| Home Page |
Column 601
House of Commons
Wednesday 13 May 1992
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker-- in the Chair ]
PRIVATE BUSINESS
Mersey Docks and Harbour Bill
[Lords]
Order for Third Reading read.
To be read the Third time tomorrow.
Alliance and Leicester (Girobank) Bill
British Railways
(No. 4) Bill--
East Coast Main Line (Safety) Bill
London Underground (Green Park) Bill
London Underground (Jubilee) Bill
Orders for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time tomorrow.
Pittenweem Harbour Order Confirmation Bill
Mr. Secretary Lang presented a Bill to confirm a Provisional Order under section 7 of the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act 1936, relating to Pittenweem Harbour : And the same was read the First time ; and ordered to be considered on Tuesday 19 May and to be printed. [Bill 7.]
Column 602
Oral Answers to Questions
ENVIRONMENT
Sewage Treatment
1. Mr. Cran : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what percentage of sewage treatment works met their consents standards in 1979 ; and what percentage comply at the latest date for which figures are available.
The Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Michael Howard) : No records were kept centrally on sewage treatment works in 1979. The latest available figures show that, in 1990, 88 per cent. of sewage treatment works met the long-term performance measures specified in their discharge consents. That compares with 77 per cent. in 1986. I expect almost all sewage treatment works to be in a position to meet the required standards from the end of this year.
Mr. Cran : Will my right hon. and learned Friend bring pressure to bear on the chairman of Yorkshire Water, which is pumping raw sewage into the River Humber from the south end of my constituency? Yorkshire Water has not made the necessary investment in treatment works in that part of my constituency. Is that not a disgrace? Will my right hon. and learned Friend help me?
Mr. Howard : I understand the concern that lies behind my hon. Friend's question, but the discharge to which he referred does not significantly affect the quality of the water in the Humber estuary. Nevertheless, we are committed to ending such discharges. Yorkshire Water will be drawing up a programme to provide appropriate treatment for the discharges.
Mr. Sheerman : Is the Secretary of State aware of the massive sewage pollution in the River Calder, which has been added to by an enormous old tip that has slipped into the river, blocking it at one point? Very dangerous heavy metal contamination has been found in that slip. Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give special consideration to Kirklees and the people who are trying to fight the real danger of a great deal of pollution in our water supplies?
Mr. Howard : I shall ensure that the relevant water authority is made aware of the circumstances described by the hon. Gentleman. He will know that £28 billion is being invested in improving our water standards through programmes that are being implemented throughout the country, of which about 50 per cent. is devoted to the treatment of sewage.
Mr. Bellingham : Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that, unlike the chairman of Yorkshire Water, the chairman of Anglian Water has done an excellent job? Anglian Water recently opened a new sewage plant-- indeed, the Under-Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Banbury (Mr. Baldry), had the pleasure of opening it last year--which cost almost £10 million. Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that, without privatisation and access to private capital, that investment would not have been made?
Column 603
Mr. Howard : I think that both the chairman of Yorkshire Water and the chairman of Anglian Water are doing a pretty good job. My hon. Friend is right in what he says about the current investment in improving our water environment. It did not happen when the industry was in the public sector, under Governments of both political parties. The record of investment in the water industry when the Labour party was last in power does not bear the skimpiest examination.Mr. Skinner : Is not it significant that since the water authorities have been privatised, a number of Tory Members of Parliament--there will be more in future--are complaining about the state of the water? When will the Secretary of State clean up the River Doe Lea, where pollution is 1,000 times above the necessary safety levels? When will he clean up the dioxin at Bolsover ? Why does he not respond to Bolsover district council's call for a public inquiry? Is not the truth of the matter that he knows all about sewage, which stinks along the Government Benches? That is why the Government are bailing out Olympia and York at Canary wharf.
Mr. Howard : The one thing of which I would never have accused the hon. Gentleman, although I might have accused many other Members of this particular failing, is a short memory. There was much more reason for concern about the state of our water environment when the industry was in the public sector than there is now. I urge the hon. Gentleman to see the massive improvements that have been made to our water environment as a result of the huge investment that has become possible following the privatisation of the industry.
Local Government Finance
2. Mr. Carrington : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he has any proposals for restoring the fixing of non- domestic rate poundages to local authority control.
