HC Deb 06 July 1950 vol 477 cc622-5
23. Mr. Russell

asked the Minister of Health whether he has considered representations from local housing authorities regarding the postponement of the operation of the one-in-five ratio until 1951; and what answer he has made.

Mr. Bevan

In answer to the very few communications received from local authorities the position has been explained as in the replies given to Questions asked by the hon. Member on 15th June and by the hon. Member for Solihull (Mr. M. Lindsay) on 25th May.

Mr. Russell

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in answer to Questions by my hon. Friend the Member for Billericay (Mr. Braine) and other of my hon. Friends on 4th May, he gave the impression that this cut was to be restored immediately; and is he further aware that the delay in doing so is causing a great deal of disappointment?

Mr. Bevan

No. The explanation is perfectly simple. Most of the houses in the 1950 programme were in hand before this modification was made. It was, therefore, quite impossible to make it retrospective. It will be made in the case of allocations for 1950-51.

Miss Horsbrugh

Will any local authority which has not yet made arrangements for its full programme be permitted to increase the number of licences?

Mr. Bevan

They ought to have made them by now, and I should be very hurt to hear that a local authority has not made the whole of its allocations for this year. If there is some local authority which has not done so I will certainly have a look at it.

35. Mr. Joynson-Hicks

asked the Minister of Health how many applications he has received from local authorities for permission to issue private building permits in excess of a ratio of one in five of their housing allocation; and how many he has granted.

Mr. Bevan

If, as I assume, the hon. Member has in mind the arrangements which I announced on 4th May, the question has not yet arisen since the allocations for 1951 are only now in course of being decided.

Mr. Joynson-Hicks

Is not the right hon. Gentleman prepared to receive, in exceptional circumstances, applications for additional allocation in 1950?

Mr. Bevan

Obviously not, because if the local authority has been doing its work the 1950 allocations have already been made.

Miss Horsburgh

Did not the right hon. Gentleman, a few minutes ago, say that he would be willing to look into any case where the allocation for 1950 had not been made?

Mr. Bevan

I should be very sorry if there were any.

Mr. Braine

Arising out of the Minister's reply to the supplementary question of my hon. Friend the Member for Chichester (Mr. Joynson-Hicks), is he aware that local housing authorities have been seriously embarrassed in having to explain to applicants for licences, whose hopes were raised, that in his answer to me on 4th May he did not really mean what he said?

Mr. Bevan

The hon. Gentleman is entirely inaccurate. If there is any confusion in the minds of people about this it is probably because of the speeches made by the hon. Members opposite.

Lieut.-Colonel Elliot

Surely the heat shown by the Minister about inaccuracy is entirely unfounded. After all, everyone had the right to assume that when the Minister said something he meant it.

Mr. Bevan

The hon. Gentleman said that when I made a statement I did not mean it. If the right hon. and gallant Gentleman will read the statement I made on that occasion he will realise that there is not the slightest justification for his impudent inference now.

Lieut.-Colonel Elliot

I am about to ask the right hon. Gentleman a question, and may I say, in preface [HON. MEMBERS:"No."] May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he really assumes that all the poor people who had hopes raised by his statement that private building was about to increase would read every one of his statements with a lawyer's meticulous accuracy, which it now appears we must apply to everything he says and by which he will be the very great loser?

Mr. Bevan

It was obvious when the statement was made about the variation of ratios that it was bound to apply to new allocations to be made, and could not be made to apply to allocations already made.

Lieut.-Colonel Elliot

In that case, what becomes of the statement which was made by the right hon. Gentleman to the right hon. Lady the Member for Manchester, Moss Side (Miss Horsbrugh)?

Mr. Bevan

I am quite prepared—and this is quite consistent—where 1950 allocations had not been made—and they ought to have been made long ago—to look into the matter.

Earl Winterton

On a point of order. In view of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has made use of an expletive at Question time, which I always thought was out of order, in which he referred to my right hon. and gallant Friend's question as an impudent one, would it be in order, Sir, to assert that the right hon. Gentleman's general attitude towards the House at Question time is one of gross offensiveness?

Mr. Bevan

Further to that point of order, I did not refer to the right hon. and gallant Gentleman's question as impudent.

Earl Winterton

Yes.

Mr. Bevan

I did not. I referred to the impudent inference in the question; and if hon. Members opposite like to give it, they must take it.

Mr. Braine

Further to that point of order. I have in my hand a copy of HANSARD for 4th May according to which the right hon. Gentleman said that to enable each council to take account of the circumstances in the district he had decided to restore up to one-fifth.

Mr. Speaker

We all seem at the moment to be generating a little more heat than we can contain.

Mr. Joynson-Hicks

In view of the very unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.