HC Deb 24 May 1966 vol 729 cc249-53
13. Mr. Frank Allaun

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is aware that the first nine decisions of the rent assessment committees did not state what was the controlled rents of these dwellings or of identical dwellings, where available; if he will now state what they were; and if, in future, this will be done by the rent assessment committee whereever possible.

Mr. MacColl

Comparisons with controlled rents cannot be drawn in all cases. For example, the 1956 rateable value may be above the limit for control set by the Rent Act, 1957, or the dwelling may have been improved and the current rateable value may not therefore bear a direct relationship with the 1956 rateable value.

Mr. Allaun

Is my right hon. Friend aware that some of these decisions overruling the rent officers have fixed rents three times as high as the controlled rents, which indicates that the shortage factor or market value is not being disregarded in the way the Act requires?

Mr. MacColl

As my hon. Friend knows, we had an interesting and useful discussion of this matter last Friday. I have nothing to add to what I said then.

Sir C. Osborne

Will the Minister look at a Question put down by his hon. Friend the Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun) two years ago, when he complained that the biggest factor in high rents was the interest charge resulting from a high Bank Rate? Why was it an evil under the Tories, and why is it a virtue under the Socialists?

Mr. MacColl

The hon. Member's, question is a very good indication of why it is desirable to leave these matters to rent officers and rent assessment committees.

26. Mr. Frank Allaun

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will state the determinations of the rent officers, up to the most recent date available, for the London boroughs, and for each provincial rent office.

Mr. MacColl

With permission, I will circulate the figures in the OFFICIAI REPORT.

Mr. Allaun

As so far only 8,200 cases—a tiny proportion of the number of extortionate rents—have been submitted to the rent officers, will my hon. Friend consider giving far wider publicity, preferably on television, to the opportunities afforded by the Act?

Mr. MacColl

We are at the moment watching the load on the rent officers and the rent assessment committees with considerable care. We do not want to in-

RENT ACT 1965
APPLICATIONS FOR REGISTRATION OF FAIR RENTS:—DETERMINATION BY RENT OFFICERS up to and including 14th May, 1966
Number of Determinations
Rent Assessment Panel Areas and Registration Areas Previous Rent Reduced Previous Rent Unchanged* Previous Rent Increased Total Determined
LONDON
In operation from 3rd January, 1966
City of London
Westminster 57 11 42 110
Camden 43 44 14 101
Islington 68 7 11 86
Hackney 109 4 3 116
Tower Hamlets 166 69 16 251
Greenwich 42 20 13 75
Lewisham 53 1 4 58
Southwark 158 6 32 196
Lambeth 95 18 36 149
Wandswotth 29 16 3 48
Hammersmith 113 6 22 141
Kensington and Chelsea 74 29 72 175
Waltham Forest 67 25 8 100
Redbridge 31 7 5 43
Havering 10 2 8 20
Barking 21 1 2 24
Newham 81 2 2 85
Bexley 23 10 14 47
Bromley 35 4 16 55
Croydon 54 3 11 68
Sutton 22 6 4 32
Merton 45 11 8 64
Kingston upon Thames 19 3 11 33
Richmond upon Thames 26 2 9 37
Hounslow 27 5 32
Hillingdon 17 5 54 76
Ealing 76 6 24 106
Brent 109 11 28 148
Harrow 4 16 13 33
Barnet 48 47 19 114
Haringey 106 1 16 123
Enfield 43 1 3 47
TOTALS (London Panel Area) 1,871 394 528 2,793
* The column "Previous rent unchanged" includes applications for registration supported by certificates of Fair Rent.

crease that load until we are sure that the existing machinery can bear it.

Following are the figures:

Number of Determinations
Rent Assessment Panel Areas and Registration Areas Previous Rent Reduced Previous Rent Unchanged* Previous Rent Increased Total Determined
Walsal 23 2 4 29
West Bromwich 1 8 9
Wolverhampton 1 2 5 8
Worcester 1 2 3
TOTALS (West Midland Panel Area) 149 66 62 277