HC Deb 07 November 1951 vol 493 cc320-30

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn—"(Mr. Drewe.)

10.2 p.m.

Mr. A. Blenkinsop (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, East)

I should like to commence by congratulating the hon. Member for Wallasey (Mr. Marples) on his appointment to his present office, and I do so with all the more sincerity because in the past we have listened to him and to his speeches on the subject of housing with very great interest. He has indeed, I think, been the only Member from his benches who has had the courage to put forward practical proposals with regard to the housing problem. We are therefore, if anything, rather sorry to find that he has not been appointed to the higher office.

I must confess that I am undertaking a new role this evening. I have, as many hon. Members will know, answered innumerable Adjournment debates in the last few years, and I am commencing tonight in a new role in which I hope for the sympathy of the House for a new boy in introducing this Adjournment debate. But I make no apology in raising what is undoubtedly a very serious matter indeed: that is, the deplorable housing situation in Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

Newcastle-upon-Tyne is a great city, but suffers under the great mishap of having, perhaps, the worst housing administration of any city in the country. I can hardly believe that there can be one worse. Certainly, during the last three years the City of Newcastle-upon-Tyne has succeeded in building fewer houses than, I believe, any city in the country of any comparable size. It is a most deplorable record.

The figures show that in 1949 only some 381 houses were built, and in 1950 even fewer—only 288, for a great city of some 300,000 inhabitants. This is indeed an appalling and shocking matter, and, of course, those completions amount to much less than half the allocations made to the city in those years by the Ministry whose functions and duties the Minister has now taken over.

I am not expecting the Parliamentary Secretary to make any full reply, but I do hope that he will be able to give certain general assurances of the continued anxiety and interest of his Ministry in this very real black spot in the North-East. Every excuse, of course, has been offered by the housing authority concerned. There have been the weather, the lack of materials, lack of labour, lack of land and many others, but all these are problems which concern every authority in the country—certainly every authority in that area of the North-East—and other authorities placed in a similar position are able to do infinitely better than Newcastle, even though they have much smaller populations.

Wild promises have been made by the housing authority. In that respect they share some responsibility with the present Administration. The wild promises about housing of the present Administration compare very closely with the wild promises made by the Newcastle housing authority from time to time, which they have consistently failed to fulfil. The position became so serious that, in the middle of last year, the four hon. Members for the City of Newcastle-upon-Tyne joined together to seek a special conference with the housing authority and it was a fairly heated conference. After it, still very dissatisfied with the situation, those four Members wrote a letter in the public Press outlining their views, their dissatisfaction, and putting forward a series of practical proposals which they felt would be helpful. They were very obvious, simple, practical proposals which, one would have thought, would have been accepted long before. There was nothing new about them they had been pressed by Labour Members from time to time. They had pressed for small builders to be allowed to build, for example, and the desirability of having non-traditional houses, for using vacant sites in the city and the importance of preparing sites for building.

I am glad that, belatedly, some of these proposals have been accepted and, as a result, the figures for building construction are improving slightly in the city. The latest figures I have show that this year some 570 houses have been completed by the local authority. That is to the latest date for which I could get a figure a few days ago. But that is still an appalling figure for a city the size of Newcastle-upon-Tyne and falls seriously short of the allocations made to the city for house building. In addition, it is true that of the houses now under construction some were put under contract more than two years ago. It is a shocking and an appalling situation. No one can possibly suggest that there is any overloading of the programme: it is still considerably under loaded.

We are also concerned with the future problem in Newcastle. There are conflicting reports as to the availability of land for the future. It is certainly likely that very large areas of land will be needed outside the city altogether and I am far from satisfied that the arrangements are being pressed forward sufficiently vigorously to ensure that there will not be a complete stop to all house-building in Newcastle within a short period—within a year or two years at the most—unless some new vigorous action is taken to avoid that situation.

There are hundreds, if not thousands of families in Newcastle-upon-Tyne now living in appalling conditions who, I am quite certain, could have been rehoused by now if the rate of housebuilding of the earlier housing administration in 1947 had been maintained. But that has not happened, and the result is, as I say, that very many of these miserable unhappy families are still waiting in all our four Newcastle constituencies—it is a problem which affects all Newcastle Members—driven desperate by their problem, and, at the same time, knowing that with any vigour and ability their needs could have been met by now. There is no doubt that the responsibility must lie on the incompetence of the housing authority concerned and a series of blunders they have made, to which attention has been repeatedly drawn by the Ministry and others over some years.

The main issue is, in a sense, a political one. I believe, although I do not expect one of the other Newcastle Members, the right hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, North (Major Lloyd George), will agree with me, that a political decision which will have to be taken in May is one about which there is no doubt. But that is not our concern in this House. I believe that something more can be done with the cooperation and help of the Parliamentary Secretary and the Minister.

I hope that it will be possible for all four Members who represent the city, who are all equally concerned about the position, to meet the Parliamentary Secretary or his right hon. Friend to have a fuller discussion about the situation to see what more can be done. I believe that particularly with the further help of the hon. Gentleman's Ministry, which has always been available in the past, more can be done to speed up a decision about the availability of land outside the city boundaries and to secure the co-operation of the county authorities in that matter. Otherwise a most serious position will arise.

