§ Mr. Lambie
I beg to move Amendment No. 100, in page 27, line 39, at end add:'and where the average standard annual rent charged on 15th May 1972 is greater than the average standard annual rent for Scotland, no increase shall be applied'.The main aim of this Amendment is to allow the Scottish Special Housing Association and the new town corporations in Scotland to keep their rents at present levels until the rents of the other housing associations reach those levels. Earlier the Under-Secretary said that we 396 should take the trouble to read the Bill and then we would understand it. I met the Secretary of State with a deputation of Members representing the new towns and I know from that meeting that he has not read the Bill and does not understand it. He told us that the main aim of the Bill was to be fair to all Scottish tenants. He said that the main aim, before there was a review in 1975–6, was to even out the inequalities in rent levels in Scotland.
Those of us who have read the Bill and understand it know that in 1975–76 there will still be a large number of inequalities in rent levels in Scotland and we shall still be able to publish a league table of rents. Unfortunately, the housing authorities that will be at the top of the league table in 1975–76 will be those in the new town corporations and the SSHA. This Amendment seeks to do what the Secretary of State says is the main aim of the Bill, to be fair to Scottish tenants. I ask him on behalf of the tenants of the SSHA and the corporations to accept this Amendment.
Since half-past three today we have been discussing a series of Amendments. My righthon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Ross) said that we had been dealing with 100 Government Amendments alone. The Government have not accepted any of our Amendments, but I hope they will accept this one because it is in line with their policy to be fair to all tenants. Tenants of the SSHA and the corporations wonder what the Government have got against them when they are dealing in such a way with the residual subsidy, the so-called "welshing" subsidy, and when they are cutting out all existing subsidies by a fixed ratio of £9 per house for this year and for every subsequent year by £10 a house.
The tenants of the new towns and of the SSHA are asking why the Government are picking on them. This is because the Government are to withdraw the residual subsidy to them at double the rate—£18 per house this year and £20 per house every subsequent year. At present, the rents charged by these housing corporations are higher than any charged elsewhere in Scotland. Instead of the Government playing fair, they seem to delight in being vicious. They are 397 attacking all council tenants but reserving their greatest attack for tenants of the SSHA and the new town corporations.
My argument can easily be appreciated if we look at average annual standard rents for each category of housing. In 1971, the average annual standard rent for all local authority houses was £79.29. The average of the SSHA was £105.5, or 30 per cent. above the average. In the new town corporations—Irvine, Livingston, Glenrothes, East Kilbride and Cumbernauld—the average was £139.96, or 75 per cent, above the average.
In my own area, in Irvine, the average was over £180, or 135 per cent. above the average. The rents charged by the new town corporation in Irvine are nearly two and a half times those charged on average by every other local authority in Scotland. By these figures, even Tories should realise there is something unjust in the provisions of the Bill and be prepared to listen to the advice of the tenants of the new towns and of those areas where we have large numbers of SSHA houses.
The Government's case is that in 1975–76, once the full implications of the Bill have been felt throughout Scotland, all these inequalities will have been evened out. That was the argument used by the right hon. Gentleman to the deputation. We were told "Do not worry, Mr. Lambie. You are being hard hit at the moment but later on, when all the other areas have had their rent increases, the rents throughout Scotland will be equal". That is what the right hon. Gentleman honestly believes because he does not understand the Bill.
The true position is that in 1975–76, in Irvine new town, the average annual standard rent will be increased to £294. The neighbouring small burgh of Kil-winning is cheek by jowl with Pennyburn, Irvine. When Kilwinning has fulfilled all the requirements of the Bill, the average annual standard rent there will be only £130 a year, which is £58 less than that presently charged by the Irvine Corporation for its houses in Pennyburn. These figures are reflected in other small burghs and new towns throughout Scotland.
In the equivalent Measure applying to England and Wales the Government have allowed local authorities in special cir- 398 cumstances to vary rent levels and increases. For example, under Section 68 of the English Act they must assess fair rents for all dwellings and reduce rents which are above the fair rent. Under Sections 64 and 65 a local authority may, if it considers that the present rent is at or near the fair rent level, make little or no increase.
We want justice for new town tenants in Scotland, particularly when our rents are already affair rent levels in relation to comparable buildings in the area. In other words, new town and certain special housing association rents are now at fair rent levels.
