HC Deb 20 October 1949 vol 468 cc878-90

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. G. Wallace.]

9.50 p.m.

Mr. Willis (Edinburgh, North)

During both the Debates we have held today the problem of the housing situation in Scotland has been stressed, first, as it affects juvenile delinquency and, second, in its relation to the alarming increase in tuberculosis in our country. I am, therefore, glad to have this opportunity of raising once again the question of housing in Edinburgh. In spite of all the efforts of the Government—and I fully appreciate what they have done, particularly in comparison with the efforts of previous Governments—this problem is still the most important for thousands of people in my division and for many more thousands in the City of Edinburgh as a whole.

The desperate plight of the homeless and the wastage of human life in the squalid areas of our large towns constitute a challenge which we cannot afford to neglect. Moreover, the increase in tuberculosis in Scotland intensifies that challenge. About an hour ago I received a letter from a Minister of the Church in Scotland saying that one of his parishioners had died last week from pulmonary tuberculosis, at her home. She was one of a family of five, four members of which were living permanently at home in a house of two rooms, with an outside communal lavatory. The oldest son and the father had to sleep in one room and the mother and daughter of 13 had to sleep with the daughter, who has since died. These tragic cases are only too frequent today.

Against that background I have been alarmed at the recent trend of housing activities in Edinburgh itself, and also at the allocation of houses for Edinburgh next year. During the past 18 months the total number of houses, permanent and temporary, completed per month has fallen and the number of men engaged in house building has drastically decreased. These are facts which we cannot afford to ignore. Last year, in Edinburgh, there were completed about 2,800, temporary and permanent houses. This year the monthly figures have fallen from 205 at the beginning of the year to 135 for the last month for which the figures have been published. So far as I can see we shall only complete about 1,500 houses this year. That is a drop of almost a half. What is even more alarming is that the allocation for next year is even lower—1,200, which is quite inadequate for the needs of Edinburgh.

Mr. Henderson Stewart (Fife, East)

Temporary and permanent?

Mr. Willis

The temporary programme has finished.

The problem, thanks to the failure of Members opposite to see that we got our share of houses between the wars, is much too big and too urgent to be dealt with in this fashion. We have in Edinburgh a live waiting list of over 15,000 families. How can we expect these men and women, who must altogether number some 30,000, to give of their best at the present time, when it is essential in the nation's interests that everyone gives of his or her best, if we can only say to them, "You cannot get a decent home for four, five, 10, 11 or even 12 years"?

Some of these people, who are waiting in Edinburgh for houses, cannot expect them before 12 years have elapsed. During that time, of course, they will have to watch the tragedy going on, of which we are familiar, of the conditions in which they live getting worse, the lives of their children being wasted, and these children being taken over and over again to hospital, because they cannot be removed to somewhere where it is more healthy to live. How can we expect men to increase their production, which we are asking them to do and which, in fact, we must do, if they are left in conditions in which they cannot even hope to sleep and rest decently and under which they have to witness this tragic procession of events year after year? In Edinburgh according to the survey taken in 1946 over 50,000 new houses are required.

Lieut.-Commander Clark Hutchison (Edinburgh, West)

I do not know where the hon. Gentleman got the figure of 50,000 houses, but the City Treasurer has said that the figure required is 30,000 to 35,000.

Mr. Willis

As a matter of fact, I was given this figure by one of the officials of the Edinburgh Corporation two or three days ago. I am giving it in good faith, and whether it is 30,000 or 50,000 it is still considered.

When we realise the enormous job to be done, the inadequacy of this allocation for next year becomes even more pronounced. I fully realise the difficulties, which my hon. Friend is up against today. But in spite of those difficulties I want to press upon them with all the earnestness that I can the necessity to give this matter further consideration. It seems to me that it is most unwise to try to deal with this problem in this fashion, because in the long run it costs us more in health, more for police, prisons, and reformatories. It seems to me that one of the best ways in which we can eventually save money over a long period of time is to tackle this problem much more vigorously.

As housing progress declined, so have the number of men engaged on site preparation and house erection in Edinburgh fallen. In March, 1948, there were 2,331 men employed in the building of houses and in site preparation in Edinburgh. By 14th September this year the number had fallen to 876, or one-third of the number formally engaged. Even when we exclude those who were formerly engaged on the building of temporary houses and those on the preparation of sites, the number engaged in the actual erection of permanent houses has fallen during the same period from 1,087 to 769. That drop is, of course, very serious.

Commander Galbraith (Glasgow, Pollok)

The hon. Gentleman said, perhaps inadvertently, that it was a fall in the number of men engaged in the erection of temporary houses. Did he mean to say that?

It being Ten o'Clock, the Motion for the Adjournment lapsed without Question put.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. R. Adams.]

