HC Deb 22 November 1961 vol 649 cc1479-95

[Queen's Recommendation signified.]

Considered in Committee under Standing Order No. 84 (Money Committees).

[Sir GORDON TOUCHE in the Chair]

Motion made, and Question proposed, That, for the purposes of any Act of the present Session to make further arrangements for the giving of financial assistance for the provision and improvement of housing accommodation in Scotland, it is expedient to authorise:—

A. (1) The payment out of money provided by Parliament of annual Exchequer subsidies, or equivalent payments, in respect of every new house provided by—

  1. (a) a local authority, or
  2. (b) a development corporation, or
  3. (c) a housing association in pursuance of arrangements made with a local authority or the Secretary of State, or
  4. (d) the Scottish Special Housing Association in the circumstances specified in paragraph (a) or paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of section twenty-three of the Housing and Town Development (Scotland) Act, 1957,
in accordance with proposals approved by the Secretary of State.

(2) The payment out of money provided by Parliament of such sums as may be required to enable the Secretary of State—

  1. (a) to make to any housing association, for a period not exceeding sixty years, annual payments in respect of arrangements made between him and the association for the provision of housing accommodation by the conversion or improvement of existing houses or by the conversion of other buildings, being payments equal to three-quarters, or in relation to housing accommodation situated in the Highlands and Islands seven-eighths, of the annual loss determined by the Secretary of State to be likely to be incurred by the association in carrying out the arrangements;
  2. (b) to make to the Scottish Special Housing Association, with the approval of the Treasury, such payments (hereafter in this sub-paragraph referred to as "deficiency payments") as he may determine in respect of any excess in any year of the total net expenditure (as calculated in accordance with rules made by the Secretary of State) incurred by the Association in the provision of housing accommodation over the sum of the payments made to them under section ninety-three of the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1950, section twenty-three of the Housing and Town Development (Scotland) Act, 1957, and any provision of the said Act of the present Session (other than a provision for the making of deficiency payments);
    3. 1480
  3. (c) to acquire, with the approval of the Treasury, shares in any authorised society within the meaning of the Housing Act, 1914; and
  4. (d) to pay into the Exchequer the sums authorised to be so paid under paragraph (b) of head E hereof.

B. —(1) The issue out of the Consolidated Fund of such sums as may be required for the purpose of making advances—

  1. (a) to housing associations (being associations registered under the Industrial and Provident Societies Act, 1893), providing housing accommodation for letting.
  2. (b) to the Scottish Special Housing Association for the purpose of—
    1. (i) enabling or assisting the provision of housing accommodation by that Association.
    2. (ii) meeting expenditure incurred by that Association in the provision of housing accommodation for letting,
    3. (iii) enabling or assisting that Association to purchase the assets of housing societies or trusts,
so however that the advances referred to in sub-paragraph (a) of this head shall not exceed the aggregate sum of three million pounds, and that the aggregate amount of the advances referred to in sub-paragraph (b) of this head, together with any advances made under subsection (1) of section ninety-four of the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1950, shall not exceed one hundred and ten million pounds.

(2) The borrowing in any manner authorised under the National Loans Act, 1939, and payment into the Exchequer of any money needed for providing or replacing such sums as may be issued as aforesaid, and the repayment into the Exchequer, with interest, of any such sums and their re-issue out of the Consolidated Fund.

C. The payment out of money provided by Parliament of sums becoming so payable in consequence of amending existing enactments as follows:—

  1. (a) the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1950:
    1. (i) the extension of the definition of a hostel in respect of which contributions are payable by the Secretary of State;
    2. (ii) the extension of the Secretary of State's power to make contributions for hostels so as to include hostels provided by housing associations under arrangements made with the Secretary of State;
    3. (iii) the extension of the Secretary of State's power to make contributions in respect of building experiments;
    4. (iv) the extension of the Secretary of State's power to contribute to the expenses of a central association for housing associations;
  2. (b) the Housing and Town Development (Scotland) Act, 1957: the restriction to houses completed after the commencement of that Act of the prohibition of the making to the Scottish Special Housing Association of payments under section ninety-three of the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1950, in respect of houses provided by them.

