HC Deb 27 March 1952 vol 498 cc1065-76

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

3.22 a.m.

Mr. William A. Steward (Woolwich West)

Even at this late hour I am glad to have the opportunity of raising a matter which has for some time been of great concern to me—namely, the rights of tenants of council houses. Today with the ever-increasing number of people living in council houses, the time has come when greater consideration should be given to the rights of tenants.

For example, on the L.C.C. estates alone there are about 130,000 dwellings. I wish to deal, first, with the problem which is the concern of many tenants in the Woolwich and Eltham areas of my constituency and, I have no doubt, throughout the L.C.C. area and the boroughs of this country. That problem deals with the right of the main tenant to select his own sub-tenant should he wish. I submit that when the main tenants wish to have their married children to live with them as sub-tenants, the approval of the council should be automatic.

How many years have we to go back to find a parallel in history of a father and mother being denied the right to offer a home and shelter to their children? As the House knows, the practice is to refuse this right on penalty of eviction. I also consider that where widows or widowers have lived in their houses for many years, and, therefore, are well-known in the district, and they wish to sub-let part of their house—as they often do for the sake of companionship—they should be allowed to do so and they should be allowed to choose their sub-tenant.

I could give many examples of main tenants being threatened with eviction by the local council for refusing to turn their sub-tenants out into the street. It will be appreciated that, by threatening the main tenants, the council put the sub-tenants in an invidious position. In these enlightened days, it is quite wrong for a council house tenant to be treated as the occupant of part of a block of barracks. Surely the tenants themselves are the best judges whether or not they can take in sub-tenants, if it means a little inconvenience to them? Too often a knock on the door of a council house today is in many respects equivalent to a visit from the secret police in certain other countries, because it can be the forerunner of being thrown into the street without a home, of a husband being parted from his wife and family, and of a family, through the generosity of a callous borough council official, being dumped in a rest centre with a mattress on the floor as a bed.

I submit that it is outrageous that tenants of council houses should go in daily fear of eviction for doing what any hon. Member would do in similar circumstances, namely, offer shelter to others in distress during a period of acute housing shortage. I am well aware of the councils' views on this question; they are afraid that the sub-tenants might jump the queue and become the main tenants out of turn. Of course, there may be cases where this might happen, but are we to take the attitude that all men are rogues unless proved to the contrary? Are we also to take up the attitude that our council estates must be "dressed by the right"? A borough cemetery is orderly, but no hon. Member would suggest that it is the acme of individual freedom.

In my view, all tenants should have the right to sub-let rooms to their children on marriage, or the children to the parents, elderly relatives and dependants and needy friends and acquaintances. They should have complete freedom of choice. The fear of weekly inspections by the council's officer should be removed. There is no reason why a council house should not be the tenant's "Englishman's castle."

I wish to make the further plea that council house tenants should have the right to ensure the individuality of the houses in which they live. For example, if a tenant wishes to paint his window-frames and doors blue or red, why should he not be allowed to do so, or is it so important that the windows and doors of the houses on these estates should all be the same colour? Many hon. Members will remember the old days in the Services, when the whitewashing was the most important part of any inspection. Let us not whitewash our estates, but give freedom to the main tenant to do as he likes with his house, provided that it is within reason, that he bears the cost and pays his rent regularly.

I am told that, in many cases, the tenant is not allowed to put up any form of outhouse or fence for fear that the uniformity of the estate is impaired. Surely these estates are intended as homes for the people and not as State prisons? Hon. Members will know countless stories about the points system being administered unfairly and of applicants being given houses out of their turn. I think there is a good case for the setting up of a housing committee quite independent of the borough council, and consisting of well-known and respected local persons.

If this is considered too difficult, why cannot an applicant have the right to state his case to the housing committee in person, thereby satisfying himself that he has had a fair hearing? I feel that a system such as this would remove a great deal of the discontent which exists today. I should like to suggest that there should be some form of regional housing appeal board so that an applicant who feels that his case has not had due consideration may have the right of appeal.

