§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now Adjourn.—[Mrs. Harriet Slater.]
§ 5.55 a.m.
§ Mr. Hugh D. Brown (Glasgow, Provan)I am sure that this is one of the latest Adjournment debates we have had for some time and, although the audience will disappear, I hope we may attract a few commuters who are waiting for the first trains.
Nevertheless, there are difficulties about trying to be indignant at 6 o'clock in the morning. I feel indignant about the fact that we conduct our affairs in such a way that we are still here at 6 o'clock. Knowing the reputation in Glasgow of my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary, knowing his sympathetic understanding of the needs of Glasgow since he became a member of the Government, and knowing his reputation for being vigorous in speeding up decisions which sometimes get held up in the Department, I look forward to hearing what he has to say about the use of land at Easterhouse.
I am raising two aspects—the general problem and the specific issues associated with it, or which arise from it. The general conception I have of Easterhouse is that it is a new town within a city. It is enough to say that it has about 10,000 houses and a population of about 35,000. If one includes a couple of adjoining schemes which rightly have been included in what is called Easterhouse township, the centre becomes a township of about 14,000 houses with a population of about 50,000.
With the exception of six large burghs in Scotland, it means that this is bigger than any of the 14 classified large burghs. It is slightly smaller than Falkirk and bigger than Inverness. Compared with other new towns it is bigger than East Kilbride and two or three times the size of Cumbernauld. I make this point because I want to compare the quality of living in the new town within a city with some other aspects of new towns. It suffers to some extent from the fact that redevelopment areas within cities have priority.
1470 This is inevitable in the sense that redevelopment starts from the ground floor in such things as health centres and I recognise that it is much easier to start from the ground floor rather than impose redevelopment on an established community. But it is unfortunate that in Glasgow, where we have three new towns—Castlemilk, Drumchapel and Easter-house, in that chronological order—Easterhouse has always been third in the queue. I am not complaining but merely stating a fact. There are delays and difficulties and big new towns are lacking in almost every amenity which makes up what I call a properly developed and balanced community.
I should like to suggest that all the shortcomings and lack of facilities are due to 13 years of Tory Government. Certainly many are, in that public expenditure was held up and local authorities had financial difficulties which made it even more difficult for them to embark on fringe benefits for any community. Nevertheless, Easterhouse is certainly not as desirable a place to live in as it should be, and the quality of living standards leaves much to be desired.
Even though the township centre of Easterhouse, which should be the main commercial, shopping and market centre and focus of social life and entertainment, were started tomorrow, it is estimated that it would take three or four years to complete. When it is remembered that the first houses in the area were occupied—not started, but occupied—as long ago as 1956, when Earl Attlee opened the 100,000th corporation house in Glasgow, it will be appreciated that it will take anything from 12 to 13 years before this main focal point is in operation in a township bigger than some of the large burghs. This is a measure of the delay and frustration inevitably found in such a community. These unreasonable delays are frustrating to the people of the area.
Leaving the general, the second issue which I want to raise concerns the 100 acre site at Queenslie. This was originally the site for 14 smallholdings and was handed over, or sold, to the Corporation for an undisclosed fee, I would have thought as a bargain, by the then Department of Agriculture for Scotland. However, there are now only five holdings classified as being used for agriculture 1471 and only five of the 10 houses now in existence are being used as dwelling houses.
This is a site of 100 acres of valuable land. Any land is valuable in the central belt, according to the Scottish Development Department's Report, which says that it is now realised that, both because of the bad psychological effect and because the land is needed, we can no longer afford to leave land derelict in the central belt and a great deal of work to improve this land is in progress. Yet here are 100 acres zoned for industry, although there seems to be some doubt about their suitability for such development because of National Coal Board workings, or their possibility. This is one matter which my hon. Friend could investigate.
There is another important point in connection with Comedie Farm. This is a piece of land zoned for housing as a result of representations by the Corporation and on which an option seems to have been obtained by a private developer anxious to take advantage of the Corporation's representations. I know that there are some difficulties, but my hon. Friend might find it worth while to investigate this matter.