D. The payment out of money provided by Parliament of any increase attributable otherwise than as aforesaid to the provisions of the said Act of the present Session in the sums required or authorised under any other Act to be so paid.

E. The payment into the Exchequer, on the winding up of any housing society or trust in which the Secretary of State owns (at the commencement of the winding up) all the shares, of—

  1. (a) any sum received by the Secretary of State on the winding up;
  2. (b) a sum equal to the excess, if any, of—
    1. (i) any amount outstanding, as at the commencement of the winding up of the society or trust, of any advances made to the society or trust by any government department, over
    2. (ii) any amount received by the Secretary of State on the winding up;
and the payment into the Exchequer of any sum received otherwise than as aforesaid by the Secretary of State by virtue of the said Act of the present Session. —[Mr. Maclay.]

10.12 p.m.

Mr. E. G. Willis (Edinburgh, East)

One would not expect Scottish Members to allow a long Money Resolution of this character to pass without a certain amount of discussion, especially after some of the speeches which we heard during the previous debate. I want to ask a number of questions, some important and some not so important, about the Money Resolution.

In head A (1) there is a reference to "equivalent payments". What is a payment equivalent to a subsidy? I should have thought that it could only be a subsidy. What does the right hon. Gentleman expect will be spent as a result of the provisions in A (1), and how will that compare with what is now being spent? I ask that because the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill says: It is estimated, however, that the expenditure over the next few years under the proposals will be about the same in aggregate as the expenditure if the present subsidies were to continue… In other words, there is to be no increase in expenditure.

I am interested in that because the Under-Secretary told us that the purpose of the Bill was to build more houses. A number of local authorities, I understand, are to receive higher subsidies than they are now receiving. If higher subsidies on more houses are to be paid, how can there be no increase in expenditure? I think that most local authorities will get the benefit of the £32 subsidy. If that is true and if more houses are to be built, surely the sum involved must be greater than that now being spent. If that is not obvious, there is something wrong with my arithmetic, and I should like an explanation.

Paragraph (2, a) of head A is concerned with, annual payments in respect of arrangements made between him"— that is, the Secretary of State— and the association for the provision of housing accommodation by the conversion or improvement of existing houses or by the conversion of other buildings, being payments equal to three-quarters… How much are we likely to spend under this provision?

10.15 p.m.

I find it rather difficult to understand head A (2). It says: The payment out of money provided by Parliament of such sums as may be required to enable the Secretary of State… (b) to make to the Scottish Special Housing Association, with the approval of the Treasury, such payments (hereafter in this sub-paragraph referred to as 'deficiency payments') and so on. We then get the proviso at the end: other than a provision for the making of deficiency payments. I have read this two or three times. I am not much of a lawyer, and I find it difficult to understand what the proviso means. What does it mean?

Head A (2, d) says: to pay into the Exchequer the sums authorised to be so paid under paragraph (b) of head E hereof. I do not understand this and should be grateful if the right hon. Gentleman would tell me what it means, because head E says: The payment into the Exchequer… In other words, it is doing the same thing. I do not follow why it refers to paying into the Exchequer in two different parts of the Money Resolution, and I should be grateful if the right hon. Gentleman would tell us something about this also.

I return to what I consider the most important point, which is whether the Bill that we discussed earlier means the payment of larger subsidies to Scotland. We are entitled to some information about that. I should like to know whether what the hon. Gentleman said means that we are to get more. If so, how do the various discrepancies I have pointed out arise?

Mr. Thomas Fraser (Hamilton)

The right hon. Gentleman said earlier that interest rates did not matter, and that was repeated by the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland. The Money Resolution does not deal with interest rates, but with the subsidies payable to be approved by the Secretary of State for Scotland.

