HL Deb 18 December 1919 vol 38 cc394-419

Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly.

[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]

Clause (1):

Provision for payment of money to persons constructing houses.

1. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act the Minister of Health (in this Act referred to as "the Minister") may, in accordance with schemes made by him with the approval of the Treasury, make grants out of moneys providedby Parliament to any persons or bodies of persons constructing houses.

(2) Grants under this section shall be made only in respect of houses—

  1. (a) which comply with the conditions pre-scribed by the Minister and are in material accordance with the conditions as to the number of houses per acre and the standards of structural 395 stability and sanitation approved by the Minister in the case of any scheme carried out by a local authority under section one of the Housing, Town Planning, &c. Act, 1919;
  2. (b) which are entitled by the local authority of the area in which the houses are situate, or on appeal by the Minister, to have been completed in a proper and workmanlike manner;
  3. (c) the construction of which is begun within twelve months after the passing of this Act and which are completed within that period or such further period not exceeding four months as the Minister may in any special case allow:

Provided that a proportionate reduction of the grant shall be made in respect of any house which is not completed within the said period of twelve months unless the Minister is satisfied that the failure to complete the house within that period is due to circumstances over which the person constructing the house had no control.

Any person aggrieved by the refusal or neglect of a local authority to grant a certificate under this subsection in respect of any house may appeal to the Minister, and if the Minister is satisfied that the house has been completed in a proper and workmanlike manner he shall certify accordingly.

(3) In so far as the provisions of any building byelaws are inconsistent with the conditions prescribed by the Minister under this section, those provisions shall not apply in respect of any houses which comply with those conditions:

Provided that, as regards the administrative county of London, the Minister shall not prescribe any conditions inconsistent with the provisions of any building byelaws in force in the county except after consultation with the London County Council on the general question of the relaxation of such provisions in connection with housing schemes.

In this Act the expression "building byelaws" has the same meaning as in Part I. of the Housing, Town Planning, &c. Act, 1919.

THE EARL OF SELBORNE moved, in subsection (2), to leave out paragraph (a). The noble Earl said: I have put down this Amendment in order to raise what I think is a very important point, and to get an explanation from my noble friend who is in charge of the Bill. This Bill has been introduced because the first Housing Bill has broken down. Why did that Bill break down? I say that it broke down largely for two reasons, though not for those reasons only. The first cause of the failure of the original Bill was the interminable delay, friction, and subsequent expense, of having to refer every plan up to the Ministry of Health. I do not think it is possible to enlarge too much on the consequences of having to receive the consent of the Ministry of Health to every plan, to every arrangement connected with those plans, to every amendment of those plans, thus involving interminable delay, which delay means friction and expense.

The second main reason for the failure of the original Bill were the conditions of building, the specifications, laid down by the Ministry of Health. I hope that the House will bear that in mind and understand exactly what I mean. I am speaking particularly of the action of the Ministry of Health in respect of building in the country districts. Others may speak about the town; I will speak about the country districts.

I think there is no dispute that under the specifications of the Ministry of Health you could not build a house in the country districts for a less sum than £690. After the period of grace had elapsed and the local authority had been recouped by the Treasury that proportion of the original cost which the nation was to bear, it remained the duty of the local authority to charge an economic rent for the cottages so built. The result was that in a country district the economic rent of one of these cottages would not be less than £40 a year. £40 a year for an agricultural labourer! The thing is perfectly preposterous. £40 a year is something like 15s. a week, for an agricultural labourer earning from 35s. to 45s. a week.

You would have thought that in the face of these figures the Ministry of Health would have altered its specifications. Not at all. It still went on with the absurd "parrot cry"—"These are the specifications to which you are to build. You are to charge an economic rent." The only possible result was that the local authorities could only build houses for persons other than labourers, and the whole immense want of the labouring class for fresh houses in the agricultural districts would have remained unsatisfied. I thought that the whole duty of this new scheme was that we had got rid of the Ministry of Health. I thought we had got rid of the interminable correspondence and the interminable delays caused by their specifications. I thought the intention of the Act was that if a builder could comply with the local bye-laws of the authority where he lived, then he was free to get the benefit of the Act and to build a house.

But, by the words of Clause 1, the whole interference of the Ministry of Health is reintroduced— Grants under this section shall be made only in respect of houses—(a) which comply with the conditions prescribed by the Minister—

That is bad enough, but then you go on to fresh words which were not in the original Bill and were inserted, most unfortunately, in Committee in the House of Commons— and are in material accordance with the conditions as to the number of houses per acre—

Nobody minds that, of course. This is what I object to— and the standards of structural stability and sanitation approved by the Minister in the case of any scheme carried out by a local authority— and so on. What I want to ask my noble friend is this. Under the words "conditions prescribed" in line 12 and "standards of structural stability and sanitation" in line 15, may not the whole paraphernalia of the specifications which have broken down be re-introduced, and may not this scheme break on exactly the same rock on which the old scheme broke? I hope my noble friend will not tell me that no good houses can be built except according to the specifications of the Ministry of Health, because I should be obliged, if he did say so, most respectfully, but flatly, to contradict him.