Another specific point about the use of land is the extension to the Loch Wood scheme or the Bishop's Loch scheme. This is an extremely desirable area and I should like to think that we could get some high amenity housing in the area which is zoned for housing. It might even be worth considering private building, because an injection of this kind of high amenity building into an area of ordinary housing would be extremely desirable and it might be worth having discussions with the corporation on this matter. I understand that no work has been done on the preparation of a layout.
A minor matter which my hon. Friend might consider is the use of Bishop's Loch a most desirable and attractive piece of water. The only unfortunate thing is part of it shores the ground of Gartloch Mental Hospital and it was originally feared that there might be an intrusion into the privacy of the patients and therefore some difficulty. However, I think that that difficulty can be overcome.
Provan Hall, an outstanding piece of history in the area, is widely quoted as being the most perfect example remaining 1472 in Scotland of a simple monkish house of pre-Reformation days. This again is something that with a little encouragement by the Department to the National Trust—perhaps a little financial assistance—could be made into something of great historic interest. It would provide great attraction to more people if it was done up and perhaps some better use made of the surrounding grounds.
On the educational side, I should like to draw the Under-Secretary's attention to the fact that there is no such thing as a nursery school in the whole of this area. There is no such thing as a community centre.
I suggest it will be 10 or 11 years before anything happens in Easterhouse, when we think in terms of the new town of Castle Market within Glasgow which is ahead of it. I think that their request for a community centre is still in the hands of the Department for approval.
The Report of the Scottish Development Corporation says that although the first houses in Livingstone were not completed until later in the year, plans were already well advanced for the development by the Development Corporation of a comprehensive community centre. I wish that we had some of the advantages of Livingstone and some of the big new towns within the city.
I turn to the need for a youth centre in Easterhouse. I think this is also with the Department at the moment, and I should like it to be generous and speedy in the decision it arrives at. The problems of delinquency are well known. After Easterhouse has been in existence for eight or nine years, it is not unreasonable that there should be some sign that something will come to interest some of the youth of the area.
Perhaps I have painted a dull and depressing picture of Easterhouse. It was not my intention. But when we have this whole area with absolutely nothing at night for the young people of the area, where the brightest thing at night was the fire station until recently when the public house came on the scene, one will gather that this is not a healthy atmosphere for young people to be brought up in. This gives me great concern.
I was a member of the corporation and perhaps should accept some responsibility for the mistakes, if mistakes they were, 1473 that have been made in the planning, or lack of it, that has gone into these new towns. Perhaps naïvely, I have every confidence and understanding that the Government, being all powerful and the Secretary of State for Scotland being particularly powerful—and even with the disadvantage of being successful in getting an Adjournment debate at this time in the morning—some good will come out of it for the people of the Easter-house area.
§ 6.10 a.m.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Dr. J. Dickson Mabon)I assure my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Provan (Mr. Hugh D. Brown) that I, too, have had the experience of having to wait for many hours to speak in an Adjournment debate. My hon. Friend will, no doubt, rejoice in the fact that a number of our hon. Friends who represent not only the City of Glasgow but neighbouring and friendly boroughs are here to support him. I regret the absence of hon. Gentlemen on the benches opposite.
As a result of my hon. Friend's flattering description of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State—as the omnicompetent in Scotland—he has given me quite a task to reply to the number of points which he raised. There are a number of matters which are the responsibility of Ministers who are not in the Scottish office. So if I touch on some of their responsibilities and my hon. Friend is not satisfied with the explanations I give, I am sure that he will, after reading the report of my speech in HANSARD, pursue them directly with the Ministers concerned.
I will begin by putting the debate in the context of the debate which we had recently, when my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Kelvingrove (Dr. Miller) raised the subject of the scale of Glasgow's housing problem. At that time I referred to the probable need for a greater amount of de-congestion in Glasgow to give the city room to develop standards of social environment equal to the best in terms of size and types of houses, open space conveniently located, shopping and recreational facilities and the means to get to them easily. The Government think it likely that there is congestion not only in Glasgow but also 1474 in a number of the surrounding areas. A detailed assessment of the present population and the long-term capacity of existing built-up areas in relation to desirable planning standards is being carried out. As I have previously stated, Glasgow is not only a city but a region, and it must be considered in that context.