From what both Ministers said today, I gathered that they thought the higher rate of subsidy for which provision is made in this Money Resolution would be an inducement to local authorities to build houses. That is, if they get £32 per house it will be an encouragement which they will not have if they receive only £12 by way of subsidy. There is a difference of £20. Is it not a fact that a change of 1 per cent. in the interest rate represents a difference of £20 in the annual cost of a house?

If the right hon. Gentleman were to reduce the rate of interest by 1 per cent., he would be giving the same inducement to all the local authorities to build more houses as would be given by a subsidy of £32 instead of the present subsidy of £12. Can he explain why an increased subsidy is an encouragement to a local authority to build a house, but a reduced rate of interest, which will have precisely the same effect on the housing revenue account, is regarded as quite beside the point and something which will not influence local authorities in any way?

Mr. William Ross (Kilmarnock)

There is one thing that puzzles me slightly. Head B (1) says: The issue out of the Consolidated Fund of such sums as may be required for the purpose pf making advances… to the Scottish Special Housing Association for the purpose of and then three purposes are set out in (i), (ii) and (iii). The Resolution then goes on to say that the aggregate amount of the advances referred to in sub-paragraph (b) of this head"— that is, the aggregates of the purposes in (i), (ii) and (iii)— together with any advances made under subsection (1) of section ninety-four of the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1950, shall not exceed one hundred and ten million pounds. Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us what advances are made under that subsection of the 1950 Act? Only if we know that shall we know the aggregate amount of money that is to be applied in respect of the purposes set out in (i), (ii) and (iii).

Can the Minister also tell me how much of the money under the various subheads is to enable or assist the provision of housing accommodation by the Scottish Special Housing Association, and the nature of it? We have already had a previous reference to the Scottish Special Housing Association in head B (1). It would be of value to the Committee to know exactly what is the expenditure of that Association in respect of this matter, so that we may judge whether or not it is being provident with the moneys that Parliament is voting. It is our function to ensure that the provision we make is being properly handled.

The third purpose is that of enabling or assisting that Association to purchase the assets of housing societies or trusts. Until we know the estimated amount of money to be allotted in that respect it will be difficult for us to make up our minds whether to agree to this power to obtain money for this purpose.

Has the Secretary of State any information to give us about the trusts and societies whose assets he is now going to allow the Association to purchase? What is their value? What is the nature of the assets? Are they actual houses? If we have that information in respect of head B, and an explanation of the difference between the aggregate amount concerned therein and the permissible amount under section 94 (1) of the 1950 Act, we shall be in a better position to judge the extent of the work that is foreseen for the Association.

It might be worth while for the Minister to give us an indication of the number of houses to be provided. I presume that the sum involved will be an aggregate sum that will take us over a number of years. It may be that the Minister will have to come back to Parliament, under the provisions of Section 94 (1) of the 1950 Act, to ask for an increase of the sum of £110 million. Only if we know exactly what are the intentions of the Association that have been approved by the Government can we obtain any idea of the number of houses likely to be provided.

There are a few other questions that I should like to ask, but I will leave them for the moment.

Mr. Cyril Bence (Dunbartonshire, East)

The only question I want to ask the Secretary of State concerns head C (a) (iii): the extension of the Secretary of State's power to make contributions in respect of building experiments". I have always considered that there has not been enough experimentation in this country in the processes and techniques of house building, because most of the planning development of housing in Scotland is by the local authorities. They are the driving force. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman is paying attention to the question which I wish to ask.

Dr. J. Dickson Mabon (Greenock)

The Minister is tired.

Mr. Bence

Some of us are worried that we may be falling behind the Continent in the matter of techniques. Let us be frank about this. It was, I think, referred to in the Second Reading debate. Many of us are anxious that there shall be an intensification of experimentation in new techniques and the general organisation and planning of house building.