VISCOUNT PEEL

I am not going to say so.

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

I knew my noble friend would not do so. We know that the country swarms with excellent houses which do not comply with these specifications. I may say that in my own local district, at the very time when the local authority was finding itself quite unable to build a house for a labourer under the specifications of the Ministry of Health, it passed plans for at least one house which a labourer proposed to build for himself, a house which did comply with the local bye-laws, and which was built at a cost within the means of a man who had saved £300 or £400. I move this Amendment in order to raise this question and to get an explanation as to the true bearing and meaning of these words, and, I hope, an assurance that they do not imply that the Ministry of Health would be able to interfere in this scheme in the way they would have interfered in the last.

Amendment moved— Page 1, line 12, leave out from beginning of line to end of line 18.—(The Earl of Selborne.)

VISCOUNT PEEL

The criticism of my noble friend has been directed generally against the Ministry of Health and to the specification and conditions which have been laid down and which, according to his statement, have checked building under the impulse of the local authorities. I think it is rather hard that the Ministry of Health should be attacked in this respect, because the words, as he knows, as they appeared in the original draft of the Bill went so far as the word "Minister"— "which comply with the conditions prescribed by the Minister."

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

Hear, hear.

VISCOUNT PEEL

Part of his argument was this—that he accepted those words. He did not quarrel with them; he wants to leave them in.

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

Which words?

VISCOUNT PEEL

The words "which comply with the conditions prescribed by the Minister." You are prepared to leave them in, are you not?

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

I want an explanation.

VISCOUNT PEEL

I will do my best to give an explanation. I was only dealing with the Amendment and pointing out that it does not propose to omit these words, but proposes to leave them in.

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

No, no. My Amendment is "Page 1, line 12, leave out from beginning of line to end of line 18."

VISCOUNT PEEL

You want to leave out the whole of paragraph (a). That is rather wider than I understood the noble Earl intended to move.

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

I am prepared to modify the Amendment, if necessary.

VISCOUNT PEEL

Anyhow, the great bulk of this paragraph to which my noble friend objects—and I understand he does not object so much to the number of houses per acre, and so on—

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

No.

VISCOUNT PEEL

The words "the standards of structural stability and sanitation approved by the Minister in the case of any scheme carried out by a local authority," etc., were not introduced by the Minister. They were introduced by the House of Commons. They were forced by the House of Commons on the Minister, and really it is rather hard to blame the Minister for seeking powers which might strangle the building of houses, when it is the House of Commons which insisted on them.

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

I said that.

VISCOUNT PEEL

I know the noble Earl did. I want to lay emphasis on the fact that they were not so much introduced as forced upon the Minister by a combination of Parties—a very strong combination of Parties—in the House of Commons. Why did they do it? I understand the reason was this. After all they are, officially and technically, the guardians of the finances of this country, and they were, of course, anxious that these subsidies—very unusual subsidies, varying from £160 to £140 a house—should be given in respect of houses that were properly built. It was their duty, in fact, to insist that the subsidy should only be given where these houses were suitable as regards sanitation and structure. What I understand they meant by the amendment was that they did not want to tie houses built by local builders to the detailed specifications which may be necessary in the case of buildings erected by local authorities; at the same time they did not want them to fall below the kind of standard set.

There is plenty of elasticity in the scheme. The mere fact that the words are "standards of structural stability and sanitation" does not tie them to all the details which the noble Earl has said have proved dangerous and deleterious to the building of houses. It is certainly the intention that the conditions prescribed by the Minister should be of a simple nature, and in very plain language, so that these local builders, who have not a great knowledge of elaborate specifications, may know beforehand quite clearly the conditions under which they will obtain the grant. That is the considered statement of the Ministry of Health.

I hope my noble friend will not press for the omission of these words. The House of Commons is, I suppose, quite as distrustful as the noble Earl of Ministers and Governments. It would not be so difficult for the noble Earl to obtain what he desires if he was only fighting the Ministry of Health. But he is not. It is sometimes suggested that the House of Commons is too subservient to the wishes of Ministers, but when the House of Commons does take a matter into its own power and decides that certain things should be done I am afraid the noble Earl will be up against a far more formidable obstacle than if he was dealing with the Ministry of Health alone.

