HC Deb 20 July 1977 vol 935 cc1601-5

3.33 p.m.

Mr. Anthony Steen (Liverpool, Waver-tree)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make further provision for the urban aid programme in towns and cities and areas of high deprivation; and for connected purposes.

Mr. Speaker

May I remind the hon. Gentleman that he is not bound to take the 10 minutes. There are many right hon. and hon. Members wishing to speak in the major debate.

Mr. Steen

I fear that there is a skeleton in one of the House of Commons cupboards which I believe needs exorcising. It thrives on my Ten-Minute Rule Bills. The House should know that over the last three years I have introduced eight such Bills concerned with championing the rights of the individual against the big bureaucracies or reinforcing the importance of family life in stress areas.

Leave to introduce four of the Bills was voted down by Labour Members and, therefore, they could not be printed. Of the remaining four, two have been printed and two have not. These latter two came up so late in the Session that there was no opportunity to debate them. [Interruption.] I shall repeat that, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman will do us all a favour if he will tell us the contents of the Bill.

Mr. Steen

I thought it might be useful to explain to the House why the last two Bills were not published. They were not published because they were heard so late in the Session that——

Mr. Speaker

Order. If the hon. Gentleman knew the pressure that I am under from hon. Members on both sides of the House who want to speak later he would come to the contents of his Bill.

Mr. Steen

I shall, of course, come to the contents of the Bill. But I should point out that during each of my Ten-Minute Bills I have been interrupted by points of order from the Labour Benches. I thought that I should tell the House why two of the Bills out of the eight were not printed.

Now to today's Bill. It is about getting the new urban aid programme right so that money goes to the people because it is those living in the cities who hold the key to the solution of our urban problems. That is what few speakers in yesterday's debate, and it would appear few Labour Members were very concerned about. They were more concerned with macro-economics, the skyline in the city, how many buildings there were and money matters.

But our cities are living organisms and the people who live there are of supreme importance. It was not just planners but politicians who failed to realise that by pulling down the slums they were pulling down whole communities. They were destroying neighbourhoods and severing family links. They did not realise that the mass transference of people from the inner city areas to the outer council estates would be so damaging.

What is the point of having an inside bathroom if one is desperately lonely and there is no family nearby to give the necessary support and help? It was the gradual awakening in the 1960s which promoted the then Government—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman is making a speech more akin to an Adjournment debate. Will he say why he wants to introduce this Bill and what it includes?

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Gentleman must realise that the House is about to begin a major debate. While I will ensure that the hon. Gentleman has a proper hearing, I think that he owes it to the House at least to come to the point.

Mr. Steen

I shall certainly come to the point, Mr. Speaker. But there is so much barracking from the other side that it is virtually impossible to hear myself speak.

It was the gradual awakening of the Government in the' sixties which helped them embark upon a number of special measures to rebuild those communities which had been broken up by the destruction of the inner area neighbourhoods. Although there has been a stream of so-called experimental urban programes, each with its own special emotive terminology—the comprehensive community programme, the housing action areas, the educational priority areas—the problems of the cities continue to elude us. The Government White Paper goes down the same well-trodden path. It is primarily concerned with construction work, the visual and the materialistic side of the city——

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman must not misuse the Ten-Minute Rule procedure. [HON. MEMBERS: "Name, Name."] There are a good many candidates for that. Will the hon. Gentleman outline his case, because the House is waiting to hear both Front Benches?

Mr. Steen

As far back as 1968 the urban aid programme provided a chance to channel money away from buildings and down into the grass roots to encourage people to greater exertion and to provide greater opportunities for them to help themselves.

Hon. Members

Oh.

Mr. Speaker

Order. May I urge hon. Members that if they restrain their feelings, the sooner we shall come to a decision.

Mr. Steen

Of course, at the beginning of the urban aid programme the local authorities through whom the money was channelled tried to take the lion's share for themselves and increase their rate support through the back door. To correct this, the Home Office issued circulars which accompanied each phase of the urban aid programme and which made specific mention of self-help activity. From the early days, when 93.8 per cent. of the money available was spent by local authorities on their building programmes, last year 50 per cent. went to the non-statutory services—voluntary work and community organisations.

It is important to realise that the solutions to the urban problems lie within the people in the cities. It is for this reason that the Government must not lose this great opportunity, when they increase their level of expenditure under the urban aid programme to£125 million, to see that a sizeable slice goes to voluntary and community work.

My Bill therefore reinforces a new attitude that is already present. Although jobs are crucial to the life of our towns and homes are important for the people to live in, what makes the city flourish is the good relations of people towards one another. The problems of vandalism and mugging are just manifestations of a lack of community and a lack of concern for one's neighbour. These are the distress signals that society is throwing up and that must be heeded.

If we are to change the apathy of so many people, we must make them feel that they are important individuals. They must play a part in improving their areas because they have a contribution to make. If people are irresponsible, it is often because they have never been given the opportunity to make a responsible contribution. My Bill suggests that the Home Office, which controls the total allocation of the urban aid funds and approves the schemes as they come in from local authorities, should give half to the statutory sector and half to the voluntary and community sector.

Solutions to the problems of our towns and cities have continued to evade an ever-increasing number of people whose business it now is to get knee-deep in city problems. The one thing that we have not done is to mobilise people themselves. He who opposes this Bill clearly has no vision. [interruption

Mr. Speaker

Order. The House must forgive me. I could not believe my luck, in that no other hon. Member rose to speak.

The Question is, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make further provision for the urban aid programme in towns and cities and areas of high deprivation; and for connected purposes. As many as are of that opinion say "Aye".

Hon. Members

Aye.

Mr. Speaker

To the contrary "No".

Hon. Members

No.

Mr. Speaker

I think the Ayes have it. The Ayes have it. Who will prepare and bring in the Bill?

Hon. Members

Father Christmas!

Mr. Steen

Mr. Edward du Cann——

Hon. Members

Oh!

Mr. Speaker

Order. We have yet to hear the rest of the good news.

Mr. Steen

His compatriot, Mr. Geoffrey Finsberg, Mr. Reginald Eyre, Mr. Peter Bottomley, Mr. Leon Brittan and myself.