I wish to know what power the Secretary of State has at the moment, if he has any, to make grants. I should like to know to what extent his powers have been extended. Have they been extended to enable the right hon. Gentleman to make grants to institutions to which he could not previously make grants? Can he make grants to local authorities to undertake massive experiments in new techniques in building? Can he make grants to private building contractors to experiment in new techniques? What exactly does this mean?

In view of the question I have asked about different institutions to which this would seem to enable the Secretary of State to make grants, may I also ask what idea the right hon. Gentleman has about how much money is likely to be entailed? What does the Treasury envisage as the sum that the Secretary of State will be able to dispense in Scotland to all sorts of institutions engaged in technological developments in house construction? I should like an answer to that question because of my particular interest in the need to increase technological and scientific development in this country. I think that the right hon. Gentleman should give us some idea about how much we should expect will be spent by his Department in Scotland on research, development and experimentation in house construction.

Dr. J. Dickson Mabon (Greenock)

It was unfortunate that we did not get this information in the previous procedures. I wish to refer to head B (1, a). It is stated that the amount shall not exceed the aggregate sum of three million pounds. I take it that that £3 million applies: to housing associations (being associations registered under the Industrial and Provident Societies Act, 1893) providing housing accommodation for letting. I welcome, as I am sure do most of my hon. Friends, this new social venture. I am glad that the Swedes have managed to percolate their ideas to the Under-Secretary whose conversion I also welcome.

I wish to know what is represented by the £3 million in terms of the number of houses which could be built. Perhaps the nature of the finances—since they do not seem to be relevant in other spheres —has escaped me. But, by the ordinary process of marketing, I assume that this £3 million would probably finance the building of 1,000 houses. Is that the intention? Would not it be a great pity if the Financial Resolution went through in this rather strait-jacketed form and it resulted in the Secretary of State having to come to Parliament again to ask the House to extend it?

10.30 p.m.

I understood from what the Secretary of State said earlier that he particularly liked this idea and welcomed industrial and provident societies using the housing associations in Scotland. If this is his intention, why does the Financial Resolution circumscribe so considerably the position of the housing association—

The Chairman

I am afraid that the hon. Member cannot argue that the Financial Resolution should be expanded.

Mr. Willis

Surely it is in order to point out as a relevant argument for discussing, agreeing to or opposing the Resolution that it is too tightly drawn and should be more widely drawn? That, surely, is one of the reasons for discussing and, if necessary, voting against it?

The Chairman

The argument that it should be more widely drawn is beyond the scope of the Queen's Recommendation.

Mr. T. Fraser

I have listened to discussions on a great many Money Resolutions and I assure you, Sir Gordon, that on most of those occasions the Opposition, irrespective of which party was in opposition, have asked that the Resolution should be taken back and redrawn more widely and made less restrictive so that the Standing Committee handling the Bill would be able to adjust it.

I understood that on this occasion my hon. Friend was asking that this restriction of £3 million ought not to be written into the Money Resolution. We are not here discussing how much money will be spent in one year, ten years or twenty years, but how much will be spent on this purpose for the rest of time. By taking out some words, not putting in words, the Standing Committee would be made more free to propose Amendments to the Bill.

The Chairman

We cannot recommend any Amendment which would go beyond the scope of the Queen's Recommendation. We cannot argue that more money should be paid out than has been proposed.

Mr. Willis

Further to that point of order. Is it in order to argue that it does not go far enough and that, therefore, we should reject it?

The Chairman

The hon. Member is perfectly entitled to argue that it should be rejected.

Mr. Willis

It is in order to put forward as one of the arguments that it does not go far enough. This is done every day.

The Chairman

We cannot recommend that it should be increased.

Dr. Mabon

If I may now intervene after that contretemps, I do not think we should be driven to the extent of having to reject it. On the other hand, I think that the Secretary of State should justify this. We are in a difficult position. How many associations are there which could possibly benefit from this? If there are very few it might be adequate, but if the intention is to create a number—and I hope there will be a number—this seems a small amount of money. As my hon. Friend the Member for Hamilton (Mr. T. Fraser) said, it seems a rather small amount for the particular task that the Secretary of State envisages.