Even if he succeeded in pressing this upon your Lordships' House I cannot, from the information which comes to me, hold out the slightest hope that the House of Commons would not stand by the words which it inserted in order to safeguard the payment of these subsidies. I suggest further that they are not really so handicapping and imprisoning as the noble Earl suggests, but that they do leave considerable latitude. They combine general structural standards with much elasticity as regards details. I hope the Amendment will not be pressed.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

I have great sympathy with the Members of the House of Commons who are anxious that the money which is to be advanced by the Treasury for these houses should not be misapplied. We are all of course in favour of that policy. The noble Viscount has properly said that it is the special function of the House of Commons to protect the taxpayer's money, but what we have to consider is how we are going to get the housing question out of the "Slough of Despond." The situation is very serious. Your Lordships have heard it ad nauseam. And the reason why it is serious is, that there does not appear to be any chance of the houses being built at such a figure that any possibility of an economic rent remains.

We are afraid that these words, if they stand, are an invitation to the Ministry of Health, almost an obligation upon the Department, to lay down all sorts of conditions—in themselves ideal conditions which, if the money were unlimited and the opportunity were open to us, we should all desire to have—which will shipwreck this scheme just as the last scheme was shipwrecked. That would be a thousand pities. We want to make the scheme as elastic as we can. The noble Viscount has rather taken credit that the clause, with regard to the standards of stability, is so vague. I do not think myself that is a very good recommendation for any clause in an Act of Parliament.

VISCOUNT PEEL

"General," I think I said.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

Yes. Perhaps the noble Viscount did. May I say that in my judgment it is a very vague clause, and such clauses are always objectionable in an Act of Parliament. You may give great liberty and discretion but you should not use language of the meaning of which you are not perfectly certain. I do not know what "material accordance" really means. It is an extremely vague phrase.

VISCOUNT PEEL

I suggest it is an "elastic" phrase.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

The rules, if there are rules, of the Department may be left to their discretion, but to put in "material accordance" as well seems to me to be piling one vagueness upon the top of another. I do not admire the drafting of the clause. What I want to impress on your Lordships and on the Government, is that this "standards of structural stability" contains a tremendous pitfall. I do not know whether the metaphor is quite apt. But building, very accurate building, is expensive. The kind of building which the ordinary local builder adopts, and of which many landlords avail themselves, is quite good enough and relatively cheap. A house built on this standard will last 100 or 150 years. We do not want any more than that: we do not want to build for Eternity.

It is these "standards of structural stability" which are so very dangerous. If you say that a wall must be absolutely plumb, scientifically plumb, you add enormously to the expense. I know this because I have seen it with my own eyes in the work on my own estate, and if you want to be economical you must allow the local builder not to build badly but to build after his own standard, or you will not get a cheap house. I very much dread that these words would seem to indicate to the Ministry of Health to draw up all sorts of rules, make these people adhere very rigidly to them, with the result that you would have nothing but expense again, and your new Bill would fail just as your last Bill failed. Those are the reasons why I suggest to the Government that the clause would be much better without these words. We are all in favour of limiting the number of houses to the acre. There is no pitfall there at all. That is nothing but good, but when you come to the "standards of stability and sanitation" you are upon a road which leads to expense. I hope the noble Viscount will reconsider these words before we part with the Bill.

VISCOUNT PEEL

May I ask the noble Marquess a question. Does he really want to leave out the whole of subsection (2) (a), or merely the words after the word "Minister"?

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

May I answer for my noble friend. There are many opinions about the ideal number of cubic feet required in a room, and a very little expansion of the standard makes a most enormous difference to the cost of building. I have the same fear with regard to the matter of cubic feet under the head of sanitation as my noble friend has about building. I therefore propose to withdraw the Amendment as moved, and then to move to leave out the word "material'' and also the words "and the standard of structural stability and sanitation." The clause will then read: "which comply with the conditions prescribed by the Minister and are in accordance with the conditions as to the number of houses per acre approved by the Minister in the case of any scheme."

VISCOUNT PEEL

I quite recognise that that is of course a considerable modification of the Amendment moved by my noble friend first of all, but I think we have to see then what is left. We have to recollect that these grants are to be made to private builders. The houses must first of all "comply with the conditions prescribed by the Minister"—That is left in, and I think it is esential—and "are in accordance with the conditions." I am inclined to think, speaking off-hand, that the noble Earl rather strengthens the clause against himself, because to say "in accord ance with the conditions" seems to be rather stricter than to say "in material accordance." The latter gives more elasticity.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

The great objection to the word "material" is that nobody quite knows what it means.

VISCOUNT PEEL

We very often do not know what words in an Act of Parliament mean, but I do not know that that is a great objection.

A NOBLE LORD

It is the lawyer's opportunity.