We are not asking for rents to be reduced. We are simply suggesting that new town corporations and special housing associations be allowed to have a rents standstill, holding rents at their present levels at least until the rents of other areas come up to those levels. There is nothing to prevent the Government accepting this proposal and at the same time retaining the fundamental basis of the Bill.
I represent an urban new town in which the rents are some of the highest in Scotland and are comparable with the highest rents in local authorities generally in England and Wales. The tenants' association has recommended that its members withhold the increase, which shows that we are likely to have a conflict between new town tenants, development corporations and the Government. This will be an unnecessary conflict if the Government mean what they say about the Bill being fair to all tenants.
§ Mr. Eadie
The powerful case made by my hon. Friend the Member for Central Ayrshire (Mr. Lambie) was included in the submissions which we made to the Secretary of State at a private interview which he was kind enough to grant some of my hon. Friends, no doubt at great inconvenience to himself. We are anxious to impress on the right hon. Gentleman the importance of giving consideration to the tenants of new towns. The Government's handling of the Bill from the point of view of these tenants has been, to say the least, ham-fisted.
However democratic local authorities may be in their activities, how democratic are new town corporations in Scotland? I ask that question because in the decision 399 which they took there was no consultation with their tenants. It was dictatorship because the new town corporations in Scotland—we are entitled to know whether they took their decision at the behest of the Secretary of State—met and decided, without consulting the new town tenants, to impose rent increases in May rather than in October.
We are talking about the new towns in relation to the Amendment. The new town corporations treated the people living in them very shoddily. They treated their Members of Parliament just as shoddily. The Secretary of State will know that I received an invitation, with a month's notice, from the new town corporation of Livingston. The corporation wanted to discuss with me the question of increasing rents. But the corporation changed its mind. Two days before the scheduled meeting I was asked to meet the corporation to discuss the rent levels, but I had arranged a meeting for that night with tenants of the new town, and I wished to meet them. So there was no question of consultation. The corporation ham-fistedly informed the tenants that the rents would be increased regardless.
When considering rent levels and the way the matter will be treated under the Bill, one cannot but be puzzled when one finds that in new towns one gets resistance which one is not getting with local authorities. I do not know whether it is Government policy to try to encourage resistance and discontent among people. If the Government have not tried to do that, it is marvellous what they have done by not trying. In the whole approach to rent levels there is gross unfairness between local authority tenants. They cannot understand, for example, that although the tenants of new towns are paying a higher rent level, they will require to pay 25 per cent. of the rent allowances which will be given to people living in private property. They cannot understand why they should have to pay that in addition to having higher rent levels than obtain elsewhere.
I do not know whether the Secretary of State was present earlier but he may know that his hon. Friend the Under-secretary gave a specific promise that he would circularise tenants of local 400 authorities in relation to the non-dependant Clauses. I wonder whether the new town tenants and SSHA tenants will get the same circular and whether the corporations, which seem to be a law unto themselves, with no democratic content, will get the same circular from the Secretary of State or will be allowed to do what they like in relation to the tenants of new towns.
This is a very important Amendment because it indicates the Government's general approach to new town rent levels. We have had agreement between the two parties that the new towns are to be economic growth points and that this is the way to deal with Scotland's economic problems. But it is a poor way to go about it if we invite people to an economic growth point and ask them to pay rents far in excess of those of neighbouring local authorities.
The Amendment is reasonable. Since we all met the Secretary of State, as representatives of new towns, he has had ample opportunity to consider this matter. Logically there is a case for doing precisely what the Amendments suggests. I hope that the Secretary of State will support the Amendment.
§ Dr. M. S. Miller (Glasgow, Kelvingrove)
The Amendment is very reasonable. Surely it cannot fail to be impressed on the Secretary of State that the situation for which my hon. Friend is asking will apply in England and Wales. I do not see why a situation which applies in one part of the United Kingdom should not apply to Scotland as well. My hon. Friend has pointed out the anomalous position with regard to Scottish new towns.
My hon. Friend the Member for Midlothian (Mr. Eadie) has said something which reminds me of what happened when, during the 1950s, I served on the planning committee of Glasgow City Council, later becoming the chairman of that committee. From 1954 to 1958 I had frequent meetings with the father of the hon. Member for Glasgow, Hillhead (Mr. Galbraith), who was then Minister of State, Scottish Office, and the then Chairman of the East Kilbride Development Corporation. It was obvious from the many discussions we had that the democratic set-up left much to be desired, to put it mildly.