Only the other day a case came to my notice of a soldier, the father of two children, of the name of Robshaw, whose home is in my constituency, and who had recently returned from Korea. He was one of the "gallant Gloucesters". One would have thought that such a hero's case would have melted the heart of even the toughest of borough council officials. But not so. His application was put back 12 months, the staggering reason given being "owing to his service overseas." He had been in Korea 15 months. I submit that this is the kind of case which justifies an appeal to an appeals board or a personal appearance before a housing committee. The decision arrived at in this case was, in my submission, contrary to the directive in the Minister's Circular 8/52, dated 31st January of this year.

A further point. Is there any reason why applicants should not be told the number of points they have at any particular time? Could not the group of points being dealt with by the council be advertised monthly in the local Press so that those who were anxiously waiting for a home could get some kind of hope that their case was getting nearer being dealt with. I fully appreciate that points are not everything, and that often need overtakes them.

In many cases this means that applicants who have waited six or seven years—and there are a great number—because they have no children are rated lower in the needs scale. In many cases the fact is that many sensible far-seeing would-be parents feel that the accommodation for them is not good enough in which to bring up children. Therefore, need is surely relevant to the circumstances of each case. A married couple without children may, because they want to have children, have a need for a house just as much as a married couple with one child.

I now want to make a plea for the engaged couple wanting to get married. In many cases it is tragic that many people are not allowed to be entered on the housing list until they are actually married, and they have to wait years before getting the house they want. There is only one way for them to get a house, and that is to get married and have a couple of children as quickly as possible: then the housing authority will look at them. I realise the difficulties in coping with this great problem, but cannot something be done to allow couples to go on the housing waiting list from the date of their engagement? In my submission, the present system encourages unmarried tenants, of whom there are many, and illegitimate children.

In dealing with this question of date and length of time to qualify to get on the borough housing list, is the Minister aware that this qualification varies between boroughs, even in the London area? For example, I understand that an applicant for a council house in Lewisham must have been a resident of that borough for five years. In the Borough of Woolwich, the residence qualification is, I understand, one year. In West Ham, the right to get on the housing list is on the male qualification only, whereas in Woolwich male or female qualification is accepted. Does not the Minister agree that unequal discrepancies of this nature mean that some boroughs tend to get over-full waiting lists at the expense of others?

This leads me to suggest that there should be a Government inquiry into the administration and allotment of council house tenancies, for unless they are put on a national basis we are bound to get the anomalies I have described. I am fully aware that under the 1936 Housing Act the administration of our housing estates is a matter for local authorities, and that this also applies to the vexed question of sub-tenants.

The fact that the Central Housing Advisory Committee have drawn the attention of councils to many of the matters I have raised tonight makes me feel the Government should consider taking further action. Personally, I should like to see some form of "Tenants' Charter," to ensure that the tenant, as well as the council, has some rights, and that they are brought into line with the rights enjoyed by a private tenant with his landlord. I submit that we must ensure in our housing drive that council houses being built are for individuals to live in and are not just units of accommodation. I believe that, by giving a sense of increased responsibility to tenants and giving them rights, greater pride will be taken by them in the houses on these estates and that they will become better and happier citizens.

3.36 a.m.

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

The House is indebted to my hon. Friend the Member for Woolwich, West (Mr. Steward) for bringing this subject to its attention. I would also congratulate him on the assiduity with which he pursues his housing and food problems. I always associate him with food and housing, two of the most essential things with which he deals.

Mr. Charles Pannell (Leeds, West)

And the prices of meals are increasing.

Mr. Marples

I would also like to congratulate my hon. Friend on the way he looks after his constituency and brings London's housing problem to the attention of the House. While I am glad to see the hon. Gentleman the Member for Leeds, West (Mr. Pannell) in his place, I only wish that he had with him a colleague from the London area, so that he would have taken an interest in Woolwich problems and those of the adjoining boroughs.

Mr. Pannell

The hon. Gentleman does not realise that very near to where I live is the constituency of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Woolwich, West. I have lived there for many years and I wanted to see what sort of a job he was going to make of this debate.

Mr. Marples

The hon. Gentleman is fortunate to be living near my hon. Friend, who represents the Woolwich, West, constituency so well. I am sorry that the hon. Member for Leeds, West, is not a constituent of my hon. Friend, for then perhaps he would be better represented than he is at the moment.

