§ Question again proposed, That this House do now adjourn.
§ 3.45 p.m.
§ Mr. ErrollI had just referred to the Leyland bungalow estate and to the nine tenants who no longer work for us. These families were visited or written to last summer and asked whether their names were on the local authority list. They have recently been sent a warning letter similar to that sent to the families in the R.O.F. site houses. That is the position today. We are in touch with the local authority, and we shall review the situation at the end of the warning period to see what shall be the next step.
The hon. Gentleman asked why the Department does not give a tenant notice as soon as he ceases to be employed by us, thus enabling him, possibly, to secure earlier and more favourable treatment from the local authority. The reason is that we have pursued a policy of leniency, which I have earlier described to him. We feel that it would be unfortunate were we to hand out a formal notice as soon as employment with us ceased. That would indeed cause alarm and despondency far greater than that occasioned by receiving notice nearly four months before Christmas or a warning letter a month before Christmas. So we prefer to rely on co-operation with the local authority rather than go through the legal formalities right from the beginning.
I should make it quite clear, however, that the rent agreement makes it plain to every incoming tenant that his tenancy may be terminated by the giving up of his employment with the Department. A tenant should be in no doubt, therefore, about his position, but for the reasons I have given I think it would be unduly harsh to serve notice automatically on a tenant as soon as he leaves us, unless the accommodation is immediately required for another employee. We should not wish to burden the local authority with additions to its housing list when we might perhaps have some of our own houses vacant. We act only when we need these houses for our own employees.
The hon. Member mentioned the possibility of recruiting local unskilled labour 2099 for our vacancies, thus avoiding the need to bring from far away people who would require these houses. I assure him that we do our best to recruit locally in the first place. It suits us far better if we can do so and avoid the problem of having to find housing accommodation. But such is the state of full employment in the country today that it is not always possible to recruit locally the particular grades we require. The hon. Gentleman may call them unskilled, but every man has some skill or expertise, and we need men capable of carrying out the job, whether they be night watchmen, police or firemen. It is true that they could be trained, but initially they need some qualities or characteristics, and such men are not to be found unemployed today.
We must therefore be prepared to bring them from further afield in order to fill our vacancies, but I will look particularly at that point and make certain that everything possible has been done, and if I can add anything useful to what I have said, I will get in touch with the hon. Gentleman.
The hon. Member referred to the problem facing the local authority. As I expect he knows, last July we asked the Chorley Rural District Council if it would build 10 houses for tenants who were to be displaced, and a further 25, all as part of its 1956 building programme—and we also asked if it would be possible for the council to put up 25 houses in 1957. That is part of our policy of co-operation. We try to give authorities advance notice of our likely needs, so as to help them in their own planning. Unfortunately, so far the council has said that it is not prepared to do this unless we help to subsidise these houses. I am sorry to say that that is something which we, as a Government Department, cannot do.
§ Mr. KenyonIs not a Government Department doing it for the Leyland tank people at the present moment?
§ Mr. ErrollThat is, in fact, the case, but it is an isolated one, and we should not like to extend this practice.
Before concluding, I want to refer to the suggestion of the hon. Member about 2100 the possibility of using the Woodlands Hostel to rehouse tenants temporarily until the council can find them accommodation. At first sight this is an attractive suggestion, but I find that it is not possible to take advantage of it. First, I must point out that the responsibiliy for providing emergency accommodation for homeless families rests upon the county authority; but we naturally try to avoid any of our former employees becoming homeless, especially as we still hope to count upon the full co-operation which we have had in the past from the local authorities responsible for housing.
Woodlands Hostel itself has been empty for some time, and it would therefore require to be refurnished in any case. Although it has been empty, however, we expect that another Department will be taking over the premises before long, and it would therefore not be possible to consider the use of this building for temporary accommodation purposes. I should mention, however, that we have in the area a large industrial hostel called Highways—which the hon. Gentleman doubtless knows—and I am going to make inquiries to see whether that hostel could be used if that should prove necessary. From what I have said, I hope that the House will realise that the Department's housing policy is generous and humane.
§ Mr. Norman Dodds (Erith and Crayford)Hear, hear.
§ Mr. ErrollI am glad to have the assent of the hon. Member for Dartford, because he and I have been in correspondence—
§ Mr. ErrollI apologise to the hon. Member, who will doubtless be travelling down the Thames with his nostrils wide open.
As I said, I believe that our policy is generous and humane. Former employees are permitted to stay on as long as we can spare the accommodation, and we take steps to recover the houses only when they are urgently needed for key workers, who would otherwise be lost, or to overcome real hardship to our existing employees.