401 I am not in favour of high rents. I am surprised that my hon. Friend even concedes that there should be an element of agreeing to the kind of high rents which are being imposed. The level at which rents are being imposed upon the people of Scotland is disgraceful.
If rents must be increased, why must they be increased for people who are already paying such extravagantly high rents? I am amazed at the level of rents in the Scottish new towns. Some hon. Members opposite seem to think that all workers earn relatively large sums of money. Many of those living and working in the Scottish new towns are not earning large sums. I wonder that some of them can pay the high level of rents that already applies in the new towns. I do not see why the Secretary of State should be stubborn about accepting an Amendment which would make the position in Scotland comparable with that in England and Wales.
The new towns being developed in Scotland have one main purpose, which transcends all other purposes. It is to ensure that the cancerous slums of our industrial cities are demolished and way is made for people to move to decent housing conditions. How is it possible to attract people from slum areas so that slums can be demolished and the people moved to decent housing conditions when the Government impose upon the people rents which many of them will not be able to afford?
I plead with the Secretary of State even at this stage to accept the Amendment, which unfortunately does not detract from his Bill. Would that the Amendment did something drastic to affect the Bill. It would at least make the position clear in relation to those in the new towns. If the Secretary of State is genuine and is not merely mouthing platitudes, if he wishes the people of Scotland to be decently housed, he should abandon the idea that it is only a matter of rents. It is houses we want built. I have told him that the Government's proposals do not build one extra house. He has not proved that they have built an extra house. If he is sincere in the view he has expressed so often—that he wishes to rehouse the people living in slums in Scotland's industrial cities—he should accept the Amendment.
§ Mr. Ewing
I speak as a tenant of the Scottish Special Housing Association and as one who for the last 18 years has suffered from the inequality inflicted by the rent structure of the association. I am greatly concerned that built into the Bill is a clear provision for preserving the differential between local authority rents and association rents and local authority rents and new town development corporation rents. Our arguments in Committee, particularly on new town rents, were answered by the Under-Secretary in saying that people should be prepared to pay for being part of a new town. I do not accept that.
I join my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Kelvingrove (Dr. Miller) in asking how a place like Glasgow can expect to spill from its population about 60,000 families into new towns. There will be no overspill agreements reached between local authorities and Glasgow Corporation because of the Bill, and yet it will be the purpose of new towns in future to take overspill families from places like Glasgow. It will be impossible for places like Glasgow to spill out 60,000 or 70,000 families into new towns and ask them to accept astronomical rents.
My view of the SSHA has always been and still is—I do not see it changing—that it should be only a building authority. Half the problem could be solved quite easily by transferring the stock of association houses in local authorities to the local authorities concerned. In the local authority areas which I represent, if a person wants an association house he can have one within days. Association houses are empty in my constituency for week after week, not because they are two-apartment, three-apartment or four-apartment houses but because they are association houses and the rents are much higher than local authority houses, and they always will be as a result of the Bill.
I wish to raise a point about the new town of Glenrothes. Myhon. Friend the Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton) is not present and I would be the last to presume to speak on his behalf, but I want to make the relevant point that it is astonishing that in 1972 Glenrothes new town development corporation is advertising houses not for letting or even for sale, but for occupation as holiday homes because it cannot get them occupied in any other way. It is true 403 that there is no industry in the area for people to go to and there is a large amount of unemployment, but the other side of the story is that the rents are so high that they frighten away prospective tenants.
I support the Amendment and hope that the Government will accept it.
§ Mr. Gordon Campbell
The effect of Clause 31, limiting rent increases made by new towns and the Scottish Special Housing Association, is to place the tenants of development corporations and the Association on the same footing as the tenants of local authorities as regards maximum rent increases. The average standard rent of Association houses is about 25 per cent. above the present average standard rent of local authority housing, but the Association will be required to balance its account in the same way as local authorities, and after the first two or three years of operation of the new system of housing finance it is expected that this gap will be very largely closed.
To compare new town housing with local authority housing is not comparing like with like, since the new town houses are in general much newer and situated in up-to-date environments of high amenity. Moreover the stock of houses in new towns includes a significant proportion—about 8 per cent.—of managerial-type houses.
Another reason for the present higher rents is that all new town tenants in Scotland have had the protection of a comprehensive rebate scheme and this protection will be improved with the model rent rebate scheme provided for in the Bill. As an example of this nearly all Irvine Development Corporation tenants receiving a family income of £30 a week or less and having at least one child of school age will pay less rent in 1972–73 than in the previous year.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. E. L. Malla-lieu)
The right hon. Gentleman is not 404 giving way, so the hon. Member must sit down.