If the Bill which fathers the Resolution were to run for ten years—which is much longer than one would expect—this would be a tiny number of houses, 100 houses for all the housing associations. That seems hardly a case to justify the experiment. Even if it were five years it would not be a significant number of houses. I think that the Secretary of State should justify why he is suggesting that the Resolution should be drawn in this way. Will he be kind enough to give information of the number of housing associations? I am told by one of my English friends who was relating this matter to the English Bill and the comparable Money Resolution that there was power given to the Minister of Housing and Local Government to contribute to the expenses of a central association for housing associations. I refer to head C, paragraph (a, iv).

The suggestion was made during the Second Reading debate that the amount of money to be given would not exceed £2,000. This raises certain questions, such as whether this amount will be adequate for the purpose. During an intervention earlier—I believe the Under-Secretary gave some advice to his right hon. Friend—the Secretary of State said that this amount concerned "the beginning," or words to that effect. What does that mean, since the Bill is intended to run for some time? Do the words at "the beginning" mean in one year or ten years? If it is to be at the beginning, will it be a sort of instalment to the central association, and is the Financial Resolution drawn with this in mind? What is the intention of the build-up of moneys to be spent in relation to this? My hon. Friends and I would like to know.

Since this is a new matter, would it be possible to use the vehicle, so to speak, that is used in England for this purpose? I am willing to see whatever agency in the south which may have relationships in the north—over the border—acting as well as it might. There might be another central association which we might like to start.

Is it the Government's intention to seek to second from, say, the Cooperative Union someone who will be concerned either with advising the already existing central association or with creating a new one? The question of money arises and I have no doubt that part of this money—this £2,000—might have to be used for fees in relation to persons either in the employ of the organisation—part-time or otherwise—or receiving fees. Is this matter being considered?

This is a wholly new venture and should be given every chance. I am at one with the Government in this matter. It is not a controversial subject and I am sure that my hon. Friends wish to see this experiment work successfully, although we have reservations on such questions as that of the influence of interest rates.

Mr. Bruce Millan (Glasgow, Craigton)

My hon. Friends and I will undoutedly require more information about this Resolution, particularly concerning the subsidy payments under head A (1).

We shall also require further details about head B (1) (b) which provides for the financing of the Scottish Special Housing Association. We find in head B that the total sum authorised is £110 million. It will be noted that this amount is not the total sum to be provided under the Bill, but a sum which takes account of advances made under Section 94 (1) of the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1950.

I am sure that my hon. Friends, like myself, want to know how much has already been advanced under that Act so that we may have some idea of how much new money is being provided by this Resolution. This is an important point, for we are dealing with £110 million. We should also like to know how much of this maximum sum has already been advanced under the 1950 Act and how much is the net figure which we are giving the Secretary of State power to advance under this Resolution.

Some hon. Members have been worried about the sums of money that have already been advanced to the Scottish Special Housing Association because the activities of this Association have, unfortunately, declined considerably over the last few years. For example, in 1955 it started on the construction of 3,253 houses, but in 1960 it started on the construction of only 1,778 houses. It seems part of deliberate Government policy to restrict this organisation's activities. If so, we should have some information. The right hon. Gentleman should tell us how far this provision represents a further restriction on the activities of the Scottish Special Housing Association, because I very much suspect that that is what it does represent.

We all recognise that the Association has made a very considerable contribution to the solution of Scotland's housing problem. This is a publicly-owned body and does not make any private profits. It has, over the years, shown a very considerable surplus, if one compares the cost of the houses it has built with what would have been the equivalent costs had the houses gone to private builders. I very much hope that the activities of the Association are not to be circumscribed in the future, but what has happened over the past few years seems to indicate that the Secretary of State intends that to happen. I hope that we shall have considerably more information about that head.