The Government are anxious to keep in touch with the local planning authorities concerned to assess the extra land that will be needed if we are to decongest, if I may be forgiven for using such a word, the purposes for which it is required and so on. In their conversations with the city and the surrounding local authorities, the Government want to bear all these points in mind, and these needs will be borne in mind by the Scottish Economic Planning Council in preparing economic and physical plans for Scotland generally and central Scotland in particular.
The Corporation of Glasgow has many burdens, including the great financial burden of trying to redevelop the city. The corporation's plans are certainly bold and imaginative. The fact that really effective steps were not taken in the past is a reflection on former Governments of this country during the last 13 years. We feel sure that things will improve under the present Government and the local government finance Bill may be introduced in this Parliament. That Measure will be designed to help great cities like Glasgow to meet the burdens which they must carry.
I had discussions with the corporation on 23rd May about the target of the housebuilding programme for the next five years. The purpose of the discussions was reflected in what my hon. Friend said about Easterhouse. The corporation recognises that in this part of Scotland a good many of our difficulties can be traced to the existence of a social environment lacking many of the facilities and, indeed, lacking the general air of a truly modern, prosperous urban area. In the urban context, a great deal of emphasis is given to redevelopment, and the reduction in overall density which the corporation hopes to achieve is vital if redevelopment is to give the best modern social environment. Often, however, not enough attention is given to the form, balance, detail and timing of development on hitherto undeveloped 1475 land. This is illustrated best of all by the situation in the Easterhouse area of Glasgow.
I will rehearse the present development plan position there. Proposals for Easterhouse were submitted to the Secretary of State in October, 1962, by way of amendment to the quinquennial review of the Glasgow development plan. Of a total area of just under 2,200 acres, 1,291 were earmarked to continue in agricultural use, 282 acres were zoned for public open space and 118 acres, mostly at Commonhead and Comedie Farms, for housing.
There were no public objections to these proposals, which were approved by the Secretary of State. The same development plan amendment included an area of 86.9 acres at Queenslie, nearby, which was re-zoned from small holdings to industrial use. An area of about 12 acres, situated to the south of Wester-house Road, is allocated in the quinquennial review for the township centre, which is to be built by a development company.
Sites have already been allocated in the quinquennial review of the development plan for community centres in Garthamloch and Wellhouse housing schemes and south of Lochend Road, all in the general area of Easterhouse.
Here I should say something about the mineral situation. The National Coal Board is proposing to extend its mining operations from Cardowan colliery in a southerly direction taking in the area around Robroyston Hospital, extending eastwards to Barlinnie Prison and to the south of Edinburgh Road. The National Coal Board did not object to the Corporation's proposals at the development plan stage, but reserved its right to raise points later in connection with individual sites. It has now notified Glasgow that it proposes to work under the site of the proposed township centre and this is the subject of negotiation between the board and the development company. They are also in touch with the corporation and the Board of Trade about the extra land zoned for industry at Queenslie. The corporation intend to build at modest densities at Easterhouse.
In the large housing areas at Comedie and Commonhead Farms no buildings 1476 over three storeys are planned. I understand that about 1,600 houses are planned for six sites in the Easterhouse area. A few will be completed this year, but most from 1967 onwards. On design, my hon. Friend is concerned mainly with the houses to be built on the lands of Commonhead Farm, near Bishop's Loch and in an area of high amenity. I sympathise with his desire to ensure that the houses built here match their environ ment in design and layout and I have no reason to believe that Glasgow Corporation does not share his views. It is. however, a matter for the Corporation. It does not seem likely that this scheme will require detailed approval for subsidy by the Secretary of State, and by virtue of the General Development Order, the Corporation itself is freed of the necessity to obtain planning permission for its own housing work. I am confident that the planning committee will give the same careful scrutiny to a local authority scheme as it would to a private development in the same area.
Bishop Loch is not controlled by the board of management which administers Gartloch Hospital, but by the British Waterways Board. I am told that informal approaches have been made for access to the loch through the hospital grounds, but these suggestions have been discouraged. The board is anxious to discourage outsiders entering other than on hospital business. I am not sure whether the British Waterways Board may permit sailing on the loch if we could find some way of making sure that the interests of the board of management were not offended.