§ Mr. Campbell
I must say this if I can. It is misleading to use the argument that because the average rent charged by new towns is higher than that charged by local authorities, the new town tenants are necessarily worse off. The simple reason for this difference is that the average stock of houses in new towns consists of new, good amenity houses. The rents charged by many local authorities for their new houses are very similar to the average rents charged in new towns. A more correct comparison is with the rent charged for new local authority houses. For example, in Edinburgh it is around £200 per annum and in Greenock about £160 to £180. The argument advanced by the Opposition did not challenge the validity of that comparison.
§ Mr. Campbell
It would be unfair to tenants of new local authority housing if the tenants of new town houses were to enjoy a standstill period as the Amendment would provide while similar local authority rents were being increased under the Bill over the next few years. The Bill has been drafted to give broadly comparable treatment for all public sector tenants but an assurance can be given that as local authority rents increase the position of the new town rents will be kept under review with those of the local authorities.
§ Mr. McCartney
Will the Secretary of State agree that what he is saying now is contrary to what he said to the deputation led by my hon. Friend the Member for Central Ayrshire (Mr. Lambie) when we met to discuss new town corporation and housing authority rents? When the question was posed, the right hon. Gentleman said that the policy in the Bill was to equalise rents and to eliminate the deficits in the housing revenue accounts. This would result in a situation in which new corporation rents would be far in excess of the local authority rents unless the Secretary of State continued to increase the rents of other local authorities. This was his statement to the deputation.
§ Mr. Campbell
I am saying now what I said to the deputation. As regards the 405 SSHA the gap should largely close in two or three years' time. With new town corporations one must compare like with like. One must compare modern, new, high-quality houses in the new towns with similar houses held by local authorities.
§ Mr. Ross
I want to pose one pertinent question. The new town of Irvine is the one new town in Scotland based on two existing towns—Kilwinning and Irvine. Both the existing towns have built very good new houses. Will the Secretary of State compare the rents of those houses in the burghs which are to be absorbed within the new town with the new town corporation houses? This is where the difficulty will arise.
§ Mr. Campbell
I have done that. I have looked at some of the differences in Kilwinning and Irvine. The local authorities can pool the rents among their tenants. If, for instance, they should be charging £200 a house they can, if they wish, charge less to one and more to some other tenant. The effect of the Bill will be that local authorities will have to balance their housing accounts
§ but to do that they may raise rents only within certain limits each year.
§ The SSHA is on the same basis. The new town corporations start at a higher level of average rents because, on average, there is much higher quality housing in the new towns. They also will be limited in the average yearly increase, so that the gap will continue for a time, with the new town average being higher than the normal local authority average in Scotland. But new town corporation rents, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, are determined in consultation with the Secretary of State, and this consultation will continue. In the years to come, as local authorities reach their—
§ It being Eleven o'clock MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER proceeded, pursuant to Standing Order No. 43 (Business Committee) and the Orders [11th April and this day], to put forthwith the Question already proposed from the Chair.
