Vol. 415 No. 1
301 Mr. Hilliard asked the Minister for the Environment if he will outline the reason for (1) the 26 per cent reduction in expenditure under Vote 25, subhead B.3, (2) the 9 per cent increase in expenditure under Vote 25 and (3) the 41 per cent reduction under Vote 25, subhead T, in the Estimates for Public Services 1992.
I take it that the second part of the question relates to subhead I. On this basis, the information sought is as follows:
|
Subhead |
Reason for Change |
|
B.3. Private Housing Grants and Subsidies, etc. |
The reduction is due mainly to falling requirements for house improvement grants and mortgage subsidies. |
|
I. Road Works and Related Services |
The increase arises on the provision for national road improvements in line with expenditure commitments in the Operational Programme on Peripherality. |
|
T. Appropriation in Aid |
The reduction is due mainly to the Housing Finance Agency paying £5 million direct to the Exchequer in 1992 in contrast to 1991 when the Agency paid £6 million into the Environment Vote. |