The Minister for Local Government and Inner Cities (Mr. John Redwood) : No, Madam
Mr. Carrington : I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that answer, as are the many small businesses in Fulham that were terrified at the prospect of having their rates set by a spendthrift local council. Does my hon. Friend remember that when the Labour party took control of the London borough of Hammersmith and Fulham, almost its first action was to raise the borough precept by 100 per cent. and the rate poundage by 44 per cent? Does my hon. Friend agree that local businesses need to be protected from such irresponsibility?
Mr. Redwood : I agree, and that is just one example of profligate Labour authorities that overtax and overspend. Business needed to be protected. We want business to prosper across the country. That means keeping rates bills down. That is why I hope that the Opposition will support the legislation that we shall be introducing shortly to cut bills further.
Column 604
Ozone Layer
3. Dr. Strang : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the steps which are being taken to protect the ozone layer ; and if he will make a statement.
The Minister for the Environment and Countryside (Mr. David Maclean) : We are co-chairing the official negotiations on the ozonelayer and hope to achieve agreement on phasing out CFCs and halons four years earlier than the Montreal protocol. I shall keep the House informed of progress.
Dr. Strang : Does the Minister now accept that
hydrochlorofluorocarbons pose a greater threat to the ozone layer than was originally thought and that therefore they are no longer acceptable as an additional substitute for the ozone-depleting substances covered by the Montreal protocol? Will the Government now announce a deadline for phasing out HCFCs also?
Mr. Maclean : I accept that HCFCs have some ozone-depleting potential, but they are one twentieth as harmful as CFCs. Of course we want HCFCs to be phased out in the long term, but if we make a unilateral or premature announcement to phase out HCFCs, we shall end up with CFCs being used for longer than they ought to be. Of course we want some of the new super-chemicals that are being developed, but HCFCs have an interim role to play until we reach that ideal state.
Mr. Robert B. Jones : Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the most encouraging breakthroughs recently has been the United States' change of heart regarding the convention on climate change? Will he pass on to our right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State our congratulations on the important role that he played in making sure that the United States changed its view?
Mr. Maclean : I should be delighted to congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on the role that he played. Most sensible commentators clearly recognise that any attempt to have a Rio agreement without the United States on board would be doomed to failure. The United States contributes 30 per cent. of CO emissions. It was vital to get the United States to go to the convention, so I am delighted that that country will now play a full and key part.
Mr. Beggs : One welcomes the steps that the Government have taken to protect the ozone layer, but can the Minister tell us whether the health of the public at large will be protected as much as it ought to be by that action, given that risk compared with the risk caused by pollution from Sellafield and other radioactive sources?
Mr. Maclean : The hon. Gentleman will know that very strict pollution controls are imposed at Sellafield. It has to operate within very tight constraints on discharges. I am absolutely confident that if one looks at any scale of risk--whether from the ozone layer or from radioactivity--those discharges are very low down in the categories of things that actually harm the public.
Mrs. Gorman : Is my hon. Friend aware that one good volcanic outburst shoots more so-called aerosol gases into the stratosphere than all the industrial production since the beginning of the industrial revolution? Is he aware that
Column 605
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration recently produced a report casting doubt on the concept of ozone holes? Is he further aware that the former director of the Atomic Energy Commission in the United States, Dixy Lee Ray, has written a book casting doubt on the idea that stopping spraying our armpits with aerosols will save the planet?Mr. Maclean : In the few years that I have been answering from the Dispatch Box, I have always received useful information from my hon. Friend. I was not aware of the first point, but I have no proposals to control volcanic emissions. I was aware of the second point. I was not aware of the third point, but, again, I intend to continue to use certain deodorants.
Mr. Win Griffiths : The Minister is in no danger of being premature. The latest announcement on CFCs was made only when industry and the President of America took the lead. The evidence about HCFCs is so strong that the Government should now act to ensure that their production is banned as soon as possible. Will not the Minister at least give a commitment that the Government are prepared to talk to industry about doing so?
Mr. Maclean : The whole House would have regarded it as less churlish of the hon. Gentleman if he had paid a fulsome tribute to my predecessor, David Trippier, who took the initiative on CFCs. He decided to call for an earlier phase-out of CFCs. He put it on the European agenda. We are now discussing an earlier phase-out of CFCs and halons because of David Trippier's action. We are very grateful to him for that.
Housing Investment Programme
4. Mr. Wareing : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to increase the housing investment programme of local authorities seeking to perform their statutory duties in respect of the owners and tenants of defective housing.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Tony Baldry) : Local authorities' statutory obligations to the ownerof dwellings designated as inherently defective are already taken into account in allocating housing investment programme resources.