Secondly, I respectfully submit that there is an error in the drafting of head E, and that this Money Resolution ought not to be passed as it stands. The Government should withdraw it because of a defect in the wording at the end of the head. The words to which I refer are: The payment into the Exchequer, on the winding up of any housing society or trust… of certain sums. There is no definition of the kind of housing society referred to. The head, as drawn, is quite impossibly wide.

Clause 33 of the Bill states that the only sort of housing society in which the Secretary of State has power to invest money is one within the meaning of the Housing Act, 1914, but head E does not say that. The drafting is quite insufficient. The Clause states: The Secretary of State… may acquire shares in any authorised society within the meaning of the Housing Act, 1914. In other words, there is a restrictive definition in head A but none at all in head E. That must be an error of drafting, and I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will, therefore, consider withdrawing the Money Resolution.

In any case, under this head we really have the most odd circumstances that it provides for what happens in the event of winding up of one of these housing societies in which the Secretary of State owns all the shares, but there is nothing to say what happens to any money received by him in the event of the winding up of one of these societies in which he owns only part of the shares. I see nothing in the wording of the Bill to prevent him investing money in a housing society, assuming we are talking about Clause 33, and there is nothing in the Money Resolution to tell us that. There is nothing in Clause 33 that signifies that the Secretary of State, if he is to invest money in a housing society at all, has to buy all the shares, yet there is nothing in the Money Resolution that says what he has to do with the money paid to him on the winding up of a housing society in those circumstances.

The whole head is very badly drafted, and I think that the Committee —and the Secretary of State, in his own interests—would be extremely ill-advised to allow this Money Resolution to go forward with this deficiency in head E. In the circumstances, I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will withdraw it.

10.45 p.m.

Dr. Dickson Mabon

Will my hon. Friend also give his attention to the question of housing trusts in relation to the Housing (Scotland) Act 1925? He will find on page 28 of the Bill a reference to "the society or trust", whereas the Resolution refers to "any society or trust". He ought to say a word about trusts as well as about societies.

Mr. Millan

I am grateful to my hon. Friend that he has noticed this. It is exactly the same point. In Clause 34 we are not concerned with any sort of housing trust but with a specific sort of trust under Section 119 of the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1925. This is the only sort of housing trust in which the Secretary of State has authority to invest Government money, and yet the Resolution seems to assume that he will get money in his possession which he has never invested because he has never had statutory power to make such investment.

I therefore ask the right hon. Gentleman to withdraw the Money Resolution.

Several Hon. Members rose—

The Chairman

I draw hon. Members' attention to the fact that the time allowed for the debate is limited.

Mr. James Dempsey (Coatbridge and Airdrie)

There are several points which I should like to mention, but in view of the time I will confine myself to head (E). What is meant by "winding up"? Have we in mind bankruptcy or the coming to an end of some form of association? May we have some information about this? One or two of these societies have gone bankrupt in Scotland, and it would be interesting to ascertain from the Secretary of State to what extent we should be involved by the Money Resolution in bankruptcy. I thought that we were prudent business people and that when we were looking after public funds they would be properly managed and that when we invested public money it would be in societies which would produce good results.

The words "winding up" are a nice piece of phraseology, but I should like to know their implications. I should be grateful for some facts and figures and to know whether it could mean the possibility of bankruptcies in which our investment would be lost to the nation.

The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. John Maclay)

The passion for information of hon. Scottish Members on Money Resolutions is admirable and utterly insatiable. I will try to deal with as many requests for information as possible in the time and within the realm of my abilities, although listening to some questions it seemed that I should have to call on my imagination, which I would not dream of doing.

The hon. Member for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Willis) asked what would be the total expenditure under the Act. He will find it in paragraph 26 of the Explanatory and Financial Memorandum in which it is estimated that expenditure over the next few years under the proposals will be about the same in aggregate as the expenditure if the present subsidies were to continue; thereafter, expenditure may be expected to rise.

Mr. Willis

How much is that?

