To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will publish (a) the 1990–91 standard spending assessment and (b) the actual budget announced for 1990–91 for each major service block for each authority in Northamptonshire.

The available information is as follows:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what he estimates would be the saving in public expenditure if the several services administered by county councils were transferred to district councils assuming that expenditure continued to be related to the standard spending assessment.

[holding answer 8 May 1990]: It is not possible to estimate. The only information available is the savings resulting from the abolition of the metropolitan county councils and the GLC in April 1986. The overall manpower saving achieved immediately following abolition was estimated at some 6,300 posts. The projected long-term annual savings resulting from those staff savings were estimated to be some £100 million. Since the share county councils are responsible for such major services as education and social services, which the GLC and metropolitan county councils were not, the information is of little direct relevance.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Derbyshire, North-East on 15 May, if he will give the population for each of the local authority areas listed in his reply, together with details of their central Government financial support for 1990–91, under the headings (a) revenue support grant, (b) non-domestic rates, (c) current specific grants within aggregate Exchequer finance, (d) current specific grants outside aggregate Exchequer finance, (e) credit approvals, (f) capital grants and (g) the totals of these categories.

[holding answer 21 May 1990]: The information is given in the table. Capital grants information is not available except for transport supplementary grants.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment on how many occasions he met Lady Porter in December, January, February and March to discuss matters relating to the community charge.

There was one meeting between the Secretary of State and Lady Porter during that period at which a wide range of issues was discussed including matters relating to the community charge.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment on how many occasions officials from his Department met officials of Islington council in December, January, February and March to discuss matters relating to the community charge.

None.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment to what extent consideration of enhanced population in departmental calculations of community charge levels in Westminster is influenced by revenue from car parking.

The weight given to the enhanced population indicator in the standard spending assessment for "All Other Services" is informed by statistical analysis of the variation in past expenditure by authorities on these services. The measure of expenditure used for this analysis excludes any income from car parking charges for all authorities including the City of Westminster.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his written answer to the hon. Member for Derbyshire, North-East of 21 May, if he will publish in the Official Report equivalent figures for each local authority area in England for 1990–91 with the estimates of the actual sums raised from items (i), (ii) and (iii) also being presented in appropriate percentage terms.

Information is not yet available for each local authority area in England. The proportions of revenue support grant, non-domestic rates and current specific grants for the areas listed in the Official Report for 21 May in answer to the hon. Member's question, are as follows:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what consultations he has had with disability organisations on the effects of the community charge on physically disabled people and their carers;(2) what representations he has received regarding the effects of the community charge on physically disabled people and their carers; and if he will make a statement.

I am not aware of any recent consultations with such organisations but I continue to receive representations on a number of aspects of the community charge. The position of the physically disabled and their carers is taken into account in the community charge system. Those who are resident and receiving care or treatment in a hospital, residential care home, nursing home, mental nursing home or hostel, as defined in community charge legislation, are exempt from the personal community charge. Certain low-paid care workers are also exempt. Those who leave their own homes to care for a disabled person, or to receive care, will not be liable to pay the standard community charge for at least a year after leaving their homes. Many disabled people subject to the personal community charge will qualify for community charge benefit which may reduce bills by up to 80 per cent. Income support has been adjusted with respect to the remaining 20 per cent. liability its recipients will face. The rules for community charge benefit and income support both make special allowance for the disabled and there is additional help within the transitional relief scheme for those pensioners and disabled people who were not former ratepayers.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the average domestic rates bill per household in (a) 1979–80 and (b) 1988–89 for Blyth Valley, North Tyneside, Newcastle and Wansbeck.

The figures are: