§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter(by Private Notice): I desire to ask the Minister of Housing and Local Government a Question of which I have given him Private Notice—if I may say so, I am grateful to him for being here—whether he will make a statement on his discussions with the building societies about his proposals for restraining the growth of house building for home ownership?
§ The Minister of Housing and Local Government (Mr. Richard Crossman)At their own request, I have now extended the talks I have been having with the Building Societies Association to include a highly representative group of builders from the house construction side of the industry. The first meeting of this enlarged group took place yesterday, and I hope before very long to be able to give the House a first report on the progress of the talks.
Meanwhile, I would like to take the opportunity to emphasise that the subject of these talks is the planned expansion of house building, including owner-occupation, and that the right hon. Gentleman's talk of a restrictive aim is wholly misleading.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterDoes not the concluding sentence of the right hon. Gentleman's answer indicate the desirability of the House having an early opportunity to discuss what is an innovation in our affairs, namely, the intention to use these hitherto wholly independent bodies as an instrument of the Minister's in connection with his housing policy? Also, is he aware that many of us are concerned lest any undue pressure or threats of building licensing be introduced into these discussions? Will he give an assurance that no such pressure will be exercised, and will he confirm the statement that the societies themselves have expressed doubts as to the practicality of his proposals?
§ Mr. CrossmanI think that the House had better wait to discuss the matter until, as I said, I bring to it a first report on the progress of the talks. I appreciate that the right hon. Gentleman is generous enough to say that this is the first time that a Government have had the sense to seek the co-operation of the building societies and the building industry in planning the expansion of house building. That is literally true. As to the suggestion that we are trying to use them in any way, all I can tell the right hon. Gentleman is that any Minister who was stupid enough to imagine that one could use people as independent as the building societies or the builders would be a very silly person. What we are doing is quite different. We are seeking for the co-operation of the two essential elements, the building societies and the builders, in ensuring that we can get an increase in house building in the next five years greater than we have had before. I should have hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would welcome the idea and wait till I can tell him how far we have come—taking the third part of his question—in solving the problems of co-operation which naturally arise.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterWill the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to answer the two questions I put to him in my supplementary question? One, will he give an assurance that no threat or pressure or suggestion of building licensing as an alternative will be introduced into these discussions? Two, will he either confirm or deny the statement that the societies have already expressed to him doubts as to the practicality of his proposals?
§ Mr. CrossmanI think that the idea that I should now tell the right hon. Gentleman what has been happening in the talks before I make a statement is stupid. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Yes. I really do. However, I shall give him this assurance. No one is using any kind of threats on either side in these talks. The talks are taking place in an atmosphere of people who, on both sides, are genuinely concerned to expand house building in this country. We are not threatening each other. We are trying to find a basis for a fruitful collaboration between the Government and the industry.
§ Mr. LubbockDoes the Minister realise that sensible people in this country will welcome his initiation of discussions with the building societies with a view to increasing the number of people entering into owner-occupation of their own homes? Is one of the measures he is considering the making available of funds to the building societies from Treasury sources at periods when the moneys they receive from depositors are not sufficient to cover their commitments?
§ Mr. CrossmanYes, one of the subjects we are discussing is precisely that. I defined this in a previous debate as discussing what should be the target of housing, what should be the floor below which housing should not be permitted to fall, and what steps the Government might take in order to prevent that happening. Clearly, therefore, this is one of the matters which we are actively discussing with the building societies.