§ 50. Mr. Frank Allaunasked the Secretary of State for the Environment why only one-quarter of the money granted for housing improvement in the year ended 31st August, 1971, £7.9 million out of £28.3 million, went on standard grants for installing bathrooms, inside lavatories and hot water systems.
§ Mr. Peter WalkerMore of the house owners concerned no doubt chose to improve their properties to a higher standard with the aid of the more generous discretionary grants.
§ Mr. AllaunI very much welcome the improvement work, but is it not a fact that this money is largely being spent on luxury improvements which the Municipal Engineering Journal describes as weekend country cottage bonanzas instead of on the vital and important job of putting bathrooms in the houses of 11 million men, women and children who need them?
§ Mr. WalkerThe hon. Gentleman is wrong in two respects. First, the discretionary grants frequently include the standard amenities, such as the installation of bathrooms, toilets and facilities of that type. Therefore, both types of grant deal with the basic amenities. So the hon. Gentleman is wrong in that respect. Secondly, there is no doubt from the pattern of improvement grants that the great mass of them are being made in the urban areas, and particularly the areas with the worst housing.
§ Mr. FreesonReverting to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun) about the areas where the money is being spent, can the right hon. Gentleman indicate the percentage of grant aid which is going to rented properties and say whether it is increasing or remaining static?
§ Mr. WalkerI cannot give the specific figures, but I have already said what will happen as a result of the extra grants for which we are providing. In the development areas, 103,000 public rented houses will be improved.