Before I answer some of the detailed points, may I say that if my hon. Friend will let me have details of the soldier to whom he referred it may be we will write a letter to the local authority to see if we can help in any way, or, at any rate, go into the details of that particular case. My hon. Friend dealt largely with matters in his constituency, and the particular matters which affect him, but I think it would be better, in my reply, if I concentrated on the general aspect.

The difficulty is that the local authority has laid upon its shoulders by statute the task of deciding who shall be the tenant. The statute refers also to the management of the property. Without altering that legislation, it would be difficult to effect some of the things suggested, and it would be out of order, in an Adjournment debate, to discuss legislation.

The basic aim of my hon. Friend was to call attention to some of the anomalies which exist between different districts, and that is a very worthy aim. In the Ministry, we only advise and it is up to the local authorities to select tenants and to manage the property. I want to say this to any local authority representative present. We realise what a thankless task it is to decide between the competing needs of tenants, especially in times of acute housing shortage. In some cases, the tenants do tend to over-state their cases and it is not easy for the local authority to sift the facts.

I would like to answer one or two of the points which were raised. The first point was on the question of sub-tenants. My hon. Friend said tenants should be more free to take in sub-tenants, and that where a tenant is prepared to take in a married son or daughter the local authority should offer no objection, even though, perhaps, the family might be crowded for space. I would refer him to the fact that a local authority has the power, if it wants, to permit sub-letting at the moment, and I hope that this debate will call local authorities' attention to the fact that they can sub-let when, in suitable cases, they wish to do so.

Not only have they the power under statute, but post-war reports, one of them by the Housing Management Sub-Committee of the Central Housing Advisory Committee, were commended to the local authorities by my right hon. Friend's predecessor, suggesting that local authorities should continue to give permission for taking-in lodgers or subletting accommodation. My right hon. Friend, in Circular 24/52, has urged local authorities to take in lodgers where it is appropriate. I hope this debate will draw their attention to that Circular, and that they will read it again.

My hon. Friend referred to sub-tenants being turned out into the street. The question of the sub-tenant taking over the main tenancy, when the main tenant either moves or dies, is not an easy one, because it is not unknown for a subtenant to move into a council house deliberately with the object of securing the tenancy when the main tenant leaves, and by doing that, of course, to jump the queue. Obviously, if a person who has not any need of a house goes in as a sub-tenant, it is wrong that the main tenancy should be given to that person while a person at the top of the housing list may be in more urgent need of accommodation.

Therefore, I think it would be dangerous to say that a sub-tenant shall automatically have the right to a main tenancy. Most local authorities do try, at any rate, to make it a condition, when allowing sub-tenants, that, if the main tenant moves, the sub-tenant should not have possession. I hope that the local authorities will make it clear beyond a peradventure that, if they do allow sub-tenancies, the sub-tenant will not move automatically into possession. If the main tenant leaves the sub-tenant should be on the housing list. If his need is great, he will be given a house.

Mr. Gilbert Longden (Hertfordshire, South-West)

Does the Ministry's circular give any advice to local authorities whether or not they should charge extra rent, which, in some cases, is known as "lodger's tax?".

Mr. Marples

That is really left to the discretion of the local authority, but if there were greater wear and tear on the house, and the main tenant was getting a substantial rent from the lodger or subtenant, it might, in appropriate cases, not be unreasonable for an extra contribution to be made for the extra wear and tear and deterioration of the property which follows from having more people in a house.

My hon. Friend the Member for Woolwich, West, also referred to the question of the selection of tenants. I often read in the newspapers how various critics try to select an association football team. I have never yet seen the same names of the team printed in all the various papers. Selecting tenants is often harder than selecting a football team to represent England, because there are so many tenants in so many different circumstances in so many different districts. Each district differs in some respects from the rest. I think it is best that the selection of tenants should be left to the local authorities who are elected, and not to a committee which is appointed.

My hon. Friend suggested that a committee should be appointed to go into the selection of tenants, and, to some extent at any rate, to replace the local authority; but it is much better that the democratically elected local authority should select the tenants, because first, they have the local knowledge which is necessary, and second, it has to submit itself to the electors for re-election. If there are any grave scandals in a district, I feel that they would make themselves felt at the next election.

Mr. Steward

May I point out that the method of getting on a housing list rests with one official employed by the council, and that it is left to his discretion as to what names go before it?