Provan Hall is open to the public and it may well be that more intensive public use could be made of the house and its grounds. This seems a matter for negotiation between the corporation and the National Trust to explore the possibility of doing this.
A youth centre and games hall at Easterhouse have been under discussion between the authority and the Government for some time. The authority was authorised in March, 1965, to accept tenders for the erection of the centre and the games hall at a cost of just over £54,000. The games hall is 110 ft. by 60 ft. and is in accordance with the most up-to-date thinking. I am told that 1477 there is a little delay in the building work.
A new further education college is planned for Easterhouse and Glasgow education authority has earmarked a site of about 12 acres for it near Provan Hall. The authority has not yet drawn up any plans for the college. It is not expected that it will be able to start work before about 1968. It is too soon for me to say whether or not it can be fitted into the Department's investment programme for that year.
The Government are not aware of any present plans by the authority to build a community centre at Easterhouse. There are earlier sites earmarked, I agree, but there are no proposals before us. Until such time as the education authority makes these propositions, the Secretary of State cannot intervene.
Nursery schools are not strictly within my own purview but in that of my hon. Friend the Member for Lanark (Mrs. Hart), but I can say that the basic policy about the provision of nursery schools and classes is that at present essential developments in primary, secondary and post-school education absorb all the building resources and the teachers available. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State regrets that he can see no early prospect of removing the restrictions on nursery school provision.
In practice, however, proposals for new nursery schools and classes may be considered if suitable accommodation is already available—for example, in an old school; the cost of adaptation is very small; staff can be obtained without affecting staffing standards in primary schools in the area or in neighbouring areas. In addition, the provision of individual nursery classes could be approved without insisting on the foregoing conditions where the effect would be to produce a substantial net gain in primary or secondary school staff by releasing from domestic duties married women who were already certificated teachers.
I understand that there are no nursery schools in the Easterhouse area at present, but there are three on the perimeter, and the conversion of part of an old primary school at Shettleston to provide a fourth has been approved. Since very 1478 few teachers live in Easterhouse, provision of nursery schools there would be unlikely to have much effect in enabling married women to return to teaching. It is a formidable problem.
I know that my hon. Friend has corresponded with the Department about the possibility of a health centre, suggesting at one time that the newly-formed Glasgow Joint Medical Services Committee should be asked to consider the possibility of Glasgow Corporation providing a new clinic in the Easterhouse area of Glasgow, incorporating practice accommodation for local medical practitioners on the lines of a scheme by the county medical officer of health for the West Riding of Yorkshire.
This proposal was referred to the Committee, and the matter was discussed at a meeting on 18th May. It was agreed that while the urgent problems were in redevelopment areas of Glasgow, the needs of the Easterhouse area would be considered as part of the whole question of the provision of medical buildings to be made throughout the city. The medical officer of health was asked to draw up a list of new clinics planned in the various areas of Glasgow so that the Committee, and more especially the general medical practitioner representatives on it, could consider the possibility of general medical practitioners in the area having practice accommodation in them.
It does not seem likely, however, that a health centre at Easterhouse would rank high in the priority list. We cannot build at once all the clinics we would like to, and the redevelopment areas have stronger claims. The fact that a site may be available at Easterhouse is not in itself an argument.
In a sense, I have given my hon. Friend some disappointing replies but I hope that I have given him one or two rather hopeful answers as well. He will see that what we are up against is the question of money for the work. In the time I have been in my own responsibilities I can say on behalf of the Secretary of State that I am very impressed by the work done by the new towns but, at the same time, I think that to some extent we are not giving the proper priority to the older areas and, for that matter, the newer developing 1479 areas in the larger cities. This is certainly true in Glasgow.
I would hope that when more financial resources become available, my right hon. Friend will not pursue past practice but will place the emphasis more fairly on the redevelopment of large cities and communities like Glasgow, and the 1480 larger burghs, so that we shall strike a social balance between those people fortunate enough to be living in new towns and the others who want to stay in the more solid and well-established communities such as Glasgow.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at twenty-five minutes past Six o'clock a.m.