§ 44 and 75. Mrs. Middletonasked the Minister of Health (1) whether he will take steps to see that houses being rebuilt or repaired under the War Damage Act, which the owners do not themselves intend to occupy, shall be made available in the first instance to the former tenants of such houses and shall not in any case be sold at inflated prices, but if not required cither by the owner or the former tenant shall be open to requisition by the local authority;
(2) what steps he proposes to take in order to prevent the sale to a third party, at inflated prices, of cost-of-works agreements between the War Damage Commission and the owners of war damaged property, in view of the effect such transactions are having upon the already high costs of house property.
§ Mr. BevanThe legal right of a tenant to return to a house which has been demolished as a result of enemy action and later rebuilt, is governed by the Landlord and Tenant (War Damage) Acts and the Rent and Mortgage Interest (Restrictions) Acts. I cannot express an opinion regarding their interpretation in individual cases. I do not think it would be equitable to differentiate in regard to sale or requisitioning between owners of war destroyed houses and owners of other houses.
§ Mrs. MiddletonIt is difficult to hear, but I would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the tenants of houses which are being repaired after bomb damage are often under very considerable hardship owing to the fact that these houses, instead of being offered to the former tenant, are being sold at very highly inflated prices over their heads?
§ Mr. BevanYes, I daresay, but it would seem to me to be inequitable under the law to differentiate between two owners—one owner who has had a house destroyed and rebuilt and another owner who has not had any destruction at all. It would be a double burden on the owner who has already received injury from enemy action, and I cannot make that differentiation under the law.