HC Deb 16 December 1952 vol 509 cc1199-204

The following Questions stood upon the Order Paper:

104. Mr. STEWARD: To ask the Minister of Housing and Local Government when it is his intention to revert to pre-war practice and allow all those able and willing to get on with the building of houses for the people.

120. Mr. GOWER: To ask the Minister of Housing and Local Government what steps he will take to increase the volume of the building of houses for private purchasers.

124. Mr. MCADDEN: To ask the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether, in view of the increase in the number of houses built by local authorities for letting, he will consider relaxing the present system of licensing.

128. Mr. HARMAR NICHOLLS: To ask the Minister of Housing and Local Government if it is his intention to stimulate the building of houses for sale.

The Minister of Housing and Local Government (Mr. Harold Macmillan)

With permission I will answer Questions Nos. 104, 120, 124 and 128.

The success of the Government's housing policy in terms of houses completed, started, and under construction in 1952, makes possible a further step forward. The Government have always been anxious for private enterprise to supplement and support building by the local authorities. Accordingly, from 1st January, 1953, it is intended to allow any individual to build a house subject to planning permission and byelaw consent so long as it is of not more than 1,000 square feet and does not consume more than the appropriate quantity of softwood timber.

Subject to the same conditions, builders will be permitted to build up to 12 houses at a time. Local authorities are being asked to issue licences automatically to both these classes of applicant. Arrangements are being made, through the regional officers, to secure that the flow of private house-building does not prejudice the claim of houses for letting on the labour and materials available.

Mr. Woodburn

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman two questions? The first is whether he is also speaking for the Secretary of State for Scotland. Secondly, is the real reason for the statement that he has made the fact that in some districts 90 per cent. of the licences issued for private house-building have been returned?

Mr. Macmillan

Apart from the question of conditions in Scotland—as the right hon. Gentleman knows they are not precisely the same—broadly speaking, there will be the same situation in Scotland, and the Scottish Office are represented and will make a statement if required. In regard to his second question, the figure which the right hon. Gentleman gave is not correct. The reason we are making this step forward is that the building of houses for letting has so far exceeded anticipations and the provision for the future that we are able to make this addition today.

Mr. Steward

Will my right hon. Friend give the House an estimate for the United Kingdom for the current year of the number of houses built for letting and sale respectively?

Mr. Macmillan

We have, of course, only reached 11 months, but I think that on the basis of the 11 months the completions for this year will probably be of the order of 235,000 against 195,000 in 1951. With regard to houses for letting, I hope that there will be built something of the order of 202,000, that is, an increase of 29,000 over the year 1951.

Mr. Stokes

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the figure which he has mentioned—235,000—was precisely the figure which my right hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan) and myself calculated we could build in 1952?

Mr. Macmillan

Then I wish I could confidently ask the right hon. Gentleman to share my pleasure.

Mr. Gower

While thanking the Minister for this dynamic news, may I ask whether he could give an estimate of the number of houses which are actually now under construction and the comparable figure for this time last year?

Mr. Macmillan

At the moment there are about 275,000 houses under construction and therefore hon. Members will perhaps draw their own conclusions as to the likelihood of our having a good result next year if the weather is not too unfavourable.

Miss Lee

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in my constituency, which is a typical industrial constituency, not a single citizen whose needs were anything like justified was prevented from building a house under the four-to-one rule? Is he aware that the statement he has made constitutes a backward and not a forward step, because it once more asserts the Tory policy that hard-working miners and agricultural workers must stand back while people whose needs are less urgent are served?

Mr. Macmillan

I am sorry that good news causes such trouble. If the hon. Lady is right in saying that nobody wishes to build a house on private account in her constituency, then, of course, she and her constituents will be neither injured nor helped by my statement.

Miss Lee

On a point of order. I think that I made a plain statement regarding constituents of mine who have built private houses for themselves. I did not say that they had been prevented from doing so. I said that they had been able to build under the four-to-one rule. It is quite unworthy of the Minister to try to dodge the essential part of my statement, which was that hard-working miners and agricultural workers and those who cannot afford to buy houses are being pushed back.

Mr. Macmillan

I am sorry. I had no intention of misrepresenting the hon. Lady—[HON. MEMBERS: "You did."]—because her argument supported me. She said that everybody who wanted to build a house in her constituency could have done so under the one-to-four rule. We have had the one-to-four rule, the one-to-one rule and now we have the complete freedom rule, so exactly the same conditions exist. But what is new is that we shall build 30,000 more houses to let this year than were built by the last Administration, and next year we shall build another 30,000 on top of that.