§ Question put, That the Amendment be made:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 244 Noes 271.409
|Division No. 205.]||AYES||[11.0 p.m.|
|Abse, Leo||Corbet, Mrs. Freda||Ginsburg, David (Dewsbury)|
|Albu, Austen||Cox, Thomas (Wandsworth, C.)||Gourlay, Harry|
|Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.)||Crawshaw, Richard||Grant, George (Morpeth)|
|Archer, Peter (Rowley Regis)||Cronin, John||Grant, John D. (Islington, E.)|
|Armstrong, Ernest||Crossman, Rt. Hn. Richard||Griffiths, Eddie (Brightside)|
|Ashley, Jack||Cunningham, G. (Islington, S.W.)||Griffiths, Will (Exchange)|
|Ashton, Joe||Cunningham, Dr. J. A. (Whitehaven)||Hamilton, William (Fife, W.)|
|Atkinson, Norman||Dalyell, Tarn||Hamling, William|
|Bagier, Gordon A. T.||Davies, Denzil (Llanelly)||Hannan, William (G'gow, Maryhill)|
|Barnes, Michael||Davies, Ifor (Gower)||Hardy, Peter|
|Barnett, Guy (Greenwich)||Davis, Clinton (Hackney, C.)||Harper, Joseph|
|Baxter, William||Davis, Terry (Bromsgrove)||Harrison, Walter (Wakefield)|
|Benn, Rt. Hn. Anthony Wedgwood||Deakins, Eric||Hart, Rt. Hn. Judith|
|Bennett, James(Glasgow,Bridgeton)||de Freitas, Rt. Hn. Sir Geoffrey||Hattersley, Roy|
|Bidwell, Sydney||Dell, Rt. Hn. Edmund||Healey, Rt. Hn. Denis|
|Bishop, E. S.||Dempsey, James||Heffer, Eric S.|
|Blenkinsop, Arthur||Doig, Peter||Horam, John|
|Boardman, H. (Leigh)||Dormand, J. D.||Houghton, Rt. Hn. Douglas|
|Booth, Albert||Douglas-Mann, Bruce||Howell, Denis (Small Heath)|
|Bottomley, Rt. Hn. Arthur||Driberg, Tom||Huckfield, Leslie|
|Bradley, Tom||Dunn, James A.||Hughes, Rt. Hn. Cledwyn (Anglesey)|
|Broughton, Sir Alfred||Eadie, Alex||Hughes, Mark (Durham)|
|Brown, Bob (N'c'tle-upon-Tyne, W.)||Edwards, William (Merioneth)||Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen, N.)|
|Brown, Hugh D. (G'gow, Provan)||Ellis, Tom||Hughes, Roy (Newport)|
|Brown, Ronald (Shoreditch & F'bury)||English, Michael||Hunter, Adam|
|Buchan, Norman||Evans, Fred||Irvine, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur (Edge Hill)|
|Buchanan, Richard (G'gow, Sp'burn)||Ewing, Harry||Janner, Greville|
|Butler, Mrs. Joyce (Wood Green)||Faulds, Andrew||Jeger, Mrs. Lena|
|Campbell, I. (Dunbartonshire, W.)||Fitch, Alan (Wigan)||Jenkins, Hugh (Putney)|
|Cant, R. B.||Fletcher, Raymond (Ilkeston)||Jenkins, Rt. Hn. Roy (Stechford)|
|Carmichael, Neil||Fletcher, Ted (Darlington)||John, Brynmor|
|Carter, Ray (Birmingh'm, Northfield)||Foot, Michael||Johnson, Carol (Lewisham, S.)|
|Carter-Jones, Lewis (Eccles)||Ford, Ben||Johnson, Walter (Derby, S.)|
|Castle, Rt. Hn. Barbara||Forrester, John||Jones, Dan (Burnley)|
|Clark, David (Colne Valley)||Fraser, John (Norwood)||Jones,Rt.Hn.Sir Elwyn(W.Ham,S.)|
|Cocks, Michael (Bristol, S.)||Freeson, Reginald||Jones, Gwynoro (Carmarthen)|
|Cohen, Stanley||Galpern, Sir Myer||Jones, T. Alec (Rhondda, W.)|
|Concannon, J. D.||Garrett, W. E.||Kaufman. Gerald|
|Conlan, Bernard||Gilbert, Dr. John||Kelley, Richard|
|Kinnock, Neil||Morris, Charles R. (Openshaw)||Silkln. Rt. Hn. John (Deptford)|
|Lambie, David||Morris, Rt. Hn. John (Aberavon)||Silkin, Hn. S. C. (Dulwich)|
|Lamborn, Harry||Moyie, Roland||Sillars, James|
|Lamond, James||Murray, Ronald King||Silverman, Julius|
