§ 58. Mr. Donnellyasked the Attorney-General whether he will make a statement regarding Her Majesty's Government's future policy on leasehold enfranchisement.
§ Mr. DonnellyWill not the right hon. and learned Gentleman be a little more forthcoming than that?
§ The Attorney-GeneralThe Government's policy was made abundantly clear in the White Paper published in January, 1953; in the debate on the White Paper on 30th April, 1953; on the Second Reading and the Committee stage of the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1954; and in the Second Reading debate on the Leasehold Enfranchisement Bill on 18th March, 1955.
§ Mr. J. GriffithsAs the facts brought out in the debate the other day on a Private Member's Bill were not disputed, is it the Government's view that the terms now being asked for the renewal of leases are fair and just? If not, do they propose to do something about them?
§ The Attorney-GeneralI think we answered all those points in that debate.
§ Mr. DonnellyWill the Attorney-General look at this again? Do I understand from his answer that there is no intention on the part of the Government to do anything about the idea of leasehold enfranchisement?
§ The Attorney-GeneralI have nothing to add to the answer I have given.
§ Mr. H. MorrisonCan the right hon. and learned Gentleman not tell the House whether it is his opinion that the law as it is is fair and just to those many people who are having anxious times? Will he say "yes" or "no" as to whether this law is fair and just to everybody?
§ The Attorney-GeneralIf the right hon. Gentleman will read the speeches made on this subject from this Front Bench, he will see the answer to his question.
§ Mr. J. GriffithsIs it the intention of the Government to allow these people, in view of the evidence given in a debate the other day, to charge any price they like, and not to accept any responsibility for protecting the people who built these houses out of their hard-earned savings?
§ The Attorney-GeneralWe have debated this subject on many occasions, and this is not the occasion to debate it again.
§ Lieut.-Colonel LiptonHas the right hon. and learned Gentleman any reason to reconsider his attitude towards leasehold enfranchisement now that the Crown has become the owner of various leasehold properties and is finding it rather onerous to carry out the terms of the covenant? Does not his recent experience lead him to think that there is something to be said now for leasehold enfranchisement?
§ The Attorney-GeneralThe hon. and gallant Gentleman knows that the question of the Crown becoming the owner of certain property by reason of forfeiture is at present before the courts.
§ Mr. DonnellyIs the Attorney-General aware that this is an innocent inquiry I have made and that he is not in the position of being the accused? Will he not be more forthcoming if I get the services of a lawyer to be present to protect his interests?
§ The Attorney-GeneralI gave the hon. Gentleman a very frank answer.