VISCOUNT PEEL

If you cut out these words all that is left is the condition as to the number of houses per acre and (b) "which are certified by the local authority of the area in which the houses are situate … to have been completed in a proper and workmanlike manner." Therefore in order to get the grant all that is needed, apparently, is that they shall be completed in a proper and workmanlike manner. Is that enough to obtain the grant? You might have a house completed in a workmanlike manner whose sanitation left everything to be desired, or which might be quite insufficient as regards floor space or window space. Proper and workmanlike manner only means that the work of actually laying the bricks, and so on, is properly done.

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

They cannot do the work except in accordance with the by-laws of the local authority.

VISCOUNT PEEL

A noble Lord said you must look at (b), and I was examining (b).

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

There are by-laws in subsection (3) in addition. Subsection (3) reads: "In so far as the provisions of any by-laws are inconsistent with the conditions prescribed by the Minister under this section, those provisions shall not apply in respect of any houses which comply with those conditions." Therefore they do otherwise apply. You have, first of all, the conditions; then (b); and then the by-laws.

VISCOUNT PEEL

I think all I can say is this, that these particular words were laid great stress upon in the House of Commons.

They do not, as far as I can understand them, constitute any very great restriction, or too severe a restriction, on the building of these houses, because they have been attacked from two different points of view. Lord Selborne criticised the clause because in his opinion it would stifle building, imprison building, and impose restrictions which were too severe; but Lord Salisbury took rather a different view, and objected on the grounds that the clause was too vague. On the one hand we are told that they are too general, and on the other hand that they are too restrictive, and surely these two criticisms proceed from rather contradictory points of view. I would urge upon the noble Earl that he should not press this Amendment even in its restricted form. These words were looked upon as the real conditions—and I wish to impress this upon your Lordships—under which the House of Commons, without distinction of party, was prepared to give these grants. If these words are omitted in this way I cannot hold out to your Lordships even the slightest hope that the House of Commons will not be adamant upon these conditions, which they believe they have got the right to impose because they are the House which grants the money for the building of these houses. I trust, therefore, that even although some of your Lordships may think these conditions too severe, you will in this case be content to let the whole responsibility for failure of success, if there is failure, rest upon the other House which grants the money and is justified in imposing the conditions.

VISCOUNT MIDLETON

I quite see that my noble friend is in a difficulty. We all want to get the houses. Is it not possible that if you lay down the particular standard which the Minister has had to lay down you will not get the houses, because that standard cannot be universal for the whole country. Would it not be better to leave out these words and then provide under paragraph (b) that when the local authority have to give their certificate they should not merely certify that the houses are built in a proper and workmanlike manner but also certify that they are of proper structural stability. Otherwise the question of structural stability will not have been considered, apparently, at all, if the words are taken out of (a).

VISCOUNT PEEL

There is the question of sanitation too. Is there very much advantage in transferring these words from (a) to (b) because there is the certificate of the local authority that they come up to the standard of structural stability, and then there is an appeal to the Minister.

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

"On appeal by the Minister." I think there is a great advantage in that.

VISCOUNT PEEL

Is the other Amendment withdrawn, and then this further Amendment suggested?

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

You have to carry my Amendment first of all.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

In the interest of order, I suggest that we begin by striking out the word "material"

Resolved in the affirmative, and Amendment disagreed to accordingly.

VISCOUNT PEEL

The Amendments standing in my name to Clause 1 are drafting.

Amendments moved— Page 1, line 17, leave out ("carried out") and insert ("submitted") Page 2, line 12, leave out ("is") and insert ("was") Page 2, line 29, leave out ("housing schemes") and insert ("the construction of houses under this Act").—(Viscount Peel.)

Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.

and the words "and the standards of structural stability and sanitation." We shall be in a position afterwards to discuss what words should be put into paragraph (b).

VISCOUNT PEEL

The feeling is so strong in another place that I should not be justified in accepting that proposal.

Original Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment moved— Page 1, line 13, leave out ("material").—(The Earl of Selborne.)

On Question, whether the word proposed to be left out shall stand part of the clause?

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 30; Not-Contents, 28.

