HC Deb 17 November 1953 vol 520 cc1552-4
26. Mr. McInnes

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware that, by keeping untenanted 94 houses in Glasgow, the Western Heritable Investment Company are in breach of the provisions of the statute under which the houses were built with the aid of subsidy from public funds; and what action he proposes to take in the matter.

Commander Galbraith

The question whether there has been any breach of the statute or of the agreement between the company and the Corporation is one for the Corporation in the first instance. My right hon. Friend has told the company that on the information before him he would not feel justified in giving consent to the sale of the houses covered by their application.

Mr. McInnes

I am glad to hear the latter part of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman's reply, but surely he is aware that the Government subsidy to the extent of £9 per annum per house, as provided for in Section 3 of the 1924 Act, is payable to these people provided—and I quote from the Act— that the houses shall be let for occupation to tenants. … Since that is so, will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman now take steps to stop the subsidy or, alternatively, will he insist on the firm letting these houses to tenants?

Commander Galbraith

I think the hon. Gentleman is mistaken. The Exchequer contributions are payable to the Corporation and it is they who administer the scheme of assistance. The Secretary of State would not reduce or discontinue the contribution unless the Corporation decided, in the first instance, that the company were in breach of the agreement between them.

Mr. D. Johnston

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman right in stating that the question whether or not the company are in breach of the law is, in the first instance, a matter for the Corporation? Is not the matter one for the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Lord Advocate, and will he take steps to make representations to the Lord Advocate on this matter?

Commander Galbraith

I have nothing further to add to the reply I have given.

Mr. Woodburn

This is a most serious matter. The Under-Secretary of State says that he has nothing to do with whether the Corporation are paying out money illegally to the Western Heritable Investment Company. Surely it is the duty of the Secretary of State to see that the Corporation do not pay out public money unless it is in accordance with the Act of Parliament.

Mr. McInnes

In view of the unsatisfactory reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.