|Latham, Arthur||Oakes, Gordon||Skinner, Dennis|
|Lawson, George||Ogden, Eric||Smith, John (Lanarkshire, N.)|
|Lee, Rt. Hn. Frederick||O'Halloran, Michael||Spearing, Nigel|
|Leonard, Dick||O'Malley, Brian||Spriggs, Leslie|
|Lestor, Miss Joan||Oram, Bert||Steel, David|
|Lever, Rt. Hn. Harold||Orbach, Maurice||Stoddart, David (Swindon)|
|Lewis, Arthur (W. Ham, N.)||Oswald, Thomas||Stonehouse, Rt. Hn. John|
|Lewis, Ron (Carlisle)||Owen, Dr. David (Plymouth, Sutton)||Strang, Gavin|
|Liplon, Marcus||Padley, Walter||Summerskill, Hn. Dr. Shirley|
|Lomas, Kenneth||Paget, R. T.||Swain, Thomas|
|Loughlin, Charles||Palmer, Arthur||Taverne, Dick|
|Lyon, Alexander W. (York)||Pannell, Rt. Hn. Charles||Thomas,Rt.Hn.George (Cardiff,W.)|
|Lyons, Edward (Bradford, E.)||Parker, John (Dagenham)||Thomas, Jeffrey (Abertillery)|
|Mabon, Dr. J. Dickson||Parry, Robert (Liverpool, Exchange)||Thomson, Rt. Hn. G. (Dundee, E.)|
|McBride, Neil||Pavitt, Laurie||Tinn, James|
|McCartney, Hugh||Pendry, Tom||Torney, Tom|
|McElhone, Frank||Pentland, Norman||Urwin, T. W.|
|McGuire, Michael||Prentice, Rt. Hn. Reg.||Valley, Eric G.|
|Mackenzie, Gregor||Prescott, John||Wainwright, Edwin|
|Mackie, John||Price, J. T. (Westhoughton)||Walden, Brian (B'm'ham All Saints)|
|Mackintosh, John P.||Price, William (Rugby)||Walker, Harold (Doncaster)|
|Maciennan, Robert||Probert, Arthur||Wallace, George|
|McMillan, Tom (Glasgow. C.)||Rankin, John||Watkins, David|
|Mahon, Simon (Bootle)||Reed, D. (Sedgefield)||Weitzman, David|
|Mallalieu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.)||Rees, Merlyn (Leeds, S.)||Wellbeloved, James|
|Marks, Kenneth||Rhodes, Geoffrey||Wells, William (Walsall, N.)|
|Marsden, F.||Richard, Ivor||White, James (Glasgow, Pollok)|
|Marshall, Dr. Edmund||Roberts, Albert (Normanton)||Whitehead, Phillip|
|Mason, Rt. Hn. Roy||Roberts, Rt.Hn.Goronwy(Caernarvon)||Whitlock, William|
|Mayhew, Christopher||Robertson, John (Paisley)||Williams, Alan (Swansea, W.)|
|Meacher, Michael||Roderick, Caerwyn E.(Br'c'n&R'dnor)||Williams, Mrs. Shirley (Hitchin)|
|Mellish, Rt. Hn. Robert||Roper, John||Williams, W. T. (Warrington)|
|Mendelson, John||Rose, Paul B.||Wilson, Alexander (Hamilton)|
|Mikardo, Ian||Ross. Rt. Hn. William (Kilmarnock)||Wilson, William (Coventry, S.)|
|Millan, Bruce||Rowlands, Ted||Woof, Robert|
|Miller, Dr. M. S.||Sandelson, Neville|
|Milne, Edward||Sheldon, Robert (Ashton-under-Lyne)||TELLERS FOR THE AYES:|
|Mitchell, R. C. (S'hampton, Itchen)||Shore, Rt. Hn. Peter (Stepney)||Mr. James Hamilton and|
|Morgan, Elystan (Cardiganshire)||Short, Rt.Hn. Edward (N'c'tle-u-Tyne)||Mr. Ernest G Perry.|
|Morris, Alfred (Wythenshawe)||Short, Mrs. Renée (W'hampton,N.E.)|
|Adley, Robert||Carr, Rt. Hn. Robert||Fidler, Michael|
|Alison, Michael (Barkston Ash)||Chapman, Sydney||Finsberg, Geoffrey (Hampstead)|
|Allason, James (Hemel Hempstead)||Chataway, Rt. Hn. Christopher||Fisher, Nigel (Surbiton)|
|Amery, Rt. Hn. Julian||Chichester-Clark, R.||Fletcher-Cooke, Charles|
|Archer, Jeffrey (Louth)||Churchill, W. S.||Fookes, Miss Janet|
|Astor, John||Clark, William (Surrey, E.)||Fortescue, Tim|
|Atkins, Humphrey||Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe)||Fowler, Norman|
