New Clause 1 - Annual report
Council Tax (New Valuation Lists for England) Bill
11:30 am
Robert Syms (Shadow Minister, Local Government Affairs & Communities; Poole, Conservative)
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
It is quite clear, if we consider the notes on the clauses, that the Bill’s purpose—the postponement of the revaluation—means the suspension of the existing programme of preparatory work for the 2007 revaluation by the Valuation Office Agency. That is clear: work will stop. As the Minister has just said, at the point at which a Secretary of State determines that he wants to proceed again, an affirmative resolution of the House will have to be moved and the House will have ample opportunity to discuss what the future programme will be and what work is undertaken.
The purpose of my new clause is to tease out what happens between those two parameters. We heard from the Minister that the Valuation Office Agency continued to do work in relation to new homes, where properties are altered and where they are sold. There is a modest amount of ongoing work on revaluation.
We also heard on Second Reading that the Government had spent some £60 million on the 2007 revaluation, including £45 million on a new computer system. What happens to that computer system? Will it have alternative uses? Will it be switched off? Will the Valuation Office Agency continue to do work on a year-by-year basis, which might be used in a future revaluation?
We also heard on Second Reading that about 1,200 staff who had been taken on for the 2007 revaluation, many of whom were on short-term contracts, would now be laid off. The purpose of my new clause is to tease out whether there will be any work done on a year-by-year basis.
Concerns have been expressed in the House and in the press about various value codes that the new computer system may use to revalue housing. There are many concerns that work might continue, possibly at a modest level, in providing some ground work for a future revaluation. Therefore, we do not want a sneak revaluation where the Government can move an affirmative resolution on a short time scale and people suddenly find that work has been done which they did not anticipate.
The new clause is a probing one. Will the Minister flesh out what the £45 million-worth of kit in the form of the new computer system will be used for? Beyond the normal changes to new homes, such as those that are altered or sold, shall any further works be undertaken, and shall people do some work on a year-by-year basis? If the answer is no, the matter is simple. If the answer is, “Some work will go on,” the Committee ought to hear about it.