Mr. Wareing : Is the Minister really satisfied that that is the true position? A considerable number of my constituents, responding to the policies of the Tory Government, have bought their Boswell and Boot houses. That is costing Liverpool corporation £11 million during the present financial year and will cost £6.5 million next year. Many people cannot have their houses repurchased, despite the defects, because a system has not been found. I am concerned about the tenants of such houses. What provision do the Government make for them in the HIP?
Mr. Baldry : Nationally, I estimate that more than 90 per cent. of all eligible owners will have been assisted by next April. The truth is that Liverpool has been tardy in working out a sensible phased programme of repurchase with owners. For many years it did nothing, but it has finally seen sense. I see no reason why all the eligible owners of designated defective homes in Liverpool should not be assisted by the end of the scheme.
Column 606
Sir Donald Thompson : Does my hon. Friend understand that many local authorities have a legacy of system-built houses that are not grouped together in one part of an authority area? Will he devise a scheme whereby those houses are looked after together, as under a housing action scheme?
Mr. Baldry : Of course. We recently raised the spending limits of grant-aided repairs in line with the recommendations of the efficiency scrutiny on housing defects legislation, which was published in November 1991, because we wanted to ensure that local authorities dealt with designated defective houses in the most cost-effective way.
Mr. Loyden : The Minister will be aware that many of the houses built in the inter-war years are more than 70 years old and he also knows only too well that local authorities are in no position to take on the task of refurbishing them, as many need major structural repairs. I live in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, West Derby (Mr. Wareing) and I can underline what he is saying about many of the houses on that huge estate. It is beyond the ability of the local authority to deal with it. Is it not time that the Government recognised their responsibility?
Mr. Baldry : We expect local authorities with designated defective properties in their ownership to consider repair needs in the same way as they tackle the renovation of other stock. To ensure the highest quality output, a larger share of the housing investment programme allocation is now awarded to local authorities that are able to prove that they have efficiently and effectively carried out their housing role. I have absolutely no doubt that if Liverpool can demonstrate that it can manage its housing stock efficiently and effectively, it will receive a larger share of the HIP allocation. The truth is that, with regard to the statutory scheme, for a long time Liverpool did nothing. It started to face its statutory responsibilities only when faced with the prospect of court action by its tenants.
Rents-to-mortgages Scheme
5. Mr. French : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what further plans he has to extend the rents-to-mortgages scheme.
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Sir George Young) : We will legislate in the current Session to extend the scheme to council tenants in England and Wales.
Mr. French : I am grateful for confirmation of the fact that we shall develop and expand the rents-to-mortgages scheme. In doing so, will my hon. Friend pay particular attention to the needs of flat-dwellers, who, too often under the right-to-buy scheme, have faced obstacles that have prevented them from proceeding?
Sir George Young : Yes, we will do that. Of course, those who live in flats as opposed to houses will have an additional advantage because they benefit from a higher discount, which will in turn reduce their outgoings and enable them to acquire a greater initial part of the dwelling. As the legislation is developed, we shall see whether additional protection is required for those who live in flats.
Column 607
Ms. Abbott : Will the rents-to-mortgages scheme apply to the private sector as well as to the public sector? If not, why not?Sir George Young : I made it clear in my main reply that the legislation would cover council tenants in England and Wales. It has always been the case that we have a mandate for the buildings that have been provided at the taxpayer's expense. The right to buy extends to public tenants, not to private sector tenants. That is an extension of our scheme for local authority tenants. We very much hope that the Labour party will not make the mistake that it made over the right to buy and oppose this scheme ; we hope that it will wholeheartedly endorse the scheme.
Mr. Harry Greenway : How soon does my hon. Friend expect the legislation to be in place to enable this admirable scheme to start?
Sir George Young : It was announced in the Gracious Speech for the current Session. The Government will introduce the measure as soon as we can and we hope that it will be implemented in 1993.
Mr. Soley : When will the Government produce a proper housing finance policy which really gives people a choice between renting and buying? All that the Government have done so far is to get rid of 2 million properties in the private and public rented sector and not replace them and, at the same time, impose mortgage misery on 1.5 million people who cannot move into the rented sector but need to do so. Can we please have less fiddling around with such systems and have more radical systems that give people who rent a chance to buy and people who buy and have bought but who need to return to the rented sector a chance to do so? That would mean a genuine choice in housing.
