§ Mr. ManuelI beg to move, in page 6, line 43, to leave out "eight," and to insert "six."
§ The ChairmanI think it would be for the convenience of the Committee if we took the two proposed Amendments to this Clause together.
§ Mr. ManuelI should be very pleased to take together with the Amendment I have moved the second Amendment, in line 43, at the end, to add:
in respect of each new house, building or dwelling completed after the twenty-eighth day of February, nineteen hundred and fifty-two.492 I think that will suit the purpose of the Committee in discussing the position of the repairs fund in Scotland under the powers of the local authorities. The purpose of these two Amendments is, briefly, to leave the £4 as at present indicated in Clause 7; and that the proposed £8 shall be £6, and that the £6 should apply only from 28th February of this year.We have heard a great deal from the other side of the Committee about how wrong it is to infringe too much on the powers of the local authorities, and we concur in that opinion. Indeed, we attempted to retain in an earlier Clause powers for the local authorities which the Secretary of State insisted he wished to take unto himself. Local authorities in Scotland, in the main, have not allowed themselves to be placed in a position such that the Secretary of State could 493 feel that their financial position regarding the repairs fund was such the he would have to force them to make greater contributions from the rates, because the £4 indicated here is a minimum figure which they have to put into their housing repairs fund on behalf of each dwelling in the local authority area each year.
Of course, the position has necessitated many local authorities throughout Scotland having to increase it, but that does not mean that very many local authorities in Scotland have had to increase it to the extent of the £8 indicated here. In fact, very few have done so, and I have the figure here if the Joint Under-Secretary would like to have it.
I think it is right to leave it to the local authorities themselves to decide how much they ought to increase the allocation per house to their local repairs fund, and, in order to meet the position arising under Clause 7, we are prepared to say that on the dearer houses, owing to higher building costs, such as have been illustrated during the debate, we will agree that there should be an increase of £2; in other words, £6 per house should be placed to the repairs fund as from 28th February this year. All the local authority houses built previously, going right back to the 1919 Act, ought to be left at the former figure of a minimum of £4, and the local authorities themselves ought to be left to increase that to whatever figure they think fit.
There is unanimity among the main Scottish local authorities on this question. My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Central (Mr. McInnes), who is secretary of the Scottish Labour Group, and who is not now in his place, although he has been here all day, has asked me to indicate to the Committee that he has received a telegram from the secretary of the Association of County Councils in Scotland. The telegram reads as follows:
Association of County Councils in Scotland, at a meeting today, in light of high rates which the affiliated county councils have found necessary to fix to cover inter alia housing deficits, desires strongly to renew its previous representations that subsidy provisions in Housing (Scotland) Bill are entirely inadequate to ensure continued provision of houses, and is alarmed lest the inadequacy of the subsidies will lead to a substantial curtailment of housing programme. Association further desires to renew its objections to compulsory contributions of £8 per house to repairs account, particularly as applying to houses completed before 28th February, 1952.—George Davie, Secretary.494 I know that in certain areas, local authorities have had difficulties, but, so far as my information goes, those local authorities have faced these difficulties and have increased the amount from £4 to the necessary figure above that sum when the repairs account looked like showing a deficit at the end of the financial year. The local authority to which I had the honour to belong for 15 years increased, during my period as Treasurer, the amount to £6. That, of course, has helped the position today.The rising cost of materials has naturally necessitated this, but I and my right hon. and hon. Friends on this side of the Committee want to leave this matter to the local authorities themselves. We do not see why we must put in £8 whether it is necessary or not. I know that there is a provision that, on appeal to the Secretary of State for Scotland, the right hon. Gentleman may allow them to pay such sum between £4 and £8 as he thinks fit. I do not think that is necessary, and I appeal to the hon. and gallant Gentleman who I understand is to reply to consider what we on this side seriously put forward, that the amount should only be £6 from 28th February this year, and that in the case of houses built previously, right back to 1919, the figure should be left at £4 as indicated in the Act.
§ Mr. PrydeI would remind the Joint Under-Secretary of State of the warning I previously gave to the Government, and I think he will agree with me that every stage of this discussion brings out in bold relief everything I said about this Bill. I am certain that, after having heard the contents of the telegram which was sent to my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Central (Mr. McInnes), the hon. and gallant Gentleman will see that the great Association of County Councils in Scotland are with me in this matter.