The final point I wish to make, and I speak briefly because I am anxious that my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Central (Mr. Short) shall be able to intervene as he has special experience of this position, and bring to the attention of the Parliamentary Secretary, is that no help will be given by any proposal merely to increase the number of houses available for sale. That would not meet the needs of any of the most urgent of the cases I have on my list in my division or, I believe, in the divisions of my hon. Friends.

There are today some 16,000 families awaiting rehousing in Newcastle, at least a thousand more than a year ago, and the position is getting steadily worse owing to the appalling factor of the incompetence of the existing housing authority. I ask the Parliamentary Secretary, as soon as he has a chance, to get together as quickly as possible the reports on the situation—ample facts and figures are there for him, I know—to see what is the best way in which we can all help to overcome the present appalling situation.

10.13 p.m.

Mr. Edward Short (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Central)

This is my first speech in the House of Commons, and I would ask the indulgence of the House for that reason. It is very appropriate that I should utter my first words in this House on this terrible problem in my own division.

I represent what is probably the worst or one of the worst-housed divisions in the country. It is common to find eight or nine people living in one or two rooms. That is very closely linked with the incidence of tuberculosis on Tyneside. The figure for the incidence for tuberculosis in Newcastle is almost twice that for the country as a whole. I feel that that is closely linked with the appalling housing conditions.

I am a member of the City Council of Newcastle, and for the past few years I have been the leader of my party on that body. I have never ceased to urge the housing committee to face up to its responsibilities. The waiting list has actually increased by more than one thousand in the past year, and for the past three years not half of the Government allocation of houses has been built. The record is very much worse than in neighbouring towns. Sunderland, which is smaller, completed 63 houses in January this year Newcastle completed seven.

I should like briefly to mention one or two of the practical problems which I understand are supposed to be holding up housing progress. First of all, there is a shortage of bricklayers. I think that this perhaps is the effect of bad housing progress and not so much the cause of it. Possibly the small amount of building activity in housing in the past few years is responsible for the available supply of bricklayers being largely engaged on other building projects. I would ask the Minister, especially in view of the speech made today by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to see whether it is possible to make available more bricklayers for housing and to cut down on less important building projects in that part of the world.

Second, I understand that heating engineers are held up because there is a tremendous shortage of tubing and galvanised tanks and houses cannot be completed because these two commodities are in short supply. It may be that the Minister can give us some assurance that more will be made available in the North-East. There is a third difficulty which I would ask the Minister to look into. It is that one particular contractor has managed to corner the greater part of the housing contracts in Newcastle. I am convinced that, because of the very bad site organisation of this contractor, considerable delays have been caused. Perhaps the Minister would look into those delays caused by the cornering of contracts by this particular contractor.

Those are not all the problems, but the time is very short. They are the sort of practical problems alleged to be holding up building, in addition to the vital question of land mentioned by my hon. Friend. They are the sort of things I would ask the Minister to investigate. Newcastle is a very important city. It is the hub of the North-East. It is a very big, ancient and famous city, and its people, particularly its engineers, make a very great contribution to the economic well-being of the nation. I am quite certain the Minister will agree that they deserve a much better deal on the question of housing than they are getting at the present time.

10.17 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government (Mr. Ernest Marples)

It is my pleasant duty to congratulate the hon. Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Central (Mr. Edward Short), on his maiden speech, and I do so most sincerely The reason I congratulate him is because he spoke about the most difficult subject we have before us today, which is housing. Secondly, he spoke about his own constituency problems, which I think is always a good thing in a new Member. Most of all I congratulate him because he was constructive and reasonable.

The hon. Member mentioned three points. One was the shortage of bricklayers; second, was the shortage of galvanised tanks; and third was the question of a particular contractor who had cornered the contracts. They were three constructive suggestions. I will go into those three points and write to him subsequently after making the necessary inquiries.

The hon. Member spoke from a practical point of view and he was clear and lucid. I would congratulate him on being, as is were, transferred from local politics—I understand he is a local councillor—into the national sphere; and the House will join with me in the hope that we shall hear a great deal more of his contributions on this vital subject. I, too, am making a maiden speech. I am grateful for the kindly references by the hon. Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, East (Mr. A. Blenkinsop), because, after six-and-a-half years as a Member of the Opposition it is a very strange feeling to be on this side of the House. That strangeness is greatly intensified by being, not only on this side, but being behind a rather formidable Despatch Box.

Mr. David Logan (Liverpool, Scotland Division)

It will be stranger.

Mr. Marples

And it will be longer, too. I appreciate the utterances of the hon. Member who opened this debate, because when he was a Parliamentary Secretary he was distinguished by his lucidity and courtesy. I never remember him being ruffled in any way and he always displayed a phlegmatic calm which I am doubtful if I shall be able to emulate in the months which lie ahead.

