HC Deb 15 April 1980 vol 982 cc1167-78

Motion made and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Wakeham.]

10.50 pm
Dr. Edmund Marshall (Goole)

I am grateful for the opportunity—a little earlier than expected—to draw the attention of the House to the extraordinary and appalling problems which are related to houses in my constitutency in a road called Corona Drive, Thorne. That road, which has 90 houses altogether, was built some 50 years ago by a firm of property developers called Corona Properties Ltd., of Manchester. The firm still owns 63 of the 90 houses. The other 27 have been purchased over the years by sitting tenants, so that now nearly all are owner-occupied. Of the 63 houses still owned by Corona Properties Ltd., 34 are occupied by tenants of that company, while the other 29 are empty.

The astonishing fact is that many of the empty houses have been vacant for many years. It appears that no new tenancies have been created by Corona Properties since about the end of the Second World War. When any sitting tenant has moved out or passed away during that time, that house has simply been left empty and allowed to grow derelict.

The condition of the vacant houses now presents an appalling eyesore. It is a source of serious nuisances for the other residents of the road. Most of the windows of the houses are boarded up, but still the properties attract vandals, and, on occasions, squatters. Indeed, at a time of continuing housing shortage in the area, it is a matter of wicked negligence that these houses should have been left empty and unused for residency for so long. Furthermore, the gardens are totally overgrown, giving rise to problems of infestation and health hazards for other residents of the road, both tenants and owner-occupiers. The empty houses are scattered throughout the length of the road, interspersed among the occupied houses.

Ten of the empty houses have been subject to closing orders under the Housing Act 1957 made by the relevant local authority, which up to 1974 was the former Thorne rural district council and since then has been Doncaster borough council. I understand that the structure of these houses is still sufficiently sound for them to be capable of being made habitable. However as the years go by, the expense of doing that grows. Until such renovation takes place, the empty houses will continue to give the whole road a general appearance of degradation to the detriment of tenants and owner-occupiers alike.

Meanwhile, the problems of the rented houses are, in a way, equally serious. Whenever items of repair work become necessary—and it is not surprising that there are many such items in houses of that age—the tenants have the utmost difficulty in getting the landlord to do the work. The only address that they have for the landlord is Corona Properties Ltd., Post Office Box 439, Manchester M60 1JB. It appears that any letters sent there receive neither reply nor attention. Indeed, I sent correspondence on behalf of my tenants to that address by recorded delivery and I received no reply.

In 1975 I discovered that the registered address of Corona Properties Ltd., under the company legislation, was 26 Pall Mall, Manchester 2. I discovered that the director of the company was Mr. Michael J. Kingsley, but only once have I received a reply to a letter that I sent there. That was in 1978. Unfortunately, that reply was unco-operative, and simply contained a refusal by the company to meet tenants and to discuss their problems.

Of course, the usual way for any tenants to report repair items for attention to an absentee landlord is through a regular rent collector. That method did not have much effect in Corona Drive when there was a rent collector. I believe that it is now some time since rents were collected. That is yet another bizarre aspect of this most extraordinary situation. When one of these rented houses becomes vacant through the death or removal of a tenant, there is no one to whom one can hand the keys. It is a chronic situation in which it is difficult to understand the motives of the landlords. They treat the property in Corona Drive as if it did not exist. I can only guess that the company's assets in Corona Drive are somehow used to offset financial gains in its operations elsewhere.

I do not know, but perhaps the company's affairs should be scrutinised closely by the Inland Revenue and the Department of Trade. Meanwhile, those of my constituents who live in houses that are owned by Corona Properties Ltd. are the innocent victims of the company's gross neglect. In such a situation, of course, the local authority has power, under the Housing Act 1957, to require that necessary repairs to rented properties be undertaken by the landlord. If necessary, the local authority can make enforcement orders, in default of which the local authority can undertake the work and subsequently charge the landlord.

Corona Properties Ltd. is well versed in the statutory procedures and delays all action to the latest possible moment by using every possible excuse for doing nothing. The conduct of Corona Properties Ltd. in respect of its houses at Thorne has been as baffling as it has been unscrupulous. Until it changes its policies and attitudes, I shall have no confidence that it is interested in fulfilling its duties as the landlord of my constituents in Corona Drive.

