Written questions by Cleverly.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the answer of 11 February 2026 to Question 111141 on Local Government Finance, whether any of the £200 million of funding in 2026-28 has been re-allocated to other programmes.

I refer the Rt. Hon Member to the Written Ministerial Statement made on 4 December 2025 (HCWS1128), which confirmed that the 6 areas on the Devolution Priority Programme would each receive a proportion of their investment fund to ensure they can start delivering on key local priorities and deliver the benefits of devolution on the ground ahead of the mayors taking office. As a result - and per the standard procedures for government Departments - the remaining funding will be re-allocated, in this case for other local growth priorities.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the answer of 28 January 2026 to Question 107021 on Housing: Asylum, how the basic accommodation will differ from council housing; and whether the asylum accommodation will be council owned.

I refer the Rt. Hon. Member to the answer given to Question UIN 103182 on 13 January 2026. Asylum seekers are not eligible for social housing.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the answer of 28 January 2026 to Questions 107021 on Housing: Asylum, whether the derelict buildings to be converted into asylum accommodation will be (a) residential, (b) commercial, (c) communal and (d) industrial.

Details of the fund are yet to be finalised. Once these details have been finalised, we will communicatethis to the local government sector and Parliament in the usual way.

Communities and Local Government, whether the Chinese Embassy development at the Royal Mint will be subject to the oversight of the Building Safety Regulator.

Full reasons for the decision in question are set out in the Secretary of State’s decision letter which can be found on gov.uk here. The letter and associated Inspector’s Report must be read in their entirety. Fire safety matters are addressed at paragraphs 100-102.

Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of restrictions on ground rents on levels of service charges for leaseholders.

Ground rent is a payment set out in a lease with no clear service provided in return. It is legally distinct from service charges. Service charges are financial contributions made by leaseholders towards the costs of the management and maintenance of their buildings. Where they relate to a service, they must be reasonable. Leaseholders who wish to contest the reasonableness of their service charges can make an application to the First-tier Tribunal.

Communities and Local Government, what proportion of the 1.5 million homes to be delivered in this Parliament will be flats.

I refer the Rt Hon. Member to the answer given to Question UIN 33286 on 3 March 2025.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the answer of 5 February 2026 to Question 109262, whether pubs which have (a) rooms and (b) conference and wedding facilities for private hire will be able to receive the full amount of the new pub relief on their full Rateable Value; and whether local authorities may (i) refuse the pub relief from being applied and (ii) only apply it in part.

It is for local authorities to determine whether properties are eligible for the Pub and Live Music Venues Relief as per the definitions provided by government in the guidance for local authorities published on 18 February. This can be found on gov.uk at here. A local authority may refuse the relief if in its view the property in question does not meet the definitions as per the guidance. The relief cannot be applied to only part of the property.

Communities and Local Government, what proportion of any increase in business rate receipts will be retained by local authorities.

The business rates retention system was set up in 2013-14 and enables local authorities to retain a proportion of the increase in business rates income – or growth – in their local areas, above a baseline set according to individual level of need, on implementation. For most local authorities, the proportion they retain is 50% across the local area, subject to a levy on that growth. Some authorities have arrangements meaning they retain a higher proportion of growth of up to 100%, and may pay no levy on this amount. In 2026-27, the system was reset, meaning growth is redistributed between local authorities in line with need, as part of the Fair Funding Review 2.0, delivered through the local government finance settlement. From 2026-27, local authorities will continue to retain their proportion of new growth above their new baseline funding need, subject to a levy. I refer the Rt. Hon. Member to the answer given to Question UIN 107993 on 28 January 2026, and to Question UIN 113106 on 26 February 2026 on the specific interaction of business rates tax changes (the 2026 Revaluation, and the introduction of additional multipliers from 2026-27) on local authority income.

Communities and Local Government, what recent representations his Department has received on the compatibility of leasehold and commonhold reform with the European Convention of Human Rights.

My Department has received representations from a range of external stakeholders regarding the government’s leasehold and commonhold reform agenda. These have included representations regarding property rights.

Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of unitary local government restructuring in Surrey on the (a) number of town and parish councils and (b) band D parish precept charged by those councils.

Town and parish councils are not in scope for local government reorganisation and will continue to operate as they do now.  The power to create and restructure town and parish councils is devolved to principal local authorities, which can review and make changes to local governance arrangements through Community Governance Reviews. In doing so, they are expected to take the views of local people into account. The Government expects town and parish councils – including new councils – to carefully consider the burden placed on taxpayers when setting their precepts. Areas considering the establishment of new town and parish councils should also think carefully about how these might be funded to avoid putting further pressure on local authority finances and/or new burdens on the taxpayer.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the answer of 15 January 2026 to Question 103895 on Local Government: Working Hours, if he will publish that letter.

I will deposit the letter in the House of Commons Library shortly.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the Answer of 5 February 2026 to Question 109273 on Licensed Premises: Business Rates, what estimate he has made of the cost of the compensation in 2026-27; and whether it will be allocated as part of the final Local Government Finance Settlement.