I challenge the hon. and gallant Gentleman to name one local authority which has said that it requires £8 per house to be added for repairs. Is it not perfectly true to say that everything spent on repairs must come out of the housing revenue account? The simple addition of £2 to make it £6 or the addition of £4 to make it £8 does not end the matter, because there is something to be paid besides that. Owners' rates 495 have to be paid. Therefore, the Joint Under-Secretary of State must agree that the whole financial basis of this Bill is absolutely wrong as applied to present-day conditions. The Government Front Bench have already admitted that building costs have risen from £600 to £800 on a £600 outlay. What is going to be added on a £1,635 outlay?
§ 9.0 p.m.
Commander GalbraithI think it would be as well if I were, first of all, to place on record the source from which this figure came. The figure of £8 was that given to us by the Scottish local authority associations themselves as the average cost of repairs when we were considering the new subsidy into which the amount of repairs enters. It was for that reason that that figure was included.
The hon. Member for Ayrshire, Central (Mr. Manuel) started by saying it was wrong to infringe too much upon the powers of the local authorities. After all, hon. Members opposite have protested in some cases and have been asking us to do that repeatedly this afternoon in other cases. But I would remind the Committee that the Government have some responsibility here. There is a good deal of taxpayers' money invested in these local authority houses, and it is our duty to see that the investment is protected. The hon. Member for Ayrshire, Central went on to refer to the fact that there was no need for this increase. I only wish I could agree with him, because I have with me a record of what has been happening to repair funds.
Before I come to that, I should like to point out to the Committee that in the days before the war when, of course, £4 applied, it was considered that a local authority should have £20 per house in the repairs fund. It was thought that that was a reasonable limit to have, and that meant a period of five years. I should like the Committee to listen to what has happened over the last three years.
Taking the average of the four cities, in 1949 a sum of £8 14s. 10d. per house was in the repairs fund. The amount was reduced to £8 4s. 2d. in the following year and is now £7 12s. 0d. In the large burghs the sum was £3 18s. 0d. in 1949, £2 10s. 7d. in 1950 and £1 16s. 0d. in 1951. In the small burghs it has fallen 496 from £8 6s. 0d. in 1949 to £5 0s. 2d. In the counties it has fallen from £3 9s. 9d. in 1949 to £1 8s. 0d.
That is a rather alarming situation. In fact, there is not sufficient being put in the repairs fund. I can remember, as can all hon. Members, constant reference being made by the hon. Lady the Member for Coatbridge and Airdrie (Mrs. Mann) to the fact that private owners were very much to blame because they did not create reserve funds to meet repairs as their buildings became older. Here is the hon. Member for Ayrshire, Central inviting me to follow that course.
It seems to me perfectly ridiculous to suggest that the new houses should have to provide £8 and the old houses should not provide that sum. After all, the older the house the more repair it needs, yet the suggestion is that less should be put into the repairs fund for the old house and more should be put in for the new house. I cannot understand that argument at all.
§ Mr. ManuelIs the hon. and gallant Gentleman seized of the point that the newer houses to which he refers will have the increased subsidy provisions and the older houses will have a much smaller subsidy, so that actually there is more in comparison between the two types of houses than the £8 limit.
Commander GalbraithThat seems to me to be beside the point. We are trying to keep houses in repair. The local authority associations say that £8 is necessary, and now it is suggested that the older houses, which will require more repair, should be provided with a smaller sum. No one on earth would think it was right not to create a repairs fund against deterioration in plant, fixtures, machinery and buildings and so on, and we are asking the Committee to allow us to take a prudent course here.
We know full well the pressure put on local authorities by ratepayers which might incline them not to do this, and the hon. Member for Ayrshire, Central has given evidence just now of this pressure in view of the high rates. We all regret the level of the rates, but that should not be a reason for neglecting the dwellings of citizens. It is for that reason that I must insist that these Amendments should be rejected.
Mr. McNeilThe hon. and gallant Gentleman is, as usual, very sound in actuarial practice when he is expounding a case acceptable to himself. I have no doubt that he will apply the same skill—I know that he can—in looking at the case on the other side. I suggest that it is a little unfair to pick out the £8 calculation of the local authorities when they were trying to show the hon. and gallant Gentleman that his basis for the calculation of the subsidy was too low.
If the hon. and gallant Gentleman had accepted the entire local authority case, I assure him that I would be accepting his view now and not pressing him to reconsider the matter. Everyone knows that if things were completely fluid, the course which he advocates would undoubtedly be the wisest one; but we are discussing the position of local authorities who are very hard pressed—who are perplexed as to what their next rating steps
§ should be, and baffled about the new burdens which the increased price of money has thrown upon them. In that situation they are pleading that they should be allowed to make the best accommodation that they possibly can.
