HC Deb 10 May 1951 vol 487 cc2299-300

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

11.10 p.m.

Mr. Edward Heath (Bexley)

The subject I wish to raise tonight is what is known in the technical jargon of the town and country planners as the "overspill of population." This is a problem which arises when you have a long housing list in a borough and room to build only a small number of new houses. That is the position in Bexley at the moment. It is also the position in many surrounding local authorities in north-west Kent—Beckenham, Bromley, Chislehurst and Sidcup, Crayford, Erith, and Penge. It is a problem of particular interest to local authorities not only in north-west Kent, but in north London and many other parts of the country.

The reason I am raising this subject is that in the division I represent many of my constituents are realising that there is little possibility of their being rehoused or given housing accommodation within their own borough, and therefore they are extremely anxious to know where they are going to be able to find new homes. May I put the position on the housing list? I hope my figures will agree broadly with any figures the Parliamentary Secretary may have. It is difficult to get complete accuracy, but if we work on broad lines I think we shall be able to agree.

On the last count there were 5,000 applicants for houses. We have to take into consideration also some 350 families in requisitioned property to whom the council recognise a responsibility, together with approximately 150 families living in hutments which must in time be cleared; they were built as prefabricated houses in the first world war. That gives a total of approximately 5,500 people. But that list does not include any who have not got a residential qualification before 1936, so it is really looking at the problem in its minimum scale. The total number who can be provided for, taking those under construction at the moment and the room which remains for new development, is approximately 1,500. That leaves a surplus of families who cannot be housed in their own borough—the overspill—of some 4,000. At one time the Minister calculated that the number was approximately 3,000. I shall not differ with him over that number, which was a very general calculation. Let us say the number is approximately 3,000 to 4,000.

Now I turn to the building position. Apart from those under construction, there is room for another 950 houses. That will involve the clearance of the hutments I have mentioned. It is therefore a pressing problem; if you have only room to build another 950 houses the problem becomes an immediate one. In 1950 the borough council built right up to its quota. In addition, the Minister was very co-operative and gave us an additional quota of some 130 houses, with a proportionate number of private licences.

The programme for 1951 is already well ahead, and it is hoped that the Minister will be equally co-operative this year in extending the quota as a reward for the efficiency of the local authority. That means that if progress is continued at that rate, within three to four years the area will be built up, and I think the Minister will agree that it means a pressing problem for the local authority.

Notice taken that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members not being present, the House was adjourned at Seventeen Minutes past Eleven o'Clock till Tomorrow.