HC Deb 05 April 1962 vol 657 cc663-5
Mr. William Small (Glasgow, Scotstoun)

I beg to move, in page 16, line 43, to leave out from "scheme" to the end of line 44.

The words that we propose to leave out are as follows: and the disposal of the assets provided under the scheme. I am very concerned about the implication of those words, and the possibility of their use by the Government, who have shown a bias against the building of publicly-owned houses to let. If this phrase were left in the Clause the Secretary of State could require the Scottish Special Housing Association to dispose of its assets. It could sell or even give away the houses it has built, and it might mean that all the houses which the Secretary of State has authorised to be added to the pool of rented houses would be taken out of that pool.

No indication is given about the circumstances of disposal, or even the conditions of such disposal. The Association has done an excellent job in house building in Scotland, often in areas where no other person would build, and where it was difficult to supply houses of a modern character for the needs, of the people. The Under-Secretary should not be surprised, therefore, if we are suspicious about this power to dispose of valuable national assets. It may be that circumstances will arise necessitating such a disposal, but we have not heard what such circumstances might be, and we cannot, without question, agree to give a reactionary Secretary of State such potentially destructive powers.

These houses were built for letting, because even a Unionist Secretary of State recognised the need. We consider that they should be retained for their original purpose, and also that the threat of the wholesale disposal of these assets would undermine the people's confidence in the good administration of the Association. I am sure that the Under-Secretary will deny any intention to dispose wholesale of these assets, but I hope that he will do more than that. He must justify the power he seeks and explain the intentions of the Government, in order to allay our fears.

Mr. Galbraith

It will be impossible to lay at rest the suspicions of the hon. Member for Glasgow, Scotstoun (Mr. Small).

Mr. Willis

Sit down again.

Mr. Galbraith

It is clear that a deep pathological illness affects all hon. Members of the Opposition in respect of these matters, and that is very serious, because it makes debating extremely difficult.

Subsection (2) imposes a duty upon the Scottish Special Housing Association, if it has built houses for letting or co-operative occupation with the aid of advances made under subsection (1, b), to comply with any direction the Secretary of State may give it as to the administration of the scheme and the disposal of the assets provided under the scheme.

The Amendment seeks to omit those concluding words, which would prevent the Secretary of State from giving directions as to the disposal of such assets.

The hon. Member argued that since the whole object of the scheme under subsection (1, b) is to provide houses for letting there ought not to be any scope for the selling of these houses, since this would defeat the whole object of the scheme. I want to make it clear that I entirely agree with him about the need for the scheme to produce houses for letting or co-operative occupation. I have also explained in our proceedings in Committee that we are anxious to see some half-way house between a local authority subsidised house and the full burden of owner-occupation. We believe that the provisions of Clause 11 and of this Clause will help towards this end.

I can assure the hon. Member that there is nothing sinister about the provision that we are now discussing—certainly nothing which seeks to cut across the essential objects of the scheme. Subsection (2), like Clause 11 (3)—which, apparently, did not cause the Opposition any difficulty—contains routine administrative provisions relating to the management of the scheme, and provides for the possibility that at some time some of the houses built under the scheme might have to be disposed of.

The provision made for the disposal of the assets is by way of being a long-stop, to meet a situation which might never arise, and which we hope never will. It is, however, a provision which we think it necessary to make. If it is necessary to dispose of one or two houses provided under an advance scheme because, for example, they fall within a redevelopment area, it would be necessary to ensure that the Association complies with the requirements laid down by the Secretary of State.

Further, if a situation ever arises in which it becomes necessary to wind up a scheme altogether it would again be necessary for the (Secretary of State to be able to direct how this should be done. The latter situation will, I hope, never arise, but if it does the provisions of subsection (2), to which the hon. Member objects, would provide a protection for the Exchequer money involved.

I can assure the hon. Member that there is no intention of undermining the whole scheme by contemplating the sale, in the ordinary way, of houses provided for letting. We want the scheme to be a success; that is why we included it in the Bill. We want to be able to demonstrate that there is a market for houses provided on this basis. The market to provide houses for sale is already catered for by ordinary private builders but, as the hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Ross) has pointed out, it is also possible for local authorities to build houses for sale, with the Secretary of State's approval.

But that is not what we are concerned with in subsection (1, b) and in Clause 11. Our whole object is to provide houses for letting or for co-operative occupation. I hope therefore, that on reflection the hon. Member will agree that there is nothing sinister or objectionable about the provisions that we have been discussing. As they allowed Clause 11 to pass I hope that they will allow this Clause to pass. In any case, I regret that I cannot accept the Amendment.

Amendment negatived.