After a few years of fruitless pursuit of these problems on behalf of my constituents, I formed the view, which I still hold, that the only effective method of resolving these problems is that of public ownership of all the houses—whether tenanted or empty—that are still owned by Corona Properties Ltd. in Corona Drive. In 1974 the Government advocated in an official circular to local authorities that municipalisation of rented houses in circumstances such as those surrounding Corona Drive was desirable. I continued to press the local authority, Doncaster borough council, and the Department of the Environment to enable such a step to be taken as regards those houses at Thorne. However, progress towards that end was partly delayed by some timidity among local authority officials. They were timid about the risk of making compulsory purchase orders. However, in my view, there was and is ample evidence to demonstrate the bad record of Corona Properties Ltd. at any public inquiry. Progress was also partly delayed by the continuing scarcity of cash needed to secure the purchase.

However, by 1978 progress was being made. I was pleased to receive a letter, dated 10 November 1978, from the then Minister for Housing and Construction, my right hon. Friend the Member for Brent, East (Mr. Freeson) in which he wrote, towards the end: We"— meaning the Department— have told them"— the local authority— that they need not hold back from acquiring the houses if finance is likely to be the only obstacle. That statement must be the nearest that any Minister of the Crown has ever come to writing a blank cheque. I was very grateful indeed to my right hon Friend for making such a commitment.

I quickly passed a copy of my right hon. Friend's letter to the chief executive officer of the Doncaster borough council, a Mr. William Jackson, who was recently President of the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives. He acknowledged receipt of the letter on 17 November 1978. But some nine months later, at almost the same time as Mr. Jackson retired, I was astonished to discover that the senior officers in the appropriate department of the Doncaster council had no knowledge of the Minister's letter, which I quoted. It appears that Mr. Jackson, for reasons best known to himself, did not inform his officer colleagues or members of the council that there was no longer any financial obstacle to a programme of purchasing properties in Corona Drive. As I say, Mr. Jackson has now retired, but through his inaction a vital opportunity to help the residents of Corona Drive was lost.

Since the summer of 1979, the Doncaster borough council has drawn up definite plans for the acquisition of seven of the empty houses in Corona Drive, namely, Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12, all of them close to the only entrance into the road. The improvement of these houses, which face anybody who comes into the road, and their reoccupation would give a much-needed boost to the morale of the road as a whole. I hope that it would spur on Corona Properties to undertake similar work to other houses owned by it along the road.

Doncaster borough council included the acquisition of these seven houses in its submission last autumn to the Department of the Environment for its housing investment programme for 1980–81. I wrote to the present Minister on 6 December in support of this particular item in the council's submissions. Somewhat regrettably, the reply from the Under-Secretary of State, whom I am pleased to see here tonight, was not very encouraging. When the housing investment allocations for 1980–81 were announced by the Secretary of State, it emerged that Doncaster's allocation fell at least £2 million short of what the council needed to meet the housing commitments that had already been made contractually. Consequently, unless additional finance is made available to the local authority in 1980–81, it cannot embark on any new housing schemes such as acquisition of houses in Corona Drive.

I think that I have said sufficient to indicate that the situation in Corona Drive, Thorne, is extremely unusual, with uniquely serious problems facing my constituents there. Responsible opinion of every political shade must surely recognise the plight of Corona Drive residents which is due almost entirely to neglect by their landlord. I hope that all considerations of party policy and doctrine can be put aside to enable the necessary finance to be made available for steps to acquire the seven houses to go ahead.

I very much hope that the Under-Secretary will be, prepared to give the position of Corona Drive thorough consideration. If it will help him to see the road for himself, I give him an open invitation, when it can be conveniently arranged, to come and have a look. If everybody concerned co-operates, I am sure that we can find the best method by which the Government and the local authority together can overcome the serious problems that I have described.

11.5 pm

The Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Geoffrey Finsberg)

I say at once that as soon as some of the more controversial legislation is out of the way, if it is of help, I shall be delighted to come to Doncaster and look at the problem on the ground.

I was most interested to hear the points made by the hon. Member for Goole (Dr. Marshall), and I can understand his concern and that of Doncaster metropolitan district council about both the specific properties in Corona Drive and other problems in connection with housing public expenditure in 1980–81. I should say at the outset that, as the housing authority, these decisions are for Doncaster to take within the broad policy framework laid down by Government.