CONTENTS.
Birkenhead, L. (L. Chancellor.) Finlay, V. Lee of Fareham, L.
Peel, V. Newton, L.
Bradford, E. Phillimore, L.
Chesterfield, E. Ranksborough, L.
Craven, E. Annesley, L. (V. Valentia.) Shandon, L.
Eldon, E. Bledisloe, L. Sinha, L.
Onslow, E. Clwyd, L. Somerleyton, L. [Teller.]
Reading, E. Colebrooke, L. Stanmore, L. [Teller.]
Strafford, E. Ernle, L. Wavertree, L.
Faringdon, L. Wigan, L. (E. Crawford.)
Sandhurst, V. (L. Chamberlain.) Hylton, L.
Churchill, V. Knaresborough, L.
NOT-CONTENTS.
Crewe, M. Ampthill, L. Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)
Linlithgow, M. Avebury, L. Lamington, L.
Salisbury, M. Brodrick, L. (V. Midleton.) Lawrence, L.
Chaworth, L. (E. Meath.) Montagu of Beaulieu, L.
Clinton, L. Ritchie of Dundee, L.
Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry) Desart, L. (E. Desart.) Rotherham, L.
Downham, L. Ruthven of Gowrie, L.
Mar and Kellie, E. Ebury, L. Saltoun, L.
Selborne, E. Elgin, L. (E. Elgin and Kincardine.) Southborough, L.
Willoughby de Broke, L. [Teller.]
Erskine, L. [Teller.]
Chaplin, V. Harris, L.

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 2:

VISCOUNT PEEL

The Amendment to this clause standing in my name is drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 3, line 2, after ("under") insert ("the preceding section of").—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 3 agreed to.

Clause 4:

VISCOUNT PEEL

This Amendment is drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 3, line 25, leave out ("and").—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 4, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 5:

VISCOUNT PEEL

The first Amendment to this clause standing in my name is drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 4, line 1, after the first ("construction") insert ("within their area").—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT PEEL

There is an Amendment which unfortunately is not on the Paper, and it is proposed in order to meet the Amendment of my noble friend Lord Churchill. The words are: to insert in subsection 1 after "buildings" ["any works or buildings"] the words "other than works or buildings authorised or required by, under, or in pursuance of any Act of Parliament." The point was raised by my noble friend Lord Churchill that railway companies and other bodies might not be able to get on with their work if they were subject to these restrictions. The restrictions were never intended to apply to railway companies and statutory bodies. I move the insertion of these words in order to meet his objection.

Amendment moved— Page 4, line 1, after ("buildings") insert ("other than works or buildings authorised or required by, under, or in pursuance of any Act of Parliament").—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT PEEL

The next Amendments on the Paper in my name are drafting.

Amendments moved— Page 4, line 12, after ("appeal") insert ("consisting of five persons") Page 4, line 13, leave out ("consisting of five persons who") and insert ("which shall") Page 5, lines 2 and 3, leave out ("on the Table of the House for twenty-one days") and insert ("before both Houses of Parliament as soon as may be after they are made").—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 6:

Prohibition on demolition of dwelling-houses.

6. If any person at any time after the third day of December, nineteen hundred and nineteen, without the permission in writing of the local authority within whose area the house is situate, demolishes, in whole or in part, or uses otherwise than as a dwelling-house any house which was at that date in the opinion of the local authority reasonably fit or reasonably capable of being made fit for human habitation, he shall be liable on summary conviction in respect of each house demolished or so used to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to both such imprisonment and fine, and where the person guilty of an offence under this section is a company, every director and officer of the company shall be guilty of the like offence unless he proves that the act constituting the offence took place without his consent or connivance.

In this section the expression "dwelling-house" means a building constructed or adapted to be used wholly or principally for human habitation.

VISCOUNT PEEL moved, after "reasonably capable," to leave out "of being made," and insert "without reconstruction of being rendered." The noble Viscount said: This Amendment was put down in order to meet my noble friend Lord Midleton, and it makes it clear that Clause 6 does not apply to a house that is not capable, without reconstruction, of being fit for human occupation. Therefore this clause does not over-ride the protection given to an owner of any such house by Section 28 of the recent Act.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT PEEL

I have a manuscript Amendment. I wish to insert a new subsection which runs:—"Any person to whom permission to demolish a house has been refused by a local authority under this section may appeal to the Minister on the ground that the house is not capable without reconstruction of being rendered fit for human habitation, and any such appeal shall be dealt with in the same manner as an appeal under subsection (2) of the preceding section of this Act."

I think Lord Midleton will see that this subsection covers, though not entirely, the ground which I think is covered by his Amendment on the separate Paper. The noble Viscount has an Amendment there in these words: "(2) Any person aggrieved by a refusal by a local authority to permit the demolition, or use otherwise than as a dwelling-house, of any house may appeal to the Minister, and any such appeal shall be dealt with as an appeal under sub- section (2) of section five of this Act." The noble Viscount will see that my Amendment does meet his point as to demolition, although it does not give an appeal on the use otherwise than as a dwelling-house. I hope that my noble friend will be content with my Amendment, because I am advised that if appeals are allowed on the more general point "otherwise than a dwelling-house" they may give rise to a great number of appeals and render it lather difficult of administration.