I entered into office on Monday, 5th November. It is now Wednesday, 7th November, and even my most ardent political opponent could scarcely say a great deal of time had elapsed. I have been there three days, and the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends were there for six-and-a-half years. Therefore, must resist the temptation to dwell on that aspect of it, because it would be a rather controversial speech if I did. For the hon. Gentleman to say that the local authority was a most incompetent authority and that it had built fewer houses this year than it had done previously was not a comment he ought to have made after being in this office. I would point out to him that in 1951 there will be fewer houses built than in any year since 1947, and that that in itself will be reflected in the local authorities all over the country.

Newcastle is a city which has a special problem because of its land, and I grant that point to the hon. Member. There are 15,000 people on the housing list, 9,100 of whom are without separate houses. If I do not dwell on the inconvenience and tragedy of that it is not because I have a lack of sympathy. It is because I want to deal with the special point that the hon. Member mentioned—the question of land. He asked for an assurance about land and said he was far from satisfied that building could continue in a few years' time. His assumption is that there will be no land available.

A preliminary survey has been made and given to me. but I have not had time to check it. That preliminary survey shows that within Newcastle there arc 219 acres of land which were not taken up in 1950–51 and that, in addition, there are 205 acres, making 424 acres altogether within the city boundaries. At 10 houses per acre that will be sufficient to cover the next three or four years' housing allocation even if the city builds up to it. So the problem is not for the immediate future but one which will have to be faced after the next three or four years.

Mr. Blenkinsop

I know the hon. Gentleman's difficulties, but a very large part of that land has been sterilised, as it were, by virtue of the large and complicated scheme for block flat building which, if proceeded with, would make the possibility of ordinary housing development in the city very doubtful.

Mr. Marples

I have dealt with the land inside the city. Newcastle has the disadvantage of having to go outside its boundaries to get more land and I should like to deal now with land outside the city boundaries. We find that there they have enough land to build 1,200 houses a year—which has been their allocation under the Administration in which the hon. Member himself served—for the next 10 years. That includes 230 acres which they now have paid for and owned and upon which they can build.

Therefore, the question of land is not a short-term problem so much as a long-term one. In that connection there is to be a meeting on 16th November of the principal regional officer of the Ministry of Housing and Local Government with the representatives of the City Council, the Northumberland County Council, the Newburn Urban District Council and various other urban and rural district councils. I think we ought to give that meeting a chance of coming to an amicable settlement after what I hope will be agreeable conversations.

Mr. Ernest Popplewell (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, West)

Would the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that this talk of discussion about additional land for Newcastle has now been proceeding for approaching three years and no finality has been reached?

Mr. Marples

All I hope, after three days, is that we shall have better results than had my predecessor who raised the matter in the House tonight. The hon. Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, West (Mr. Popplewell), can rest assured that our efforts will be directed to that end. I can only hope they obtain more success than has been obtained by previous Administrations.

We ought to give this meeting a chance: let us see what happens at the meeting. I will accept the hon. Gentleman's invitation, and I will be delighted to meet the four Members for Newcastle after the meeting has been concluded. We shall see what arrangements are arrived at at that meeting. In all these affairs in a democratically elected local authority it is much better if agreement can be arrived at in a friendly way rather than by using compulsion, and I hope hon. Members opposite will not bandy charges of incompetence against local authorities, because that is not the right way to get agreement.

After saying that that is the hope of the Ministry, may I issue a warning? It may sound obvious, but after the remark of the right hon. Member for Ipswich (Mr. Stokes), about oil being of no use in the ground, I feel fortified in making an obvious remark, namely that the Newcastle City Council ought to be careful about the sewerage question, because if this land is likely to be needed in 1954 discussions about sewerage schemes should start now. That is a practical point which I hope the hon. Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Central, who made his maiden speech, will bear in mind during his discussions with the local authorities. In all these sewerage schemes it is necessary to start early because of shortage of steel and cast iron goods. Therefore, I hope that this meeting which is discussing arrangements for the land will deal with the question of sewerage, and if it does not the principal officer will remind them.

The hon. Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, East, thought that private building licences would not solve the problem and so forth. I may be wrong, but I thought he was angling for something about the general policy which will be adopted by this administration. [An HON. MEMBER: "Hear, hear.] An hon. Gentleman says "Hear, hear," but surely the hon. Gentleman would not expect me to do it after three days, because the brightest star in his party wanted at least 14 days in 1945. It would not be right to invite a junior Minister to handle general policy, and for my part it would be very stupid and highly improper if I were to anticipate the Minister's announcement which will be made in due course.

In principle, the Ministry exists to guide and shape the housing policy and to help local authorities. It has a very sympathetic and able Minister, and he has assured me today that he will do everything in his power to display a friendly spirit and a desire to help local authorities. If the hon. Gentleman has any specific point which he cares to write in about and will give a little more notice than he has done on this occasion we shall be most grateful.

I think the primary responsibility in Newcastle for improving the past record must, to a large extent, rest with the local authority and the contractors. But it may be that the paper allocations which the Ministry have given have not been matched up by availability of materials and labour. That has been so in some cases, and it may be so in this case. If I have more time to go into it I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall look at this sympathetically and, I trust, more hopefully and more successfully than my predecessors in this office.

Question put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-nine Minutes past Ten o'Clock.