I know that the hon. Gentleman has taken a deep personal interest in Corona Drive for some years now, and is rightly concerned about the condition of the properties. It is indeed unfortunate—and that may be an understatement—that the landlord has not taken remedial action, and I know that the council has been pressing him to do so. As far as I am aware, to date no application for approval to acquire any of the Corona Drive properties has been made to my Department by the local authority. That is not to say—and I have to make it clear—that we would give borrowing approval to the purchase of such houses if it was the council's intention to add them to its own housing stock.

The council is already heavily committed to a programme of house purchase from the National Coal Board. That will add substantially to its number of council houses. I understand it is contractually committed to a five-year programme of acquiring between 1,000 and 1,700 houses annually at an overall cost in excess of £6 million. The cost to the public purse does not of course end there. Estimates of £8,000 to £9,000 per house are spoken of for improvements and repairs, and, if that applies to any substantial number of the total of nearly 7,000 houses, we are talking of a very large capital investment indeed.

With Doncaster council's substantial programme of new building projects, that adds up to a level of expenditure on housing that we as a nation cannot afford. It is Government policy to allow local authorities to acquire existing properties in the private sector to add to their own housing stock only in the most exceptional circumstances.

Against that general background, I believe that the suggestion that the answer to the problem may be in permanent acquisition by the local authority is wrong. It seems to me that it is the very large existing programme of municipalisation in Doncaster, with the immense demands that that makes on resources of all kinds, that may be preventing, or at least inhibiting, the local authority in its wider housing responsibilities.

The problem, as the hon. Gentleman pointed out, has been running on for several years, irrespective of the seven or eight months' delay apparently caused by Mr. Jackson. The local authority has had ample opportunity, if it so wished, to acquire some or all of these dwellings. Alternatively it could have pursued—indeed, can still pursue—other courses with a good deal more determination than appears on the face of things to have been shown so far.

Indeed, I do not believe that would be unfair to suggest that on this particular occasion the hon. Gentleman is seeking to use me, as it were, as an amplifier or a loudspeaker to turn up the hi-fi volume of the criticism that he has been making over a considerable period of the action or inaction of the local authority in this case.

Dr. Edmund Marshall

On that very point, may I explain that in a letter that I received from the new chief executive of the authority, dated 29 November, he says specifically that the seven houses that I mentioned in Corona Drive have been included in the programme of purchases under the housing improvements programme for 1980–81?

Mr. Finsberg

That is not quite the same point as I was making. The inclusion in the HIP bid and an actual application for a compulsory purchase order are two very different things.

As I say, I think that the hon. Gentleman has been trying to make the local authority do something over a long period, and I must emphasise that the responsibility for any necessary action must rest first with the local authority and not primarily with the Department of the Environment.

What are the alternative courses open to the local authority to secure improvement or repair of these houses? Without detailed knowledge of the condition of the individual dwellings, I cannot be precise, but there are two major possibilities.

First, if the dwellings lack essential amenities, the local authority may be able to compel the owner to bring them up to standard using the powers in part VIII of the Housing Act 1974. Broadly speaking, these powers involve the service of a notice on the person having control of the property requiring works to be carried out. If the notice is not observed, the local authority may carry out the works and recover the cost of so doing from the person having control of the property.

The second option applies if the dwellings do not lack amenities but, to quote the statute, if substantial repairs are required to bring 'them' up to a reasonable standard, having regard to 'their' age, character and locality. The procedure in this case is broadly similar and, indeed, I believe that the local authority has served repair notices in respect of four of the dwellings. I do not know why the notices were not, apparently, followed up with enforcement action by the local authority, for example, undertaking the works itself and charging the cost to the person having control of the dwellings. The hon. Gentleman said that Corona Properties Ltd. is sharp. My experience of local government is that over a period of years it gets to learn the tricks if it wants to do anything.

We are trying to help authorities such as Doncaster which I know are already in difficulties enough with the financial consequences of property acquisition without adding further to the problem. We believe that they will be able to obtain some relief through the provision in the Housing Bill giving tenants the right to buy their council houses. This would benefit Doncaster council both in attracting private investment by passing some of the improvement and repair responsibilities to the new home owners and by allowing the council to augment its available resources for housing provision in 1981–82 and subsequent years by 50 per cent. of its unapplied capital receipts. This, I should have thought, was perhaps a reason why Doncaster might respond to what the hon. Gentleman said and suggest, as we are trying to do, solutions free of political dogma.

