John Healey (Minister of State (Local Government), Department for Communities and Local Government; Wentworth, Labour)

Clause 15 allows levying authorities to grant relief on the payment of business rate supplements—a matter that we touched on in earlier discussions. When a levying authority decides to grant BRS relief, subsection (2) provides that the chargeable amount must be calculated in accordance with the rules set by that authority. That gives a levying authority flexibility to decide precisely  how the relief should be applied. It could set a threshold for BRS liability that was higher than the £50,000 rateable value prescribed by the regulations under clause 12, or it could introduce a taper, applying for example a multiplier of 1p for properties with a rateable value of less than a set amount and 2p for those with a rateable value of more than that amount. Another approach enabled by the flexibility in the clause is to phase in a BRS over a number of years, so that, for example, a 0.5p multiplier is introduced for the first five years of a project, a 1p multiplier for the next five years, and a 2p multiplier for the years after that.

Finally, subsection (3) sets out the conditions that must be met before the relief may be applied. The relief can be based only on rateable value and it must be applied uniformly to all types of hereditaments and owners or occupiers. A levying authority could not apply relief only to warehouses or certain types of retail outlets. That ensures consistency and fairness across the BRS area.

I hope that, on the basis of those remarks, members of the Committee will now allow the clause to stand part of the Bill.

Bob Neill (Shadow Minister, Communities and Local Government; Bromley & Chislehurst, Conservative)

I just want to give the Minister the opportunity to come back to the point that I sought to raise earlier. I am grateful for what he says about the flexibility measures—the taper and the threshold setting—that are intended to be given in the form of reliefs. Perhaps the Minister in his reply will pick up the point that I sought to raise via the hon. Member for North Cornwall. When the right hon. Gentleman says that under this provision the local authority will be able to set a threshold that is higher than £50,000, is that without prejudice to the statement on page 14 of the impact assessment:

“To provide consistency this threshold will be standardised across England”?

Is it the case that the minimum guaranteed protection—I see nods from those who advise the Minister—is £50,000 but that a local authority will have the flexibility to increase that protection if circumstances in its area so warrant? Such recognition of the situation would be useful and would come as some reassurance on that point.

John Healey (Minister of State (Local Government), Department for Communities and Local Government; Wentworth, Labour)

I apologise to the hon. Gentleman. To be honest I did not pick up that point because I thought that it was evident in what I was saying. We want to ensure a base consistency and will legislate for that threshold. The Bill provisions allow a levying authority to set thresholds that are higher than that £50,000 rateable value, should it decide that that is appropriate. The hon. Gentleman quoted accurately from the impact assessment: it does refer to England. The Bill would require Welsh Ministers to set an appropriate threshold for Wales, similar to the way in which under regulations we set a threshold of £50,000 for any BRS in England.

Bob Neill (Shadow Minister, Communities and Local Government; Bromley & Chislehurst, Conservative)

I am sorry if I was being a hard-headed lawyer in pinning the Minister down on that point.