VISCOUNT MIDLETON

I think the noble Viscount's Amendment fairly meets the point as regards the appeal, but I do not understand him to abandon his own new subsection (2) which is most important.

VISCOUNT PEEL

I intend to put that.

Amendment moved— Page 5, after line 18, insert the said new subsection.—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT PEEL had an Amendment on the Paper to insert the following new subsection: "(2) Notwithstanding anything in this section the permission of the local authority shall not be required in the case of any house the demolition of which is required or authorised by or under any Act of Parliament, or which is used otherwise than as a dwelling-house for any statutory purposes." The noble Viscount said: I beg to move my new subsection, if I may, with one slight drafting change—that is to say, after "or authorised" to insert "by under or in pursuance of any Act of Parliament" which makes it clear.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 21, at end insert: (2) Notwithstanding anything in this section the permission of the local authority shall not be required in the case of any house the demolition of which is required or authorised by under or in pursuance of any Act of Parliament, or which is used otherwise than a dwelling-house for any statutory purpose."—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 6, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 7:

Powers of borrowing for purpose of Housing Acts.

7.—(1) A local authority (including a county Council) may, with the conesnt of the Minister, borrow any sums which they have power to borrow for the purpose of the Housing Acts, 1890 to 1919, by the issue of bonds (in this Act referred to as "local bonds") in accordance with the provisions of this Act.

(2) A county council may lend to any local authority within their area any money which that authority have power to borrow for the purposes of the Housing Acts, 1890 to 1919, and may, with the sanction of the Minister and irrespective of any limit of borrowing, raise the money required for the purpose either by the issue of local bonds under this section or by a loan subject to the like conditions and in the like manner as any other loan raised for the purpose of their powers and duties, and subject in either case to any conditions which the Minister may by general or special order impose.

(3) The provisions set out in the Schedule to this Act shall have effect with respect to local bonds.

(4) Where on an application made by two or more local authorities the Minister is satisfied that it is expedient that those authorities should have power to make a joint issue of local bonds, the Minister may by order make such provisions as appears to him necessary for the purpose, and any such order shall provide for the securing of the bonds issued upon the joint rates, property and revenues of the authorities.

The provisions of any such order shall have effect as if they were contained in a Provisional Order made under section two hundred and seventy-nine of the Public Health Act, 1875.

(5) Any local authority by whom any local bonds have been issued may without the consent of the Minister borrow for the purpose of redeeming those bonds.

LORD MONK BRETTON moved, at the end of subsection (1), to add the following new subsection— (2) A county council or any statutory committee thereof may, with the consent of the minister, borrow any sums which they have power to borrow for the purpose of the provision of houses for persons in their employment or paid by them by the issue of local bonds in accordance with the provisions of this Act.

The noble Lord said: This Amendment is brought forward because, as your Lordships are aware, county councils have to do a large amount of housing on their own account for the purposes of roadmen and policemen, and although some county councils are doing it through the housing authorities, the district councils, a large proportion of them are building their own. This Amendment was drafted by, and I move it on behalf of, the County Councils Association. The Association want to make it perfectly clear that county councils are going to get the financial benefit of this Bill for their cottages. I can hardly believe that it is the intention of the Government to do anything else. On the other hand, they do not think that the Bill is clear on the point, and they want it to be per- fectly clear that the county councils are going to get the financial benefits of borrowing for the purpose of housing their own employees. Considering the large sums they have to spend and that the Report of the Committee on which this Bill is founded recommends that county councils shall do the borrowing for the district councils, I can hardly believe that the Government leave any other intention.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 26, at end insert the said subsection.—(Lord Monk Bretton.)

VISCOUNT PEEL

My noble friend does not in this case attribute undue intelligence to the Government. He has correctly stated their intention. The clause was originally rather differently drafted, but now it entirely meets the purpose which my noble friend desires it should.

LORD MONK BRETTON

In those circumstances I withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Drafting Amendment agreed to.

Clause 7, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 8 agreed to.

Clause 9:

Amendment moved— Page 6, line 23, leave out ("made") and insert ("granted").—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 9, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 10:

Acquisition of land for purpose of garden cities or town-planning schemes.

10—(1) Where the Minister is satisfied that any local authority (including a county council) or two or more local authorities jointly, or any authorised association, are prepared to purchase and develop any land as a garden city (including a garden suburb or a garden village), or for the purpose of a town-planning scheme for the area in which the land is situate, in accordance with a scheme approved by the Minister, and have funds available for the purpose, he may with the consent of the Treasury and after consultation with the Board of Trade, the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries and the Minister of Transport, acquire that land on behalf of the authority or association either by compulsion or by agreement in any case in which it appears to him necessary or expedient so to do for the purpose of securing the development of the land as aforesaid, and may for that purpose exercise any of the powers of a local authority in relation to the acquisition of land under the Housing Acts, 1890 to 1919, and may do all such things as may be necessary to vest the land so acquired in the local authority or association.

