§ 40. Mr. Silvermanasked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that under existing legislation protected tenants bear the burden of any increase of rates but do not benefit by any reduction of rates; and whether he will introduce amending legislation?
§ Mr. E. BrownI am advised that the landlord of a controlled house who has increased the standard rent under Section 2 of the Rent and Mortgage Interest Restrictions Act, 1920, to meet an increase of rates, is legally obliged, should that rate increase be subsequently reduced, to make a corresponding reduction in the rent. If my hon. Friend is suggesting that the standard rent itself should be decreased whenever the amount of rates payable falls below the amount payable on 1st September, 1939, I would point out that an amendment of the Rent Acts, which would involve a fundamental alteration in the principle of rent restriction, namely, the laying down of a fixed standard subject to certain denned permitted increases, would be necessary. As at present advised I do not consider that such a fundamental alteration is called for.
§ Mr. SilvermanDoes not my right hon. Friend realise that since September of last year the Treasury has borne an ever-increasing share of local expenditure caused by the war effort, that as a result rates all over the country have been reduced, and that unless this amending legislation is introduced the whole advantage arising from the State taking over that financial liability will go into the pockets of slum landlords?
§ Mr. BrownI do not wish to express any opinion on that, but I would point out that the tenants of houses brought into control by the Act of 1939 would not, but for the passing of that Act, be protected at all.