Sir George Young : The hon. Gentleman says that we have got rid of those properties, but they are still there and real families are living in them. They are still part of the country's housing stock. On the hon. Gentleman's other point, in the past 18 months, interest rates have progressively decreased, thus reducing the pressure on home owners. Had his party been elected, that progress would not have been maintained. On his general point, we are confident that the housing policies that we have been developing and on which we shall work will provide a balanced housing strategy to meet the needs of all the people, whether they want to be tenants or home owners.
Mr. Bowis : Will my hon. Friend use this reform opportunity to build into the new system a tougher requirement for local authorities to collect? If they fail to collect from their tenants, that puts an added financial burden on rent-payment tenants and reduces the money available to improve the housing stock.
Sir George Young : The rent collection performance of some local authorities, especially in London, is deplorable. That means that they have fewer resources to plough back into housing management and maintenance. Under the new system, local authorities that can improve their performances will be rewarded. The Under-Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Banbury (Mr. Baldry), and I will meet some of the local authorities whose performance has been disappointing, to see how we can encourage them to do better.
Column 608
Sports Clubs
6. Mr. Pendry : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to introduce mandatory rate relief for voluntary non-profit-making sports clubs.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Robin Squire) : No, Madam
Mr. Pendry : Is the Minister aware that that was a most complacent reply? Is he further aware that, according to his Department's figures, more than 1,000 voluntary sports clubs were denied rate relief in England and Wales last year? Government rating policy is hitting the grassroots of sport, whereas in Northern Ireland mandatory rate relief is benefiting sport. Will the new Minister use his undoubted talents to urge the Government to extend the Northern Ireland system to the rest of the United Kingdom?
Mr. Squire : To the extent that I detected a compliment in that question, I thank the hon. Gentleman, but in reply to the substance of that question, I must say no. The Government believe--and I agree [Laughter.] --that local authorities are best placed to determine the contribution that clubs make to the local community. Local authorities can already give up to 100 per cent. relief. That is determined locally ; it is not a matter in which the Government should intervene.
Mr. Devlin : Do not many sports clubs play on grounds belonging to charitable trusts, which are automatically eligible for the full 50 per cent. rate relief?
Mr. Squire : I believe that my hon. Friend is correct. To return to the point of the original question, we recently conducted a survey which showed that a growing number of non-profit-making clubs were receiving more relief. Indeed, such clubs received more relief in 1990-91 than in 1989-90. We believe that our policy is working.
Council House Sales
7. Mr. Vaz : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to allow councils to spend the revenue they get from the sale of council houses.
Mr. Baldry : Local authorities may currently spend 25 per cent. of their capital receipts from the sale of council houses. We have no plans to change that percentage.
Mr. Vaz : The Minister will know that since 1979 Leicester city council has sold more than 9,500 council houses under the right-to-buy scheme, bringing in £99 million in capital receipts. He will also know that when the Minister for Housing and Planning visited Leicester he told the city council to carry on with the good work. Is not it absurd that that money remains in the bank, and the council cannot spend it on building new homes and repairing defective housing? When will the Government be prepared to change their plans?
Mr. Baldry : Leicester may well have sold a lot of houses and have made some money from that, but it also has considerable debts--£286 million worth. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not be insensible to the cost to the community charge payers of Leicester of servicing that debt. Once the council has cleared its debts, it will be able to spend most of its receipts as it wishes.
Column 609
Mr. Hicks : Does my hon. Friend agree that in certain parts of the country there is a genuine need for specialised housing, such as low-cost social housing for disabled people and the single homeless? Is there not a strong case for relaxing the present figure of 25 per cent.--say, to 40 per cent? To do so would not only help to meet a social need but help the housing and construction industry.Mr. Baldry : I understand my hon. Friend's worries, but to let councils spend more of their capital receipts would not solve the problems that he mentions, because capital receipts tend to be scarcest in the areas of greatest need. Of course we have to tackle the problems of social housing, especially in the important area of housing for special needs. That is why the Housing Corporation continues to receive a large share of public finance which, together with the money that it raises from the private sector, means that its future budget will be almost £2 billion.
Mr. Bennett : What hope can the Minister offer many of my constituents who are homeless and on the council waiting list in Tameside and in Stockport? Does he realise that in Stockport, the number of people on the housing waiting list is now double the number it was in 1974 when I was first elected to the House? Stockport has a considerable sum which it could spend to provide homes for all the people who desperately need them. Is not it time that the Government allowed local authorities to spend their capital receipts, and to solve the problem of homelessness and of those who desperately need better accommodation?