The first recourse of the local authority over the specific problem of the properties in Corona Drive must be to persuade the owner of the properties to undertake the necessary works himself. The council has various statutory powers to this end. Also, I hope the landlord may be encouraged by the provisions in the Housing Bill, which will make investment by him more attractive. I am thinking of shorthold tenancies if he wished to grant them for the vacant properties, and the local authorities' discretion to waive the repayment of any improvement grant if the houses were subsequently sold.

It is only as a last resort that the Doncaster council should consider stepping in to acquire any of the properties. I must make it crystal clear that, if it wished to acquire the houses, my Department would approve such a course of action only if the local authority planned to acquire the houses by agreement, improve them and sell them upon completion on the open market. Again, the Housing Bill gives substantial encouragement for such an approach.

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman is as aware as I am of Doncaster council's difficulties in matching its expenditure with the announced housing investment programme levels. Its programme has been an ambitious one involving substantial new building schemes and a five-year programme for the acquisition of NCB houses. I appreciate that the choices the council now has to make are not easy ones for it. But if, as a last resort, it decided that it must embark on a scheme for the acquisition, improvement and sale of the Corona Drive properties, then, although the cost of that scheme would need to be financed from its 1980–81 HIP allocation, its spending power in future years could benefit substantially from the unspent capital receipts.

There is not much that I can offer to do for Doncaster about its HIP allocation because the situation is not altogether easy. The hon. Gentleman said that Doncaster's existing commitments significantly exceed the sums that it would be allowed to spend in 1980–81. This seems to be for two reasons: first, its current estimate of commitments is substantially in excess of the figure it gave my Department in September and, secondly, it has incurred a substantial overspend in 1979–80 which must now become a first charge on the 1980–81 allocation.

I am not sure of the precise reasons for the overspend in the last financial year, but it is a surprisingly large sum of more than £2 million and certainly not in character with other authorities in the Yorkshire and Humberside region. I have already commented on the extent of Doncaster council's commitment to add substantially to its housing stock by purchasing NCB houses, and, although I do not have the council's outturn payment figures for the whole of the last financial year, I notice that its spending up to the end of December last showed an outlay of almost £10 million on new build schemes out of a total programme expenditure of nearly £13 million.

Were it not for this overspend, I believe that the allocation to Doncaster council for 1980–81 would be close to its commitments for this financial year, that is, both just over £14 million. Even so, when the HIP allocations were being worked out, we were basing our calculations on a commitment estimate by the local authority of a little more than £10 million.

In the Yorkshire and Humberside region no council was given an allocation for 1980–81 which was less than the level of commitments forecast by the local authorities themselves in their HIP submissions. Even so, we must not lose sight of the obvious merit of basing allocations with increasing emphasis on housing need and less on historic spending levels, and this the Secretary of State has already told local authorities he proposes to do.

I come back to what I have said to the hon. Gentleman. First, if no acceptable solution seems to be working out in the next two or three months, I will gladly try to come and look at the problem on site. Secondly, if Doncaster is prepared under the terms of the Bill to acquire, im- prove and sell, there are substantially fewer problems. Thirdly, if Doncaster will commence the sale of its existing stock of council houses, it will have the opportunity of augmenting its capital expenditure by the percentage I have already mentioned.

Much of the problem seems to have been caused by a lack of enthusiasm by Doncaster council and its predecessor to do very much for the unfortunate tenants the hon. Gentleman mentioned so movingly. Certainly its enthusiasm has not matched his. I can only say that I will do what I can to see whether there is anything further I can suggest to him. I will have examined some of the points the hon. Gentleman raised about whether the accounts of Corona have been properly field and whether there is a possibility that other provisions of the Housing Act 1974 which compel the disclosure of names and addresses of directors of companies may be of any benefit. But in the end much of the decision has to be taken by Doncaster.

I hope that, with the benefit of this debate, the hon. Gentleman will be able to spur Doncaster into taking more action than it has done in keeping with the racing that takes place in Doncaster.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at eighteen minutes past Eleven o'clock.