§ The local authorities are not going to be any more careless than the Government about the condition of the houses. The local authorities are certainly much more likely than the Government to hear the protests of the tenants if such are justified. We are asking Her Majesty's Government, since they have imposed a very hard bargain upon the local authorities, to permit them to make the best accommodation they can in relation to their repairs fund.
§ Question put, "That 'eight' stand part of the Clause."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 139; Noes, 109.
499Division No. 240.] | AYES | [9.7 p.m. |
Allan, R. A. (Paddington, S.) | George, Rt. Hon. Maj. G. Lloyd | Nield, Basil (Chester) |
Anstruther-Gray, Major W. J. | Gomme-Duncan, Col. A. | Oakshott, H. D. |
Ashton, H. (Chelmsford) | Gower, H. R. | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. W. D. |
Baker, P. A. D. | Gridley, Sir Arnold | Orr, Capt. L. P. S. |
Baldock, Lt.-Cmdr. J. M. | Grimston, Sir Robert (Westbury) | Osborne, C. |
Baldwin, A. E. | Harris, Frederic (Croydon, N.) | Partridge, E. |
Barber, Anthony | Harrison, Col. J. H. (Eye) | Peyton, J. W. W. |
Beamish, Maj. Tufton | Heald, Sir Lionel | Pilkington, Capt. R. A |
Bennett, William (Woodside) | Higgs, J. M. C. | Powell, J. Enoch |
Birch, Nigel | Hill, Mrs. E. (Wythenshawe) | Price, Henry (Lewisham, W.) |
Bishop, F. P. | Hirst, Geoffrey | Raikes, H. V. |
Black, C. W. | Holland-Martin, C. J. | Redmayne, M. |
Boyle, Sir Edward | Horobin, I. M. | Remnant, Hon. P. |
Bromley-Davenport, Lt.-Col. W. H. | Howard, Gerald (Cambridgeshire) | Renton, D. L. M. |
Brooman-White, R. C. | Howard, Greville (St. Ives) | Robertson, Sir David |
Browne, Jack (Govan) | Hudson, Sir Austin (Lewisham, N.) | Robinson, Roland (Blackpool, S.) |
Buchan-Hepburn, Rt. Hon. P. G. T. | Hudson, W. R. A. (Hull, N.) | Roper, Sir Harold |
Bullard, D. G. | Hurd, A. R. | Russell, R. S. |
Bullock, Capt. M. | Hutchinson, Sir Geoffrey (Ilford, N.) | Schofield, Lt.-Col. W. (Rochdale) |
Butcher, H. W. | Hutchison, Lt.-Com. Clark (E'b'rgh W.) | Scott, R. Donald |
Cary, Sir Robert | Hylton-Foster, H. B. H. | Scott-Miller, Cmdr. R. |
Clarke, Col. Ralph (East Grinstead) | Jenkins, Robert (Dulwich) | Shepherd, William |
Clark, Brig. Terence (Portsmouth, W.) | Johnson, Eric (Blackley) | Smiles, Lt.-Col. Sir Walter |
Cole, Norman | Kaberry, D. | Smithers, Peter (Winchester) |
Conant, Maj. R. J. E. | Lambton, Viscount | Snadden, W. McN. |
Cranbarne, Viscount | Law, Rt. Hon. R. K. | Stanley, Capt. Hon. Richard |
Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. F. C. | Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A H | Stewart, Henderson (Fife, E.) |
Crosthwaite-Eyre, Col. O. E. | Linstead, H. N. | Storey, S. |
Crouch, R. F. | Lloyd, Maj. Guy (Renfrew, E.) | Strauss, Henry (Norwich, S.) |
Crowder, Sir John (Finchley) | Longden, Gilbert (Harts, S. W.) | Stuart, Rt. Hon. James (Moray) |
Davidson, Viscountess | Lucas, Sir Jocelyn (Portsmouth, S.) | Sutcliffe, H. |
Deedes, W. F. | Lucas, P. B. (Brentford) | Thomas, P. J. M. (Conway) |
Dodds, N. N. | Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh | Thornton-Kemsley, Col. C. N |
Donaldson, Cmdr. C. E. McA. | McCallum, Major D. | Turner, H. F. L. |
Donner, P. W. | Macdonald, Sir Peter (I. of Wight) | Turton, R. H. |
Drayson, G. B. | McKibbin, A. J. | Vaughan-Morgan, J. K. |
Dugdale, Rt. Hn. Sir Thomas (Richmond) | Macleod, Rt. Hon. Iain (Enfield, W.) | Vosper, D. F. |