Mr. Baldry : Stockport also has a very large amount of local authority debt. It must be right that, as far as possible, the debt is discharged. It is the past profligacy of many Labour local authorities which has led to local government's enormous debts. Between them, the top five indebted councils in England have a debt of about £5.5 billion.
Mr. Batiste : Can my hon. Friend confirm that over the coming year the Government intend to keep the tightest control over local authority borrowing and spending, and especially that they will not allow Labour authorities to use the introduction of the council tax as an excuse to rip off their taxpayers?
Mr. Baldry : That is absolutely correct. The history of local government finance all too often demonstrates that Labour-controlled authorities have been profligate in handling public expenses. As so often now, their community charge payers have to finance high interest rates and high service charges in repaying the debts incurred by Labour-controlled local authorities.
Mr. Gould : What is the Minister's best estimate of the current level of capital receipts? How many houses could be built and how many homeless families rehoused if that money were invested in housing? What saving could be made to the public purse if local authorities were permitted to rehouse homeless families instead of putting them into bed-and -breakfast accommodation? Does the Minister accept that the answers to those questions are of direct, practical and immediate importance to homeless families and to the construction industry? If he cannot give detailed answers now, why not?
Mr. Baldry : I suspect that we should all like to hear the shadow Chancellor answer those questions. The
Column 610
Opposition are in a complete mess on this issue. During the election campaign, the hon. Member for Hammersmith (Mr. Soley) sought to persuade us that the public sector borrowing requirement rules should be relaxed. That was immediately attacked as monstrous by the shadow Chancellor. It is interesting that the shadow Chancellor could not bring himself to sign Labour's amendment to release councils' capital receipts which was on the Order Paper yesterday, although he is confident in signing the amendment today. The truth is that the shadow Chancellor shows a greater responsibility for public finances than does the hon. Member for Dagenham (Mr. Gould).East Thames Corridor
9. Mr. Hunter : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a further statement on his policy regarding development in the east Thames corridor.
Sir George Young : The study into the potential of the east Thames corridor for development and environmental enhancement, commissioned by my right hon. Friend the Member for Henley (Mr. Heseltine) last November, is proceeding and is due to be completed by July. Once the study is completed, I shall need to look carefully at the consultants' findings and consider appropriate action.
Mr. Hunter : As the concept of development in the east Thames corridor has much merit in itself and as it would relieve pressure for development in other parts of the south of England where, arguably, there has been excessive development in the past, will my hon. Friend give a great priority in this Parliament to implementing sensitive development in the east Thames corridor?
Sir George Young : My hon. Friend is right. The east Thames corridor has considerable potential for development, not only for those who live in the area, but for the region as a whole. We see it as a regional resource. One of our priorities will be to develop a coherent strategy for the east Thames corridor, enhancing the environment while releasing opportunities for development and focusing especially on the many derelict and underused sites. If we can do that, it will reduce the pressure on other parts of the region.
Mr. Spearing : Can the Minister confirm that the criteria for the study are other than the criteria delivered some time ago to the London Docklands development corporation? Does not full development also include affordable housing, opportunities for employment, productive industry and integrated public transport, all of which were notably lacking from the notorious Canary wharf scheme? Surely we want something which is other than an enlarged London Docklands development corporation.
Sir George Young : The hon. Gentleman is confusing two entirely different studies. The east Thames corridor study is examining a strategic outline for a whole region. The LDDC, in the study to which the hon. Gentleman refers, was focused much more narrowly on part of east Thames. The scale is different. There will be opportunities in the east Thames corridor for affordable housing, regeneration, employment opportunities and, of course, transport, because the channel tunnel rail link will go
Column 611
through the middle. We are determined to obtain the best possible benefit from that transport link both for those living in the area and for those in the region as a whole.Mr. Jacques Arnold : My hon. Friend will be aware that those of us who represent historic towns and green belt areas in the east Thames corridor are aware of not only the opportunities but the considerable dangers presented by the study. May I draw it to his attention that the borough of Gravesham contains the only remaining piece of green belt southwards from the Thames between the London conurbation and the Medway towns? It has associations with Charles Dickens at Gad's Hill and local residents are determined to maintain it.