|Awdry, Daniel||Clegg, Walter||Fraser,Rt.Hn.Hush(St'fford & Stone)|
|Balniel, Rt. Hn. Lord||Cockeram, Eric||Fry, Peter|
|Batsford, Brian||Cooke, Robert||Galbraith, Hn. T. G.|
|Beamish, Col. Sir Tufton||Coombs, Derek||Gardner, Edward|
|Bell, Ronald||Cooper, A. E.||Gibson-Watt, David|
|Bennett, Sir Frederic (Torquay)||Cordle, John||Gilmour, Ian (Norfolk, C.)|
|Benyon, W.||Corfield, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick||Gilmour, Sir John (Fife, E.)|
|Berry, Hn. Anthony||Cormack, Patrick||Godber, Rt. Kn. J. B.|
|Biffen, John||Costain, A. P.||Goodhart, Philip|
|Biggs-Davison, John||Crouch, David||Goodhew, Victor|
|Blaker, Peter||Crowder, F. P.||Gorst, John|
|Boardman, Tom (Leicester, S.W.)||Davles, Rt. Hn. John (Knutsford)||Gower, Raymond|
|Body, Richard||d'Avidgdor-Goldsmdi, Sir Henry||Grant, Anthony (Harrow, C.)|
|Boscawen, Hn. Robert||d'Avigdor-Goldsmid,Maj. -Gen. James||Green, Alan|
|Bossom, Sir Clive||Dean, Paul||Griffiths, Eldon (Bury St. Edmunds)|
|Bowden, Andrew||Deedes, Rt. Hn. W. F.||Grylls, Michael|
|Braine, Sir Bernard||Dixon, Piers||Gummer, J. Selwyn|
|Bray, Ronald||Drayson, G. B.||Gurden, Harold|
|Brewis, John||du Cann, Rt. Hn. Edward||Hall, Miss Joan (Keighley)|
|Brinton, Sir Tatton||Dykes, Hugh||Hall, John (Wycombe)|
|Brocklebank-Fowler, Christopher||Eden, Sir John||Hall-Davis, A. G. F.|
|Brown, Sir Edward (Bath)||Edwards, Nicholas (Pembroke)||Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury)|
|Bruce-Gardyne, J.||Elliot, Capt. Walter (Carshalton)||Hannam, John (Exeter)|
|Bryan, Sir Paul||Elliott, R. W. (N'c'tle-upon-Tyne, N.)||Harrison, Col. Sir Harwood (Eye)|
|Buchanan-Smith, Alick(Angus,N&M)||Emery, Peter||Haselhurst, Alan|
|Buck, Antony||Eyre, Reginald||Havers, Michael|
|Burden, F. A.||Farr, John||Hawkins, Paul|
|Campbell, Rt.Hn.G.(Moray & Nairn)||Fell, Anthony||Hayhoe, Barney|
|Carlisle, Mark||Fenner, Mrs. Peggy||Hicks. Robert|
|Higgins, Terence L.||Maxwell-Hyslop,R.J||Shaw, Michael (Sc'b'gh & Whitby)|
|Hiley, Joseph||Meyer, Sir Anthony||Shelton, William (Clapham)|
|Hill, James (Southampton, Test)||Mills, Peter (Torrington)||Simeons, Charles|
|Holland, Philip||Miscampbell, Norman||Sinclair, Sir George|
|Holt, Miss Mary||Mitchell,Lt.-Col.C.(Aberdeenshire,W)||Skeet, T. H. H.|
|Hordern, Peter||Mitchell, David (Basingstoke)||Smith, Dudley (W'wick & L'mington)|
|Hornby, Richard||Moate, Roger||Soref, Harold|
|Hornsby-Smith.Rt.Hn.Dame Patricia||Molyneaux, James||Speed, Keith|
|Howe, Kn. Sir Geoffrey (Reigate)||Money, Ernie||Spence, John|
|Howell, Ralph (Norfolk, N.)||Monks, Mrs. Connie||Sproat, Iain|
|Hunt, John||Monro, Hector||Stainton, Keith|
|Hutchison, Michael Clark||Montgomery, Fergus||Stanbrook, Ivor|
|Iremonger, T. L.||More, Jasper||Stewart-Smith, Geoffrey (Belper)|
|Irvine, Bryant Godman (Rye)||Morgan, Geraint (Denbigh)||Stodart, Anthony (Edinburgh, W.)|
|James, David||Morgan-Giles, Rear-Adm.||Stoddart-Scott, Col. Sir M.|
|Jenkin, Patrick (Woodford)||Morrison, Charles||Stokes, John|
|Jessel, Toby||Mudd, David||Stuttaford, Dr. Tom|
|Johnson Smith, G. (E. Grinstead)||Murton, Oscar||Sutcliffe, John|
|Jopling, Michael||Nabarro, Sir Gerald||Tapsell, Pater|
|Joseph, Rt. Hn. Sir Keith||Neave, Airey||Taylor,Edward M.(G'gow,Cathcart)|