Mr. H. Morrison

Despite this excited atmosphere of jubilation, may I put this consideration to the right hon. Gentleman? Are we to understand that there is now complete freedom for local authorities or private enterprise to build as many houses as they like? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this may well damage the quota of houses that can be built by local authorities for letting, and secondly, is this lifting of all control on house building something which may prejudice the building of factories which are vital for our economic recovery and the building and repairing of hospitals and schools?

Mr. Macmillan

These are very fair points, and it is a little difficult in a short reply to deal with all of them. It is not proposed to abolish the licensing system. It is proposed to keep the licensing system, because we must control timber and other precious materials. What we propose to do is to exercise control through the regional system as, indeed, I have done during this year. We have abandoned broadly the yearly allocation. We have worked on an instalment to each region according to the labour and materials available. Through that system we shall be able to protect to the full the council programme upon which we must rely for by far the greatest proportion of the contribution. We shall see that the licensing of the private flow is kept in such a way that each region will work harmoniously within the general plan.

Mr. Morrison

But did not the right hon. Gentleman refer to the automatic granting of licences, and, in view of what he has just said, may we take it that a local authority is free to build as many houses as it likes and attract the appropriate Government grant?

Mr. Macmillan

No, Sir. As I said, it is difficult to answer this in a short statement, but the last sentence of my reply was that these arrangements are being made through the regional officers to insure that the flow of private house building does not prejudice the claim on labour and materials available for the construction of houses for letting. [HON. MEMBERS: "How?"] I think it will be found we shall do that all right.

Captain Duncan

In view of the statement of my right hon. Friend about England and Wales and the fact that he said a statement would be made, if necessary, about Scotland. will you, Mr. Speaker, allow my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland to make a statement dealing with the question in Scotland?

Mr. Speaker

I have had no notice of such a statement.

Mr. H. Nicholls

Is the Minister aware that all who wish to help in meeting the housing shortage will find his announcement both helpful and timely? To meet any misapprehension, can he tell us in more detail what will be the position of houses of more than 1,000 square feet?

Mr. Macmillan

Applications for licences to build houses between 1,000 and 1,500 square feet will be considered on their merits by the local authority.

Mr. Bottomley

Is the Minister aware that the Economic Commission for Europe stated that the United Kingdom Government are only building more houses at the expense of factories, schools and hospitals; and that brings misery to millions of people?

Mr. Macmillan

Although I was a very early member of the European Movement, I am the responsible Minister in the British Government for housing and I do not accept all the statements that are made by commissions which represent not only Western Europe but Europe from the other side of the Iron Curtain.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

Further to the point of order submitted by the hon. and gallant Member for Angus, South (Captain Duncan), and in view of the fact that the Minister said that the Secretary of State for Scotland could tell us the position in Scotland, are we not entitled to hear a statement from the Secretary of State for Scotland on this matter?

The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. James Stuart)

To clear up any misunderstanding, may I say that a statement was issued in Scotland on 29th September dealing with this very matter? I have no statement to make at the moment, because I do not see any necessity to be dragged along by the coat tails by England.

Mr. Rankin

Further to the point of order raised by my hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes)—

Mr. Speaker

That was not a point of order.

Mr. Rankin

Then this is a new point of order.

Mr. Speaker

The question raised by the hon. Member for South Ayrshire was not a point of order.

Mr. Rankin

May I raise a point of order? We have heard from the Secretary of State for Scotland that because a statement was issued to the Press on a certain date, that enables him to evade his duties as a responsible Minister in this House. I want to know whether that action is in order?

Mr. Speaker

It is in order.

Captain Pilkington

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that in none of the comments or questions which we have had from the other side of the House today has there been one word of congratulation upon this great progress?

Mr. H. Morrison

I am sorry that my rising should cause the Prime Minister to sit there with a most unpleasant expression on his face. I am glad it is improving. I have caused him to smile, which is all to the good. May I ask the Leader of the House whether, in view of the importance of the statement that has been made by the Minister of Housing and Local Government and the fact that he was less fluent when he got to some of the later questions than he was earlier on, and in view of the possible disastrous consequences of this new policy to slum clearance and the bombed areas, he will be good enough to postpone the Committee stage of the Transport Bill, either tomorrow or on Thursday, and let us have a debate on this important subject?

The Lord Privy Seal (Mr. Harry Crookshank)

I am afraid I have already announced the business up to the Christmas Recess.