(2) In this section "authorised association" means any society, company or body of persons approved by the Minister whose objects include the promotion, formation, or management of garden cities (including garden suburbs, and garden villages), and the erection, improvement or management of buildings for the working classes and others, which does not trade for profit or whose constitution forbids payment of any interest or dividend at a higher rate than six per centum per annum.

VISCOUNT MIDLETON had on the Paper an Amendment in subsection (1), after "are prepared to purchase and develop any land" to insert "in regard to which a town-planning scheme may be made." The noble Viscount said: This is one of the cases of doubtful language which my noble friend Lord Salisbury alluded to a few minutes ago. According to this clause, where the Minister is satisfied that any local authority (including a county council) are prepared to purchase and develop land as a garden city, he is to set to work to get that land for them, and for that purpose he may use any of the powers of the local authority. I am quite sure that the intention of the Government is that any land which these persons are to be allowed to seize should only be land which could have been seized in a similar way in regard to a town planning scheme, and I think it would make it much clearer if at the outset, and without references to other Acts of Parliament, it was made clear that under this clause they can do nothing which they were not empowered to do in regard to the seizure of land for a town planning scheme.

VISCOUNT PEEL

I think this Amendment would rather unduly restrict the operation of the clause, because the noble Viscount wishes to apply the town planning limitations to the acquisition of land for garden cities. If he was, prepared to move the words after the second "or" in line 32 I should be ready to accept such an amendment.

VISCOUNT MIDLETON

Is it intended that any land, no matter what the restrictions which have been put upon it by Act of Parliament for any purpose, may be taken for a garden city?

VISCOUNT PEEL

Obviously the words would be wider than land which is aimed at by the limitations that define what town planning means. Because otherwise it might be confined to entirely undeveloped land, and it might be necessary for the purpose of garden cities to take land which was to some extent developed.

VISCOUNT MIDLETON

Let me put a case. It is not at present open to any authority to say—"I intend to have a garden city. I will take So-and-So's path" and proceed to do so, after only going through a certain formula. Is it not possible under this clause to do something which was not possible before?

VISCOUNT PEEL

The clause is simply for this purpose. When local authorities or authorised associations not only desire to take land for the purpose of garden cities but also show that they are financially able to take it for that purpose, it enables the Minister to act as their agent, and merely as their agent, for the purpose of acquiring the particular land.

VISCOUNT MIDLETON

I agree to the noble Viscount's alteration.

Amendment moved— Page 6, line 32, after the second ("or") insert ("in regard to which a town-planning scheme may be made").—(Viscount Midleton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT PEEL had on the Paper two Amendments, the first, in subsection (1), to leave out "and may for that purpose exercise any of the powers" down to and including "1890 to 1919;" and the second, after subsection (1), to insert the following new subsection— ("(2) The provisions of the Housing Acts, 1890 to 1919, relating to the powers of a local authority to acquire land for the purposes of Part III. of the Housing of the Working Classes Act, 1890, shall apply for the purpose of the acquisition of land by the minister under this section, and the minister in exercising his powers of acquiring land under this section shall be subject to the same conditions as are applicable to the acquisition of land under the Housing Acts, 1890 to 1919, by a local authority. (3) A local authority shall have power to acquire land for the purposes of a scheme approved by the minister under this section and to develop any land so acquired in accordance with the scheme, and shall have power to borrow as for the purposes of the Housing Acts, 1890 to 1919, any money required for the purposes of so acquiring or developing any land.")

The noble Viscount said: In moving these Amendments I would explain that the first Amendment is merely introductory to the second proposing the insertion of two new subsections. The purpose of the clause is really to secure a careful limitation on the powers of the local authority, and also on the Ministry as regards what they can and cannot do. It was re-drafted in this way mainly to secure that commons, open spaces, and land of that kind could not possibly be taken under that clause. I am advised that probably it could not have been taken as the clause was originally drawn, and this is only to make assurance doubly sure. The new subsection (3) simply makes clear what was possibly open to doubt—the power of a local authority to develop land for a garden city and to borrow money for that purpose.

Amendment moved— Page 7, line 2, leave out from ("aforesaid") to ("and") in line 4 Page 7, line 6, after subsection (1), insert the said new subsections.—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 10, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 11:

Meaning of local authority, 53 & 54 Vict. c. 70.