Mr. Willis

We must recognise that, 18 months ago, a certain number of men were engaged in the erection of temporary houses, and that that programme has come to an end. The first figure I gave included the number of men engaged on temporary houses, but what I am now concerned about is the number of men engaged in the erection of permanent houses. It has fallen from 1,087 to 769 in the past 18 months. That fall is undoubtedly very serious and I understand that it has already created difficulties and that those concerned with the building of houses in Edinburgh cannot get more bricklayers, plasterers and joiners. There was a plentiful supply of bricklayers a short time ago, but that is not the position today.

When the financial limit for work to be done without licence was raised to £1,000, I raised the question whether or not that alteration would have an effect upon the labour available for the building of houses. It now appears, so far as I am able to judge, that the fear I expressed at that time has been realised. It is understandable. Jobbing work is more profitable for the employer, and for the worker also, in that industry. I think that what has happened in Edinburgh is that the very large section of the building trade which is comprised of small building firms is now not available for the building of houses. Previously this available labour had been organised in the form of a building group and did build some 400 houses. Today that labour is not available. I want to ask my right hon. Friend whether he does not think that the time has now arrived when the limit of £1,000 should be reviewed. If it is operating in the manner which I suggest, should it not be revised?

I should like to put many more points about Edinburgh housing but I shall raise a point of a more general character before I conclude. During the past two or three months I have been going around houses in my constituency, and I have become increasingly impressed with the ignorance of people concerning their rights. I have come across people living in properties for which they were paying rent and for which, in my opinion, under the common law of Scotland, they should not have been paying rent at all. In fact, in a certain case, I have had the rent returned. I have also come across people who knew nothing about their rights as tenants. That was particularly the case with people living in furnished or unfurnished rooms. In the past few years we have passed most complicated legislation in order to protect tenants and to clarify the position of landlords, but we have not done sufficient to ensure that people know their rights.

We had the experience lately in the Ministry of Pensions of men who were entitled to grants, weekly payments, from the Government, and did not know of their entitlement until the Minister sent them a letter asking whether they were sure they were getting all they were entitled to. Since the Minister sent out that letter, tens of thousands of people have claimed benefits and are now receiving them. In the case of tenants' rights, or, for that matter, landlords' rights, where the legislation is far more complicated, my right hon. Friend ought to do something to enable people to appreciate exactly their position. Many of them are frightened because they know they have nowhere else to go. The duty of Parliament, it seems to me, is not simply to pass legislation to protect individuals but also to see that people are fully informed to the greatest possible extent by the Government so that they can reap the benefit of that legislation. I have raised this matter before and I know that the Scottish Department publishes a small book giving some of this information. I expect it is now out of date. I have never found anybody who possessed a copy of it.

I hope that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will give this matter serious consideration. It was found possible during the war to inform soldiers and their wives of their position in regard to certain matters. Surely we can find better methods of doing the same in this very important matter, because it will become increasingly important. If the announcement to be made on Monday has the effect of delaying housing to any extent—I sincerely hope it will not it would probably be wrong if it did—this question will be increasingly important. If my hon. Friend can do anything about the matters I have raised tonight he will be doing something which-will at least lighten the burden of thousands of people in the City of Edinburgh.

10.7 p.m.

Lieut.-Commander Clark Hutchison (Edinburgh, West)

I am in agreement with some of the points made by the hon. Member for North Edinburgh (Mr. Willis). I am distressed at the size of the allocation of new houses for the City of Edinburgh. I feel that it should be greater. I am very distressed indeed at the long waiting list of applicants for houses. Somehow or other it never seems to grow any less. One can undoubtedly see houses rising, but more and more applications for them keep coming in.

Before the war we were going ahead pretty well with the building of houses in Edinburgh. I was on the town council, representing a ward which is now part of the constituency of the hon. Member for North Edinburgh. If my memory is not at fault, I recollect being told officially in 1939 that, at the then rate of building, within five years we would complete what was then called the slum clearance and overcrowding campaign. The war intervened and the housing programme came practically to a standstill. I do not admit for a moment that the rate of building in the City of Edinburgh before the war was anything about which the Opposition or the Corporation of Edinburgh need feel any shame. It was going ahead well in comparison with other places.

I was interested in the figure of 50,000 houses mentioned by the hon. Member for North Edinburgh, and I was shocked by it, because it is a higher estimate than I have ever heard before. The last official statement I recollect was the announcement about nine months ago by the City Treasurer that 30,000 to 35,000 new houses were required, and that is a big enough order in all conscience. I am appalled to think that the position is so bad that the figure has now risen to 50,000.

Mr. Willis

As I said in my speech, believe that that was the figure given recently. I did not have the survey which was published and I could not check it.

Lieut.-Commander Hutchison

I hope that it is not correct for it will mean that the problem ahead will be very serious indeed. I have heard that one of the reasons for delay is what might be called administrative bottlenecks at St. Andrew's House. I know that that is not unusual for over-centralisation to be blamed, and I should like to hear the Under-Secretary on this point that there are unnecessary delays over licences at St. Andrew's House.

