§ 15. Mrs. Mannasked the Secretary of State for Scotland what procedure he will adopt to ascertain whether his warning to landlords is effective; and what measures he will adopt if it fails.
§ The Joint Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. J. Nixon Browne)As my right hon. Friend has already indicated, he will continue to watch the position closely, but he does not propose to add at this stage to what he said in the debate on 3rd March.
§ Mrs. MannMay we take it that the right hon. Gentleman has no intention of doing anything and that if he had had, he would have done so before the Kelvin-grove by-election? Are not his statements mere propaganda? If he is to watch anything closely, is not it the evictions which he intends to watch?
§ Mr. BrowneMy right hon. Friend has no power to call for returns on what is essentially a matter between the landlord and the tenant. I cannot add to what he said in the debate.
§ Mr. T. FraserWill the Joint Under-Secretary say what powers the Secretary of State has to take action to deal with problems arising from the Rent Act, without new legislation?
§ Mr. BrowneThat is an entirely different question, but I remind the hon. Member that if he and the Labour Party are sincere and really believe that there will be trouble, they should withdraw their threat to nationalise homes and to pay inadequate compensation for them.
§ 17. Mrs. Mannasked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware of hardship to tenants particularly aged people contained in new agreements made under the Rent Act, 1957; and if he will set up a tribunal to deal with cases of hardship and evictions.
§ Mr. J. N. BrowneA new tenancy agreement of a decontrolled house is a matter of negotiation between landlord and tenant, but my right hon. Friend has made it clear on several occasions that he looks to landlords to act reasonably.
§ Mrs. MannIf a landlord refuses to negotiate—and many are refusing to negotiate—will the Secretary of State intervene at that stage to prevent old people being evicted? Would not it be a very small request that he should establish a tribunal just to deal with urgent cases?
§ Mr. BrowneThis matter was very fully debated and the Government made their position quite clear in what my right hon. Friend said on 3rd March. After very careful examination, it is my view that if there is hardship and if there are evictions the Labour Party, with its nationalisation proposals, will be largely responsible.
§ Mr. T. FraserDoes not the Under-Secretary appreciate the inconsistency of what he is saying? He says that the Labour Party promise to municipalise houses is causing houses to be sold, while his right hon. Friend says that they are not being sold, but relet. Does not he see the inconsistency?
§ Mr. BrowneMy right hon. Friend has corrected the figure to 25 per cent. not relet, but that is still a very high percentage. It was not a promise, it was a threat.
§ Mr. RossDoes not the Under-Secretary realise that it is not very much use placing reliance on the reasonableness of a set of people who even supplied the Secretary of State with quite wrong figures, which he took no opportunity to verify, and which may be even more wrong than he has admitted?
§ Mr. BrowneThat is another question and my right hon. Friend has quite properly made a statement on that.
§ 24. Mr. Rankinasked the Secretary of State for Scotland the nature of the protests he has received from the tenants at Merrick Gardens, in the constituency of the hon. Member for Govan, in regard to the operation of the Rent Act, 1957; and what reply he has sent.
§ Mr. J. N. BrowneMy right hon. Friend had last week a letter from one tenant who has entered into an agreement with his landlord but regards the new rent as excessive. The reply sent by his Department drew attention to recent Government statements on the working of the Rent Act but indicaed that my right hon. Friend has no power to intervene in an agreement between landlord and tenant. My right hon. Friend also had a letter from another tenant in November containing a protest in general terms not calling for a reply.
§ Mr. RankinIs the Secretary of State fully aware of the nature of the increase which has been imposed on this tenant; that, prior to the Rent Act, she was paying £40 a year including rates, and that she is now faced with the payment of £191 including rates? Does he regard that as reasonable, and does he realise that there were no negotiations here whatsoever, but that this was imposed, not only upon this tenant, but upon every single tenant in the area which I have indicated?
§ Mr. BrowneI appreciate the sincerity of the hon. Gentleman, but I do not think he would expect me to comment on an individual case without full investigation. My right hon. Friend looks to landlords to act with humanity and intelligence.
§ Mr. WoodburnCould the Minister clear up some of the confusion on this matter? At one time, the Government are saying that they intend to do something to prevent landlords from abusing their powers, but the next time we have a Minister making a declaration that they do not intend to alter the terms of the Act. Under what powers can they interfere with landlords once they have given them power to take this inhumane action?
§ Mr. BrowneI am not at all sure that that is relevant to the hon. Gentleman's Question, but the answer is contained in 212 columns 861 and 862 of HANSARD of 3rd March, when my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government made a statement.