Sir George Young : I make it absolutely clear that the terms of reference for the consultants studying the east Thames corridor include the opportunity to enhance the environment in that area for the benefit of local residents. Any concept that the region will be concreted over for development is wholly misguided. We want to improve the environmental quality of the region at the same time as looking at some of the underused sites, especially those which suffer from degradation.
Mr. Gould : Does the Minister accept that taxpayers' money should not be used to bale out a private sector company such as Olympia and York, particularly when the fortunes of that company and of the Government and their Ministers have been so closely linked? Will he assure the House that any deal struck with Olympia and York will be totally transparent and that full disclosure will be made of all the tax benefits, rating reliefs and other sweeteners already made available to that company at the taxpayers' expense?
Sir George Young : Any expenditure by the Government will be subject to the normal scrutiny by the House and the Public Accounts Committee and to all the other institutional opportunities available to Opposition Members. I endorse what my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State said yesterday. Any transaction between the Government and a landlord in the east Thames on behalf of civil servants will be done on the basis of the best value for money.
Empty Council Properties
10. Mr. Riddick : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the 10 councils with the highest number of council properties lying empty.
Mr. Baldry : In the latest housing investment programme returns, the 10 councils reporting the highest percentage of their council house stock empty on 1 April 1991 were Liverpool, Manchester, Salford, Burnley, Brent, Hackney, Tower Hamlets, Knowsley, Newcastle upon Tyne and Wolverhampton.
Mr. Riddick : Is it not the case that most of those authorities are Labour controlled? Is it not also the case that most Labour authorities also have considerable rent arrears? If those Labour local authorities got their act together could we not achieve a massive reduction in the levels of homelessness in Britain?
Mr. Baldry : My hon. Friend is absolutely right. All those authorities were Labour when the figures were prepared. [Interruption.] The facts speak for themselves.
Column 612
Many Labour councils have a disgraceful record in filling up their homes and collecting rents. The Audit Commission has advised that there is no reason why local authorities should not on average turn round empty properties within six weeks in London and three weeks elsewhere. If those targets were achieved it would release an extra 26,000 lettings in a year.Mr. Pike : Does the Minister recognise that the largest percentage of those unused properties in Burnley are deck access properties with special problems? Does he recognise that those problems are included in the Burnley city challenge bid? Will he undertake, if he wants that problem solved, to ensure that Burnley's bid for city challenge is approved, or to ensure that a special allocation is given to Burnley to deal with those properties?
Mr. Colvin : Does my hon. Friend acknowledge that it is not merely councils which have empty properties, and that the waiting lists in England would be halved if the 650,000 empty private properties came on to the market? Can he say what further steps the Government will take, in addition to those that they have already taken, to stimulate the private rented sector?
Mr. Baldry : My hon. Friend makes a good point and that is why the Minister for Housing and Planning and I are talking to the Housing Corporation, with a view to having a housing association in every region, able to act as managing agents for any owner in the private sector who would like their property to be taken over and rented out. Clearly, it would be all to the good if one could take into account more of that unoccupied property. That is why we are taking those steps with the Housing Corporation to find out how much more private property we can bring into active use.
Mr. Bradley : Yet again, the Minister makes an unwarranted attack on Manchester. The latest figures for Manchester show that half the empty properties have been emptied because it won the city challenge and the Government asked it to empty them. Only 1,800 out of 90,000 properties are management voids, which is less than 2 per cent.--a lower percentage than the Government's own Ministry of Defence stock.
Mr. Baldry : I suggest that the hon. Gentleman looks at the figures. According to Manchester's own figures, the city had 6,000 properties empty on 1 April. What is more, Manchester had 3,785 properties vacant for more than six months--more than 4 per cent. of its housing stock was vacant for more than six months--but the hon. Gentleman has the audacity to come to the House with special pleading without explaining why that number of properties should remain vacant for such a long time.
Mr. James Hill : Is my hon. Friend aware that in a small city such as Southampton during the election campaign I mentioned on many occasions that there were 379 empty council units in the city, when the cry from the other side was that the council could not use the capital receipts? I had to deny that, but no one seemed to register the fact in the Labour council. Now, people are aware of homelessness in the city. Those 379 units could wipe out homelessness overnight.
Column 613
Mr. Baldry : My hon. Friend makes a good point. There is no reason, as the Audit Commission has advised, why local authorities such as Southampton should not be able to turn round their void properties within three weeks, if they were effectively managed and efficiently run.
| Next Section
| Home Page |