Mr. Pannell

If that is within the experience of the hon. Member for Woolwich, West, it is not within mine. I have been a member of a local authority, and I feel sure the hon. Gentleman the Parliamentary Secretary will pay a reasonable tribute to the members of local authorities who carry out their onerous duties fearlessly and well. I think that the hon. Member for Woolwich, West, is speaking from a rather limited experience.

Mr. Marples

If I may intervene in the debate which is going on between the two hon. Members, I want to say that, broadly, the local councilors take charge of their housing problems, the paid official is acting under the housing committee as a rule and the housing committee acts under the local council. There may be cases where a very able and industrious official takes charge of perhaps some councillors, but it should not be so. If my hon. Friend has any example in mind, perhaps we could intervene usefully with a little advice. But I can assure him that over the country generally the local councillors are in charge.

My hon. Friend said that the qualifications for admission to the housing lists vary in different parts and that there is discontent with the results of the selection of tenants. He mentioned Lewisham, where they have a five-year residential qualification, and Woolwich, where they have a one-year residential qualification. It would be a good idea if local authorities whose boundaries adjoin each other would get together and consult about making their rules for tenants, so that there should not be any great discrepancy between the two.

We have suggested that such consultation in some cases is wise because, otherwise, the local authority which imposes a small number of restrictions tends to have a larger housing list than the local authority which imposes a large number of restrictions. Therefore it would be a good idea if Lewisham and Woolwich, and perhaps some adjoining local authorities, would try to get nearer to each other's conditions if possible.

My hon. Friend suggested that the applicant should appear before the committee. I think it might be a good idea in some cases, but it would be very bad if the applications of one family were heard by another family which was on the housing list. In my experience it is a good idea for housing committees not to discuss cases by name but by number. Then the personal element does not enter into the calculation and the allotment of houses is decided on merit.

It is not always safe to let applicants appear in person because a house may then go to the most eloquent instead of the most needy. Some people who need a house are not able to express themselves except in private, and when it comes to appearing before a formidable committee they become terrified by the searching questions which are put, as I should be if I attended before a committee on which the hon. Member for Leeds, West, appeared. I do not think, therefore, that it would be a good idea if in every case the applicant appeared before the committee.

My hon. Friend made an extremely good point about the housing lists and the method of allotting points being well known in the district. I believe that half the rumours which circulate among council applicants and tenants would be avoided if local authorities would proceed on the method of giving publicity to their system of allotting houses. I remember that when I was in the Army we never knew where we were going or what we were doing. On one occasion the officers had a very good operation to perform and it meant moving from one point to another. They would not tell anyone about it. Before I became an officer I was a regimental sergeant-major, I found that the best way to interpret the Army Act was to stand on a soap box and tell everyone what was going on. It was not scientific, but it was effective.

I would suggest that housing committees should do something like the same thing. It is much better for people to know what is the exact position. I would refer local authorities, in this connection to a booklet of the old Ministry of Health about the selection of housing tenants, where it says: Nothing undermines the confidence of applicants in any method of selection more surely than the suspicion that personal influence can affect anyone's prospects of obtaining a house. It goes on: It is, therefore, desirable that the fullest possible explanation of the method of selection should be given to all applicants, showing what factors are taken into account in selecting tenants. … Many authorities have found it an aid to impartial selection to consider applications under a code number instead of by name. Then they recommend every local authority to take steps appropriate to their area and acquaint the public of the method adopted for the selection of tenants. I should like to call the attention of local authorities to this excellent book, which is prepared by a sub-committee of the Central Housing Advisory Committee.

The question of the painting of houses has to be divided into two parts, the inside and the exterior. I believe that a tenant should do what he likes inside the house, painting it red, green or blue if any of those colours expresses his individuality. A large number of local authorities make paint available for that purpose. But the care of the exterior should be left to the local authority because they are better aware of local conditions. In some areas the variety of colours suggested by my hon. Friend might not be welcomed by the inhabitants of the district.

In the few moments that remain I should like again to thank my hon. Friend for raising this subject, which, I know, is very close to his heart. I hope that the remarks which I have made will be read by his local authority.

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

Adjourned at Seven Minutes to Four o'Clock a.m.