·6 | 1 |
asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the average domestic rate payment per household in 1974–75; and what will be the average payment in 1975–76.
The average rate payment per domestic hereditament in England and Wales in 1974–75 was £68, after allowing for deductions under the special domestic rate relief scheme. The average payment in 1975–76 is estimated at £91. Both figures exclude charges for water services.