The department will publish the cost of compensating local authorities for the relief as part of the 2026-27 NNDR3 outturn data reconciliation, following the end of the 2026-27 financial year. Local authorities will be fully compensated for the loss of income associated with granting the pubs and live music venues relief they award against the main business rates liability. The Greater London Authority is not reimbursed for the lost revenue arising from government funded discretionary reliefs awarded under section 47 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988, such as the 15% Pubs and Live Music Venues Relief, when this relief is applied to a Business Rates Supplement (BRS). While these reliefs are applied on a parallel basis to reliefs on Non-Domestic Rates, the Greater London Authority bears the entire cost in respect of the resulting reduction in BRS revenues. Business Improvement District (BID) levies are established under separate legislation from the business rates system and are payable in addition to non-domestic rates. Business rates reliefs granted under section 47 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988, such as the Pubs and Live Music Venues Relief, apply only to a ratepayer’s liability for non-domestic rates and do not apply to BID levies. These reliefs therefore reduce a ratepayer’s liability to non-domestic rates only. Individual BIDs may allow for a reduction in a levy in line with their own schemes but this is a matter for individual BIDs to determine. Where a billing authority grants discretionary business rates reliefs (including reliefs under section 47 of the 1988 Act), the authority is compensated for the resulting loss of non-domestic rates income via grant paid under section 31 of the Local Government Act 2003. This compensation relates solely to reductions in non-domestic rates liability and does not extend to BID levies. Accordingly, there is no provision for central reimbursement in respect of BID levy amounts.

Communities and Local Government, with reference to his letter to council leaders and others of 16 February 2026 on postponement of local elections in England in May 2026, for what reason the decision was made by the Housing Minister.

As set out in the Government’s communication to the Court and the Secretary of State’s correspondence to the Rt. Hon. Member of 23 February, in order to ensure that the position was reconsidered afresh, and recognising the urgency created by the electoral timetable, the Minister of State for Housing and Planning was invited to review the matter.

Communities and Local Government, what requirements does Pride of Place funding have to be spent on (a) capital and (b) revenue in (i) England and (ii) each other constituent nation; and whether this differs from Levelling Up Funding.

The government’s Pride in Place Programme will provide up to £5.8 billion of funding and support over 10 years to up to 284 places. Each community will receive up to £20 million over that period. For Phase 1 places, funding is split 75% capital and 25% revenue. For Phase 2 places, funding is split 63% capital and 37% revenue, paid to respective local authorities in line with the published funding profiles. The capital and revenue splits and funding requirements apply equally to all places selected to receive funding under the programme, in all parts of the UK. The Levelling Up Fund was predominantly capital-focused and did not include a defined revenue allocation for capacity building and engagement.

Communities and Local Government, what assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of the performance of the Planning Inspectorate against its targets on planning decisions.

I refer the Rt Hon. Member to the answer given to Question UIN 112059 on 24 February 2026.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the Answer of 5 February 2026 to Question 108217 on Independent Review into Civil Unrest in Leicester, if he will publish the report.

I refer the Rt. Hon Member to the answer given to Question UIN 87636 on 11 November 2025.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the Answer of 13 January 2026 to Question 102774 on Islamophobia, if he will list the dates of meetings with the relevant stakeholders; and whether those meetings were with (a) officials and (b) Ministers.

As is standard practice in government policy making, officials undertook some limited and focused informal engagement with relevant stakeholders.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the Answer of 11 February 2026 to Question 111141 on Local Government Finance, how much funding the six areas will receive in (a) 2026-27 and (b) 2027-28 prior to the rescheduled elections.

The six areas on the Devolution Priority Programme will receive both the Mayoral Capacity Fund and the Investment Fund, which is based on population, from MHCLG in 2026/27 and 2027/28, subject to the strategic authority being established where this has not already happened. Details of the allocations methodology for Mayoral Capacity Fund can be found in the Local Government Finance Settlement. Combined, these amounts rounded to the first decimal place are as follows: Devolution Priority Programme area26/27 (£m)27/28 (£m)Cheshire and Warrington13.624.4Cumbria8.413.8Greater Essex18.119.5Hampshire and the Solent19.320.7Norfolk and Suffolk16.517.8Sussex and Brighton16.718.0

Communities and Local Government, whether the (a) Ministerial Envoys, (b) his Department and (c) Defending Democracy Taskforce is taking steps to help ensure the integrity of the ballot in the councillor and mayoral election in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets in May 2026.

Security of our democratic processes is paramount, and this Government has robust systems in place to ensure the integrity of its elections. The Joint Election Security and Preparedness unit (JESP) is leading cross-government efforts in preparation for the 2026 elections, which are taking place across the UK. JESP will stand up an election cell over the election period to monitor election security risk and be ready to stand up a response if required. JESP has issued updated security advice and guidance to candidates and ROs in England and Wales, which brings together expertise from across the security community, including the Police, the National Protective Security Authority, National Cyber Security Centre, and others, to help candidates and ROs implement security measures and ensure the integrity of the polls. A statutory intervention is in place in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets to secure the Council’s compliance with its Best Value Duty. This is centred on a team of Ministerial Envoys who provide support and advice to the Council’s leadership team and oversee the Authority’s improvement work.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the Answer of 4 February 2026 to Question 108644 on Council tax: billing, what his planned timetable is for responding to that consultation; and whether the change on billing would require primary legislation.

The Government will respond to the consultation in due course. It would not require primary legislation to move to 12-month billing by default, this could be done by secondary legislation.