Another matter which arises continually is the increasing occupation of the large buildings in the western part of the city for Government and public offices. That is always a bone of contention between the Town Council of Edinburgh and the Department of Health. I understood that there had been some gentleman's agreement as to the zone in which Government offices might spread within the City and beyond that they should not advance. I should like to know what the position is now, because I have been hearing that there have been encroachments upon dwelling houses beyond the zone which had been earmarked.

One other point is the quality of certain of the new permanent houses. I have been down to visit one or two of the houses in question because I have had complaints that the substitute used for timber for flooring is not satisfactory. The occupants of the houses seem to think it leads to dampness through condensation. Unfortunately I am not a builder, equipped with the necessary technical knowledge, but I know that in the Pilton area there have been a number of complaints about the quality of the new buildings and that part of the fault is attributed to the lack of timber. In some cases the floors are not regular, with the result that there is a certain lumpiness which is not attractive and gives an unfortunate impression. I would ask the Under Secretary to comment on that point.

10.12 p.m.

The Joint Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. J. J. Robertson)

It is particularly appropriate that at the end of a long day's Debate on Scottish matters we should come to discuss this important question of Scottish housing. With regard to Edinburgh, there was a survey carried out in the early part of this year in which it was indicated that 20,000 houses were needed to combat overcrowding and subletting. It was further estimated that another 30,000 houses might be required to replace sub-standard accommodation. That would make a total of 50,000.

Lieut.-Commander Hutchison

Was that a Department of Health survey?

Mr. Robertson

No, it was a city survey. I think it would be wise, however, if we looked at the pre-war work of the City of Edinburgh in regard to housing. The corporation produced 14,694 houses during the 20 years between the wars. That was an average of 700 per annum. Now during the period since 1945 the corporation has built altogether in temporary and permanent houses 6,466, or an average of over 1,360 houses per year, which is nearly twice as many as the pre-war average built by the corporation.

Lieut.-Commander Hutchison

Is it not a fact that before the war something like more than 3,000 houses per annum were being erected in the City of Edinburgh.

Mr. Robertson

I am coming to that. I am dealing now with the work of the corporation. In addition to the new houses requisitioning and Service camps have provided accommodation for 1,493 families, so that during a little over four years accommodation has been provided in Edinburgh for some 8,000 families.

Mr. Willis

Does that include the additional number provided by the subdivision of larger houses?

Mr. Robertson

No. The sub-division of larger houses has been carried out largely by private enterprise. I will give the figures because they are important. Before the war private enterprise built a large number of houses in Edinburgh—22,908 altogether—and since 1945 private enterprise has built 587 houses for owner occupiers, or about one in five of the total built, which is comparable to what has been done in England and Wales.

Lieut.-Commander Hutchison

Is it not a fact that private enterprise is not permitted, except under very restricted licence, to build houses for owner-occupiers?

Mr. Robertson

That system has been operating, of course, since 1947, but despite that, up to September of this year, private enterprise has been able to build a ratio of one in five.

In conversions, carried out largely by private enterprise, 1,076 homes have been provided. This makes a grand total of 9,000 families rehoused in Edinburgh since 1945. Let me relate that figure to the total number of houses built in Scotland during the period under review. The total number of families accommodated is slightly over 100,000. With Edinburgh's population of rather less than one-tenth of the total population of Scotland, slightly under one-tenth of the total accommodation which has been provided, has been provided for families in Edinburgh. Edinburgh, therefore, has not been lacking in civic responsibility and has had, on the whole, not an unfair share of the total building throughout Scotland on a population basis.

I want to refer to the allocations for 1950. Edinburgh Corporation have been allocated 1,200 houses for general needs, all of which are to be brought under construction before this time next year. Of these, 541 have been authorised to be started this year. We took that step because we saw that Edinburgh was beginning to run down on its number of houses under construction. Despite the fact that these houses were part of the 1950 programme, we arranged that Edinburgh could start their building in the current quarter. In addition, we have offered the city of Edinburgh 150 houses for the special miners' programme. I understand that the corporation are now considering this proposal. The arrangement is that 50 per cent. of these 150 houses would be for miners who are citizens of Edinburgh and the remaining half for miners in the Lothian coalfields wishing to reside in the city.

With regard to allocations of houses for Edinburgh compared with other cities in Scotland, Glasgow in the 1950 allocations, with a population of almost three times the population of Edinburgh, has had an allocation of 1,500 and, in addition, 350 from the Scottish Special Housing Association. Edinburgh's allocation is at present 1,200. Aberdeen, with a population of just over 180,000, has 300 houses allocated and Dundee, with a population of just over 180,000, has 380 houses allocated. It will be seen, therefore, that Edinburgh has received a relatively higher allocation than the other cities and I wish to explain the reason.

