HC Deb 08 March 1967 vol 742 cc1659-61
Mr. Murton

I beg to move Amendment No. 27, in page 7, line 5, to leave out from 'of' to 'two' in line 6.

Mr. Speaker

With this Amendment we are to discuss Amendment No. 28, in page 7, line 7, to leave out: 'as the Minister may determine'.

Mr. Murton

The Clause deals principally with the question of mining subsidence, and the object of this Amendment is to ensure that, where the Minister is satisfied that a site is liable to subsidence, he will have power to pay the £2, as has been the case since the Housing Act, 1946, and not a lesser amount. Under the Clause as drafted, the Minister has discretion to pay less than the full supplemental subsidy of £2, and we are of opinion that the Clause should provide that the full subsidy must be paid in the case of mining subsidence.

Why is there discretion in the Bill to pay a lesser amount? In Committee, the Parliamentary Secretary himself told us that, during 1961–65 there were about 26,500 dwellings which qualified, mostly in the Midlands, Yorkshire and Wales and further North. It is unnecessary for the Minister to be parsimonious in this matter. We understand that the basic subsidy now covers the point, but, even so, this exceptional payment in recognition of the extra expense and difficulty which will be encountered should be allowed.

Mr. Mellish

As the hon. Gentleman has quite properly said, this Clause enables the Minister to pay a supplementary supplement up to a maximum of £2 per dwelling for sixty years for securing rights of support for taking precautions against subsidence. The effect of the Amendment would be to require the Minister to pay £2 in every case where he considered that the supplementary subsidy should be paid.

The supplementary subsidy is payable in addition to the basic subsidy. That means that assuming a representative rate of 6½ per cent., the combined subsidies on all extra costs up to £45 per dwelling would exceed the total loan charges on those extra costs. That is unacceptable.

I can assure the House that my right hon. Friend proposes to continue to pay the subsidy in accordance with substantially the same sliding scale related to extra costs which was in force under the old Housing Act, 1961. Under that scale, only £2 would be payable on all extra costs above £64 a dwelling. We are not being parsimonious. Local authorities do not complain of that: they recognise that the Government are merely showing their intention in these matters. As I have given that assurance, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not press his Amendment, because the Clause does not represent an effort on our part to hurt these people but to help them.

Mr. Murton

In view of the Parliamentary Secretary's assurance that he wishes to help, as we do, the people involved, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.