Duncan, Capt. J. A. L. | Macpherson, Maj. Niall (Dumfries) | Wakefield, Edward (Derbyshire, W.) |
Duthie, W. S. | Maitland, Patrick (Lanark) | Ward, Miss I. (Tynemouth) |
Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E. | Manningham-Buller, Sir R. E. | Waterhouse, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. |
Fell, A. | Markham, Major S. F. | Wellwood, W. |
Finlay, Graeme | Maude, Angus | White, Baker (Canterbury) |
Fisher, Nigel | Maydon, Lt.-Comdr.- S. L. C. | Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge) |
Fleetwood-Hesketh, R. F. | Mellor, Sir John | Wills, G. |
Galbraith, Cmdr. T. D. (Pollok) | Morrison, John (Salisbury) | Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro) |
Galbraith, T. G. D. (Hillhead) | Mott-Radclyffe, C. E. | |
Garner-Evans, E. H. | Nicolson, Nigel (Bournemouth, E.) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES: |
Mr. Drewe and Mr. Studholme. | ||
NOES | ||
Allen, Arthur (Bosworth) | Hobson, C. R. | Reid, Thomas (Swindon) |
Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R. | Hubbard, T. F. | Rhodes, H. |
Bacon, Miss Alice | Hudson, James (Eating, N.) | Robens, Rt. Hon. A. |
Balfour, A. | Hynd, J. B. (Attercliffe) | Roberts, Albert (Normanton) |
Bence, C. R. | Jeger, Dr. Santo (St. Pancras, S.) | Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvonshire) |
Blackburn, F. | Jones, David (Hartlepool) | Robinson, Kenneth (St. Pancras, N.) |
Bowden, H. W. | Keenan, W. | Ross, William |
Brockway, A. F. | King, Dr. H. M. | Royle, O. |
Brook, Dryden (Halifax) | Kinley, J. | Shackleton, E. A. A. |
Butler, Herbert (Hackney, S.) | Lee, Frederick (Newton) | Short, E. W. |
Carmichael, J. | Lever, Leslie (Ardwick) | Silverman, Julius (Erdington) |
Champion, A. J. | Lewis, Arthur | Simmons, C. J. (Brierley Hill) |
Clunie, J. | MacColl, J. E. | Smith, Norman (Nottingham, S.) |
Collick, P. H. | McKay, John (Wallsend) | Snow, J. W. |
Craddock, George (Bradford, S.) | McLeavy, F. | Soskice, Rt. Hon. Sir Frank |
Cullen, Mrs. A. | MacMillan, M. K. (Western Isles) | Sparks, J. A. |
Davies, A. Edward (Stoke, N.) | McNeil, Rt. Hon. H. | Steele, T. |
Davies, Harold (Leek) | MacPherson, Malcolm (Stirling) | Strachey, Rt. Hon. J. |
de Freitas, Geoffrey | Mallalieu, E. L. (Brigg) | Summerskill, Rt. Hon. E. |
Delargy, H. J. | Mann, Mrs. Jean | Sylvester, G. O. |
Ede, Rt. Hon. J. C. | Manuel, A. C. | Taylor, John (West Lothian) |
Evans, Albert (Islington, S. W.) | Marquand, Rt. Hon. H. A. | Taylor, Rt. Hon. Robert (Morpeth) |
Evans, Edward (Lowestoft) | Mellish, R. J. | Thomas, Ivor Owen (Wrekin) |
Field, W. J. | Mitchison, G. R. | Thomson, George (Dundee, E.) |
Forman, J. C. | Morgan, Dr. H. B. W. | Timmons, J. |
Gibson, C. W. | Morley, R. | Viant, S. P. |
Glanville, James | Morris, Percy (Swansea, W.) | Watkins, T. E. |
Greenwood, Anthony (Rossendale) | Oswald, T. | White, Henry (Derbyshire, N. E.) |
Grey, C. F. | Padley, W. E. | Whiteley, Rt. Hon. W. |
Griffiths, Rt. Hon. James (Llanelly) | Paget, R. T. | Wilkins, W. A. |
Griffiths, William (Exchange) | Paton, J. | Williams, Ronald (Wigan) |
Hale, Leslie (Oldham, W.) | Poole, C. C. | Williams, W. R. (Droylsden) |
Hall, Rt. Hon. Glenvil (Colne Valley) | Popplewell, E. | Woodburn, Rt. Hon A. |
Hamilton, W. W. | Price, Joseph T. (Westhoughton) | Yates, V. F. |
Hargreaves, A. | Proctor, W. T. | Younger, Rt. Hon. K. |
Hastings, S. | Pryde, D. J. | |
Hayman, F. H. | Rankin, John | TELLERS FOR THE NOES: |
Mr. Holmes and Mr. Hannan. |
Question put, and agreed to.
§ Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.