|Kaberry, Sir Donald||Nicholls, Sir Harmar||Taylor, Frank (Moss Side)|
|Kellett-Bowman, Mrs. Elaine||Noble, Rt. Hn. Michael||Tebbit, Norman|
|Kershaw, Anthony||Normanton, Tom||Temple, John M|
|Kilfedder, James||Nott, John||Thatcher, Rt. Hn. Mrs. Margaret|
|Kimball, Marcus||Onslow, Cranley||Thomas, John Stradling (Monmouth)|
|King, Evelyn (Dorset, S.)||Owen, Idris (Slockport, N.)||Thomas, Rt. Hn. Peter (Hendon, S.)|
|King, Tom (Bridgwater)||Page, Rt. Hn. Graham (Crosby)||Thompson, Sir Richard (Croydon, S.)|
|Kinsey, J. R.||Page, John (Harrow, W.)||Tilney, John|
|Kirk, Peter||Parkinson, Cecil||Trafford, Dr. Anthony|
|Kitson, Timothy||Percival, Ian||Trew, Peter|
|Knight, Mrs. Jill||Peyton, Rt. Hn. John||Tugendhat, Christopher|
|Knox, David||Pike, Miss Mervyn||Turton, Rt. Hn Sir John|
|Lambton, Lord||Pink, R. Bonner||van Straubenzee, W. R.|
|Lamont, Norman||Powell, Rt. Hn. J. Enoch||Vaughan. Dr. Gerard|
|Lane, David||Price, David (Eastleigh)||Waddington, David|
|Langford-Holt, Sir John||Prior, Rt. Hn. J. M. L.||Walker-Smith, Rt. Hn. Sir Derek|
|Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry||Proudfoot, Wilfred||Ward, Dame Irene|
|Le Marchant, Spencer||Pym, Rt. Hn. Francis||Warren, Kenneth|
|Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland)||Quennell, Miss J. M.||Weatherill, Bernard|
|Longden, Sir Gilbert||Raison, Timothy||Weils, John (Maidstone)|
|Loveridge, John||Ramsden, Rt. Hn. James||White, Roger (Gravesend)|
|Luce, R. N.||Rawlinson, Rt. Hn. Sir Peter||Wiggin, Jerry|
|McAdden, Sir Stephen||Redmond, Robert||Wilkinson, John|
|MacArthur, Ian||Reed, Laurance (Bolton, E.)||Winterton, Nicholas|
|McCrindle, R. A.||Rees, Peter (Dover)||Wolrige-Gordon, Patrick|
|McLaren, Martin||Renton, Rt. Hn. Sir David||Wood, Rt. Hn. Richard|
|Maclean, Sir Fitzroy||Ridley, Hn. Nicholas||Woodhouse, Hn. Christopher|
|Macmillan,Rt.Hn.Maurice (Farnham)||Ridsdale, Julian||Woodnutt, Mark|
|McNair-Wilson, Michael||Rippon, Rt. Hn. Geoffrey||Worsley, Marcus|
|McNair-Wilson, Patrick (New Forest)||Roberts, Michael (Cardiff, N.)||Wylie, Rt. Hn. N. R.|
|Maddan, Martin||Roberts, Wyn (Conway)||Younger, Hn. George|
|Madel, David||Rost, Peter|
|Marten, Neil||Russell, Sir Ronald||TELLERS FOR THE NOES:|
|Mather, Carol||St. John-Stevas, Norman||Mr. Hamish Gray and|
|Maude, Angus||Scott, Nicholas||Mr. Marcus Fox.|
|Mawby, Ray||Sharples, Richard|
§ Question accordingly negatived.
§ Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER then proceeded, pursuant to the said Orders, to put forthwith the Questions on Amendments, moved by a member of the Government, of which notice had been given, to that part of the Bill to be concluded at Eleven o'clock.
Amendment made: No. 101, in page 27, line 39, at end add—
(2) If high cast subsidy is payable to a development corporation or the Scottish Special Housing Association for any year, then the standard rents which they charge for that year shall not exceed an amount which, together with the high cost subsidy payable to them for that year, produces income which is equal to the development corporation rent income or, as the case may be, the Scottish
Special Housing Asociation rent income as respectively defined in section 10 of this Act.—[Mr. Gordon Campbell.]