UK Parliament / Open data

Council Tax (New Valuation Lists for England) Bill

The hon. Gentleman tries to lead me into territory that I shall probably cover when I reach a later part of my speech. I want to set out the principles that should inform a proper system of tax based on property values that allows for revaluation. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will bear with me for a moment. The problem with the Government’s position is that, although they say that they are postponing, not cancelling, revaluation, they have given no indication about when the postponed revaluation will take place. The date of 2007 was set for revaluation after a lengthy period of consultation. The Green Paper, ““Modernising Local Government Finance””, which was issued in autumn 2000, invited views on whether there should be provision for regular revaluations and, if so, how frequently. It was suggested that there might be six-yearly, eight-yearly or 10-yearly gaps between revaluations. The 2001 local government White Paper, which I had the privilege of preparing and implementing, made it clear that respondents to the consultation overwhelmingly supported the principle of a fixed cycle. The White Paper announced the Government’s conclusion that there should be a regular 10-yearly cycle of revaluation, with the first being based on 2005 values and taking effect from 2007. There was a logic behind that. As my hon. Friend the Member for South Ribble (Mr. Borrow) pointed out—as a former valuer, he is experienced in such matters—the cycle for valuation must be co-ordinated with the current five-yearly cycle of business rates revaluations to avoid imposing unreasonable pressures on the staff of the Valuation Office Agency. It was therefore considered sensible to conduct the first revaluation of council tax as soon as possible after the completion of the 2005 business rates revaluation and well before that of 2010. That was the logic behind choosing 2007. That was not only agreed through all the usual channels of Government but, because legislation was required to effect the decision, debated at length in 2003 during the passage of the Local Government Bill. The measure was passed, arrangements were made to begin the revaluation in 2005 and the Valuation Office Agency undertook a great deal of preparatory work. I understand that some £60 million of work had already been done before it was decided a couple of months ago to stop the process.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
439 c48-9 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top