In fixing the allocation for 1950 regard was had to the fact that Edinburgh has pursued a policy of restraint in the matter of inviting tenders during the period since the end of the war and, in consequence, we considered it was fair that Edinburgh should have a relatively higher allocation for 1950 than the other cities. Regard was also had to the speed with which Edinburgh was able to build the houses and to the number she had under construction. Edinburgh has now about 1,000 houses under construction and has 102 houses approved but not yet begun.

We shall watch the position very carefully. It has to be watched very carefully because we do not desire to get into difficulties by overbalancing the housing programme generally in Scotland and giving the building industry more than they can carry out. We have just emerged from that and are not anxious to get back to it. We shall watch the position carefully and if the Edinburgh City Council, with its very active housing committee, can persuade the builders to build houses faster than they are doing and if the material and labour are there—which are also tremendously important—we shall look very favourably on any approach the Corporation may make during the course of 1950 to see whether we can add to the numbers we have already allocated.

This is not the last word. It may be that if there are in Scotland certain local authorities which have been given allocations which they cannot complete for some reason or other—perhaps siting difficulties or something of that nature—if Edinburgh is very eager and has the available labour and sites ready she may stand to benefit, as in the past, by getting houses with which other local authorities were not able to proceed.

Mr. Henderson Stewart

Does that apply—subject to those two conditions, that they get on with the job quickly enough and that there is sufficient labour and material—to other parts of Scotland, particularly the rural parts?

Mr. Robertson

I do not think we can upset the allocations made because they have been very carefully worked out and we have every reason to believe that most local authorities will be able to fulfil obligations during the course of 1950, but I am thinking of one or two local authorities which are having difficulty in getting sites ready in time and, as we are most anxious to get on with the housing programme over the whole of Scotland, we are not going to wait on slow-moving authorities getting sites ready. If they have not the sites ready it may be necessary to take some of the houses away from these slow-moving authorities and to give them to other local authorities. Certainly that does not apply specially to Edinburgh; it will apply to other local authorities also.

My hon. Friend the Member for North Edinburgh (Mr. Willis) mentioned there had been a rather alarming fall in the labour force in Edinburgh. It is perfectly true. Edinburgh had a large number of temporary houses which were only completed last year, and when they were completed there was a migration of that labour force out to the Lothians to build houses for miners and agricultural workers. In some respects it was a very good thing that we were able to get that labour diverted from the cities out to the areas which were probably rather less attractive for building workers so as to get on with the agricultural programme and the programme for the miners. We need more building labour in the country areas to meet the clamant need of houses for agricultural workers.

Mr. William Ross (Kilmarnock)

Can my hon. Friend give us any figures to show us whether or not the fall was entirely due to that or to what extent it was due to the extension of jobbing work?

Mr. Robertson

I can give figures for the whole of Scotland but I have not figures for Edinburgh alone. The figures for the whole of Scotland show that by the end of October, 1948, we had 31,200 building operatives employed on new housing. By the end of August, 1949, there were 25,700 so employed, a drop of 5,500 during the period. Much of that was labour coming off site preparation but during that time there was a relative drop in the number of houses under construction. That does not mean that the housing programme was put out of balance. Indeed we brought it into balance. There has been a rapid speedup of the completion of houses during this period. Indeed Scotland has built more permanent new houses this year than was done in the whole of 1948. The drop in the building force is relative to the drop in the number of houses under construction, which has actually given us a higher number of completions.

I do not know that I can say much more about that except in relation to the point which was made about unlicensed building up to £1,000. We are carefully watching that matter, and recently at a meeting with the builders in Glasgow I mentioned the alarm felt at the reduction in the building force and at the large number of people employed on conversions and repair work. I indicated that we were looking at the matter very carefully and we might have to consider whether it would be necessary to carry forward the provision of a licence being required for building up to £1,000.

In regard to the final point relating to the advice which the Department might be able to give to people who come within the terms of the Rent Restrictions Act, it is no part of the Department's duty to give legal advice. We will however consider the point, which is a very valuable one. I will ask my right hon. Friend to suggest to the B.B.C. that something might perhaps be done in that way to familiarise people with their rights as tenants under the Rent Restrictions Act.

As I say, the position in Edinburgh will be carefully watched. The Edinburgh Corporation have had a very good record during the period since the end of the war, and if it is possible to induce the builders to build more speedily in Edinburgh we shall certainly do what we can to help them on with their work. We know of course that parts of Edinburgh constitute some of the black spots which need attention, just as do parts of Glasgow and the other cities. Because of that my right hon. Friend and those of us concerned with this great problem of Scottish housing do—

The Question having been proposed at Ten o'Clock and the Debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at Half past Ten o'Clock.