§ 18. Mr. Woodnuttasked the Minister of Public Building and Works what was the total value of output on new work by contractors in Great Britain in 1967; what is the approximate annual value of licensable work under the Building Control Act 1966; what was the value of work for which licences were refused from the commencement of controls until 31st March, 1968; and upon what criteria those licences were refused.
§ Mr. Mellish£2,906 million, £170 million and £19.2 million. My Report to the House on 22nd May, 1968, contained a statement of the criteria upon which building licence applications are considered. Rather than take up the time of the House, I would refer the hon. Member to the Report.
§ Mr. WoodnuttIn view of the very small proportion of work done subject to licence and the small amount refused, and the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has already indicated to my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Gar-ston (Mr. Fortescue) that he will reconsider this whole question, will he go further and decide that this is a lot of nonsense and, as the unemployment rate in the construction industry is higher than it has ever been at this time of the year, will he not abolish the licensing system?
§ Mr. MellishThe industry is not complaining to me that I am causing it 16 any hardships. I repeat that when the time is opportune these controls will be withdrawn.
Mr. Chichester-CIarkIn view of these interesting figures, can the Minister estimate what was the immediate impact on the balance of payments of these measures as forecast by the Prime Minister in July 1966?
§ Mr. MellishNot without notice.
§ 19. Mr. Woodnuttasked the Minister of Public Building and Works what estimates he has made of the probable level of output in the construction industry in 1969 and 1970; and whether he will make a statement.
§ Mr. MellishI expect ouput on new work in 1969 and 1970 to increase by between 4 and 5 per cent. each year.
§ Mr. WoodnuttIs not that rather small increase another reason for cutting out licences? The Minister is trying to meet us on this question and he says that he will look at it, but does he not appreciate that he must work hard to increase the throughput of the industry? In this day and age, we could be aiming at something like a 10 per cent. increase?
§ Mr. MellishYes, but one must not underrate what these figures mean. Year after year, at constant prices, there has been an increase in output. Last year, there was an all-time record for the industry. Now we are looking for a 4 per cent. increase on that; next year, we hope to have a 4 per cent. increase on what we hope to achieve this year, and so on. It is a very creditable record.
§ Mr. RoebuckI welcome the information which my right hon. Friend has given the House, but could he do more to persuade small building firms to co-operate together in the purchase of expensive machinery, which could then be shared among them in the same way as small farmers share expensive machinery, in order to increase productivity still more?
§ Mr. MellishSmall builders do present a problem, I agree. I have a later Question about them, and at this stage I merely tell my hon. Friend that we have 17 a procedure now by which we discuss with the industry the problems of large, medium and small builders. If that proposition is put to me, I shall gladly consider it.