Council Tax (New Valuation Lists for England) Bill

My Lords, that may well be the case, but the system is as I described: it is based on bands and those bands will not necessarily change even after a review. That is an important point to remember. Also, all values are related to the 1991 values. The noble Baroness and the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, made some observations about the impact on Valuation Office Agency staff of the Government’s decision to postpone revaluation. Future revaluations are likely to require fewer staff in any event, as the benefits of the technology that I talked about earlier will ensure that there is less manual preparatory work and a speedier response to the call for revaluation. Of the expenditure on preparation for revaluation as it would have been, £45 million will be reusable. The Valuation Office Agency had about 1,400 people employed on revaluation work when the postponement was announced. Immediately following the announcement, the agency took steps to reduce continuing expenditure and the opportunity to reshape the agency to fit the new situation. Some 420 staff employed as casuals or on fixed-term contracts would have left the agency by the end of November last year, and a voluntary early departure scheme has been announced, with 600 staff expected to depart between March and June this year. Coupled with natural wastage, we expect the total reduction to amount to some 1,250 staff. There is a careful management process in place designed to ensure minimal damage to the work of the organisation, but to take account of the fact that work flows have changed and will not be as originally predicted. The noble Baroness, Lady Scott, and the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, made perfectly respectable points about pensioners and low-income taxpayers not taking up council tax benefit. The Department for Work and Pensions is taking very active steps to improve take-up, as I explained in my opening contribution, and as the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, will be well aware from her important work in her time in the department. That includes a positive approach—ringing pensioners whom it believes may be entitled but are not claiming council tax benefit, taking details over the phone and then sending completed claim forms, which the pensioner need only sign to get their benefit. In the longer term, the department aims to make getting the benefit as automatic—in other words, passported—as possible. The noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, made some important points based on his continued and in-depth knowledge and experience of local government, for which I pay tribute; he does a first-rate job in representing Essex County Council, and I am grateful to him for his insights. I take issue with his assertion about Wales being a precedent; as I said, it is our intention that any revaluation in the future be revenue neutral. In basic terms, the Bill’s provisions are very close to the existing legislation. Without the Bill, we would be obliged to continue with the process as it is. We do not want that to be the case. It is important that we move on and provide ourselves with the space to take account of Sir Michael Lyons’s final report and review. I simply ask the noble Lord to be patient; it is a great virtue and one of which we in local government have long experience. This is an important moment for us to take time and reflect on where we go with function and funding. Those two elements are very important to the longer-term future and the debates that take place over local government and its continued and important role as part of the machinery of government in this country. I am grateful to those who have contributed; it portends well for an informed and orderly debate on a Bill that is essential for us to achieve a purpose that has had universal support, even if it is for different reasons, from the major parties in your Lordships’ House. On Question, Bill read a second time.