§ 8. Mr. Simon HughesTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give figures for the number of households accepted as homeless in Greater London in 1979 and in 1987; and what is Her Majesty's Government's policy for reducing homelessness in London.
§ Mr. RidleyAcceptances in 1979 and 1987 were 16,650 and 30,000 respectively, I should emphasise that these figures represent households qualifying as homeless under the terms of the Act. It is likely that most had some form of accommodation before applying.
§ Mr. HughesDo the Secretary of State and the Government not stand condemned by those figures, which show that under the Tory Government homelessness in London has doubled to 30,000 families a year, while the number of rented properties has diminished by 13 per cent., or 200,000? Is not the only solution for the Government to realise that affordable rented accommodation is required to meet the needs of the homeless? Is not the only immediate prospect of that an amendment to the Housing Bill on Report next month to ensure that in London, as in the rest of Britain, we have affordable rented housing for those who would otherwise have inadequate housing or no housing at all?
§ Mr. RidleyNo, Sir. The failure lies very much with the local housing authorities, which are responsible for housing. I am glad to say that the category that really counts—those in bed-and-breakfast accommodation—has grown smaller. The figures fell from 8,000 at the end of the first quarter of last year to 7,000 at the end of the year. That 7,000 is almost one fifth of the number of council-owned void and squatted properties, which stands at 33,000, so there are almost five times as many houses as people in bed-and-breakfast accommodation. The hon. Gentleman mentioned money. I point out that this year more than £800 million is available for housing capital works in the London boroughs, so it can hardly be said that the boroughs do not have the resources, given that most of the repairs necessary cost less than £15,000 per unit.
§ Mr. BowisI do not underestimate the need to look for solutions to the genuine problems of homelessness, but does my right hon. Friend agree that the definition of homelessness needs to be kept under constant review? In the light of his answer to the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes), does he recognise the need to introduce measures to cajole, if not force, Labour authorities sitting on empty or squatted properties to put them to good use to help homeless people?
§ Mr. RidleyYes. We should always keep all these matters under close review. I agree with my hon. Friend that we must prevail upon local authorities to bring more of their properties back into occupation. I would add that the Housing Bill will definitely greatly increase availability 940 in London because of the large number of empty private properties that may by released by removing the Rent Act restrictions.
§ Mr. Tony BanksHow dare the Minister blame local authorities in London for the homelessness crisis? Is he aware that there are between 30,000 and 40,000 people in 600 bed-and-breakfast hotels in Greater London? It is absolutely insufferable for the Minister to stand there in his complacent fashion and blame someone else. Why do the Government not accept responsibility for the scandal and crisis of homelessness in London? Why does the Secretary of State not do something positive for once? Why does he not call together the leaders of all the local authorities in London, Tory and Labour alike, for a conference to try to find some way of working the problem out together?
§ Mr. RidleyThe hon. Gentleman's last suggestion that I should call the leaders of the London boroughs together makes my point, that it is the responsibility of the London boroughs to deal with homelessness. Parliament has placed that responsibility on local authorities. Half the time I am told not to interfere with local authorities—except when Opposition Members try to make a political point.
I would add that the money available to local authorities—as I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Mr. Bowis)—for repair and restoration of houses is £800 million a year. There is plenty of opportunity for authorities to put the problem right. Furthermore, the figure that the hon. Gentleman gave is not the figure that I have for those in bed-and-breakfast hotels, which was 7,000 households—not 30,000—at the end of last year.
§ Mr. Nicholas BennettDoes my right hon. Friend recall the parliamentary answers that he gave at the beginning of the year concerning empty properties nationally and in London, and rent arrears, showing that the constituency borough of the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) had the highest number of empty properties anywhere in London and that the borough council of the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) had 1,800 empty properties and took six months to relet them?
§ Mr. RidleyThe figures for Newham show that at the end of 1987 there were 2,764 void dwellings and 575 households in bed-and-breakfast accommodation. The answer to the problem is perfectly clear—those homeless people could have been housed in the empty properties in Newham.—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. It would be helpful to the whole House if Members' questions could be confined to the Minister and not asked of each other across the Chamber.
§ Dr. CunninghamHow can the Secretary of State deny responsibility for London's housing problems or those of the country as a whole when the Government have deliberately and systematically cut local authority housing investment programmes by more than 70 per cent. in real terms during their period in office? Does the Minister agree with his right hon. Friend the Member for Henley (Mr. Heseltine), who, in addressing himself to this problem, said 941 that he was far from persuaded that building more and more houses which fewer and fewer of our children could afford to buy would solve the problem of homelessness?
§ Mr. RidleyThe hon. Gentleman has always failed to realise that, on top of capital allocations, 20 per cent. of receipts is available to local authorities to spend. That amounts to a record figure of £6,000 million for capital investment.
The hon. Gentleman quoted my right hon. Friend the Member for Henley (Mr. Heseltine), who I wish was with us. I shall quote exactly what he said.
§ Dr. CunninghamI have his words here.
§ Mr. RidleyI have them too. My right hon. Friend said:
If there is an assumed right of the newly created family, the newly separated single family or the pensioner living longer to have a home in the south-east, then we are effectively abandoning the south to an inevitable and irreversible erosion of the very qualities that are today so prized by those who live there.That is the view of my right hon. Friend. What he means is that surplus people should be transported.