Mr. Maclay

The hon. Member can work it out—

Mr. Willis

If local authorities are to have bigger subsidies under the Bill, how can they build more houses within the same total?

Mr. Maclay

The hon. Member has listened to most of the debate, including my speech, in which I tried at some length to explain how the Bill is supposed to work. He will realise that some authorities can get bigger subsidies. Some will get less, if they do not qualify for the higher rate of subsidy. The hon. Gentleman will find that the answer is clear. If he considers what I have said and read out from the Explanatory and Financial Memorandum, he will see that it is in order.

Another point raised by one or two hon. Members concerned the £110 million. The hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Ross) went into some detail on head B (1, b) (i), (ii) and (iii). The first main answer is that so far a sum of approximately £90 million has been committed. At present £100 million is the limit. We are taking wise advantage of the Bill to increase that sum by another £10 million. This is merely to avoid running hard up against a statutory limit.

The hon. Member for Greenock (Dr. Dickson Mahon) asked questions about the £3 million. This is bound to be an estimate. One cannot tell at the moment how far and how fast this new proposition will go or how many houses will be built. Always having proper regard for the great concern of Parliament for proper financial controls and the utter reluctance of hon. Members opposite to trust the Secretary of State too far with anything, we have put a reasonable limit in the Bill. If this proposition goes with great urgency and speed and does all we hope of it and does it faster than we expect, it is always possible to come back to the House for further sums of money. This is a reasonable and reasoned estimate of what might sensibly happen in the next few years. This is a very wise and sensible approach to a problem of this kind. I am sure that the hon. Member for Greenock will agree with me on this.

I was asked which were these housing societies. Head E says: The payment into the Exchequer, on the winding up of any housing society or trust in which the Secretary of State owns (at the commencement of the winding up) all the shares… Money Resolutions are usually drafted very clearly, concisely and carefully, and need to be studied. Strangely enough, this one means precisely what it says, namely, what I have just read. At the moment there are two such societies. They are the First and Second National Housing Companies. These are the ones which are involved. No others would be involved, unless I found myself for some obscure reason owning all the shares in them, in which case they would be covered by this point.

Mr. Millan

We are looking to the future. The Secretary of State is empowered to acquire shares in other societies. The present position is of no consequence to us. The only authorised societies in which he can acquire shares in the future are those within the meaning of the Housing Act, 1914. He has not explained why that sort of thing is not mentioned under head E.

Mr. Maclay

The hon. Member is only making suppositious theories if he is talking about some period in the future when I may own other shares. His question is simply whether this head applies to housing associations in which I own part of the shares. The wording is clear. He must accept the wording of the Resolution for what it is. I do not think it would make any difference to the range of the debate or make the passing of the Resolution more a matter of enthusiasm for hon. Members opposite.

On the general point it is correct to say that the Resolution, as hon. Members will appreciate if they have studied it with their usual skill, energy and care, is drawn in very generous terms and is singularly unlikely to lead the Chairman of the Standing Committee to be restrictive in his views on what can be discussed. I seem to remember that over a great many years—

Dr. Dickson Mahon

What about head C (a) (iv)?

Mr. Maclay

The hon. Member for Glasgow, Craigton wants an answer on one point. The hon. Member for Greenock wants an answer on another. Another hon. Member wants an answer to another question.

Mr. Dempsey

We are dealing with public money.

Mr. Maclay

My only hope of being fair to everybody is to take hon. Members right through the Resolution.

I will start with head A (1). This provides for the payment of subsidies for new houses under Part I of the Bill to the local authorities and other bodies specified in Clause 1 (1).

Dr. Dickson Mabon

What about head C (a, iv)?

Mr. Maclay

I really cannot—

It being five minutes to Eleven o'clock, three-quarters of an hour after the House had resolved itself into the Committee, The CHAIRMAN put the Question pursuant to Standing Order No. 1A (Exemptions from Standing Order No. 1 (Sittings of the House)).

Question agreed to.

Resolution to be reported.

Report to be received Tomorrow.