11. In this Act the expression "local authority" means the local authority within the meaning of Part III. of the Housing of the Working Classes Act, 1890:

Provided that for the purpose of the application of the provisions of this Act (other than those relating to expenses under section sixteen of the Housing, Town Planning, &c. Act, 1919) to the county of London the London County Council shall be the local authority to the exclusion of any other authority, except that in the City of London the common council of the city shall be the local authority for the purposes of the provisions of this Act relating to the prohibition of certain building operations and the prohibition of the demolition of dwelling-houses.

VISCOUNT PEEL moved to leave out from "to the exclusion of any other authority," to the end of the clause, and to insert "and that in the city of London the London County Council shall be the local authority for the purpose of the certificate as to the completion of houses to be given under the provisions of this Act relating to the payment of money to persons constructing houses." The noble Viscount said: The object of this is that the borough councils may be the local authority for the purpose of Clause 3, and the London County Council the local authority for the whole of the county of London outside the City for the purposes of all the clauses of the Bill except Clause 3.

Amendment moved— Page 7, line 23, leave out from ("authority") to the end of the clause and insert the said word.—(Viscount Peel).

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 11, as amended, agreed to.

VISCOUNT PEEL moved, after Clause 11, to insert the following new clause— . For the purpose of securing the proper execution of this Act in the administrative county of London, the London County Council shall have the power to require a district surveyor under the London Building Act, 1894, to perform within his district such duties as the Council think necessary for that purpose, and the Council may pay to a district surveyor such remuneration as they may determine in respect of any duties performed by him in pursuance of this section.

The noble Viscount said: This is put in at the request of the London County Council and has the effect of making the district surveyors the authorities who should give the certificates under Clause 1.

Amendment moved— After Clause 11, insert the said new clause.—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 12 agreed to.

Clause 13:

VISCOUNT PEEL

There are several Amendments on this clause which are purely drafting.

Amendments moved— Page 8, line 40, leave out ("to Part II.") Page 9, line 3, leave out ("to Part I.") Page 9, lines 8 and 9, leave out ("and to section two hundred and thirty-three") Page 9, lines 9 and 10, leave out ("respectively") Page 9, line 11, leave out ("and to section two hundred and thirty-seven").—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 13, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 14:

Short title and duration.

14.—(1) This Act may be cited as the Housing (Additional Powers) Act, 1919.

(2) The provisions of this Act, other than the provisions thereof relating to powers of borrowing for the purpose of the Housing Acts, 1890 to 1919, the Public Authorities and Bodies (Loans) Act, 1916, and the acquisition of land for the purpose of garden cities and town-planning schemes, shall continue in force for two years only from the commencement thereof, and no longer:

Provided that section thirty-eight of the Interpretation Act; 1889 (which relates to the effect of repeals), shall, in relation to the provisions of this Act which cease to be in force on the expiration of the period aforesaid, apply as it these provisions had been repealed by another Act passed on the date of the expiration of the said period.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved, in subsection (2) after "1919" to insert "and," with a view to moving later, in subsection (2), to leave out "and the acquisition of land for the purpose of garden cities and town planning schemes."

The noble Marquess said: I do not wish to press this Amendment on the Government if they do not wish to accept it, but I should be very glad of an explanation. Clause 14 proposes primarily to make this Act only an Act of two years' duration. But there are certain things which are excepted from that limitation, and are made permanent. Among other things the acquisition of land for the purpose of garden cities and town planning schemes is exempted and becomes permanent. Just now the noble Viscount induced your Lordships to insert an Amendment apparently considerably changing the provisions under which garden cities can acquire land under the earlier clauses of the Bill. The procedure, as the Bill stood, was that they went to the Minister and then, apparently without any more bother, the Minister could authorise the garden city company to take any lands in which the two parties agreed upon. They might come to anybody's park and say "We want this land for a garden city"; they would then go to the Minister and ask him to approve. If the Minister approved, then the land could be acquired. There were certain safeguards, but I never quite made out how far those safeguards went. In the course of our proceedings a few minutes ago the safeguards seemed to have been increased on the motion of the noble Viscount. I should be very glad if he would explain how far that alters the situation. Certainly, upon the face of it I do not think that a garden city company ought to be put upon the same footing as a local authority and to have rights to acquire land compulsorily for garden city purposes.

In order to prevent any misconception, I should like to say that I myself am a great friend of the garden city movement, like many of your Lordships. I have a garden city suburb upon my own property in Lancashire, and I have just sold a lot of land to another garden city in the South of England; so that I have not the least desire to pose as an opponent of garden cities. On the contrary, it is a movement in which I immensely believe for the future. At the same time, however, garden city companies are not public authorities. They consist of men of great philanthropic zeal, of great ingenuity, and of great business capacity, but, like all men who have a great deal of zeal, they are occasionally impulsive, and sometimes think that everything ought to yield to the object which they have in view. They would not do their work so well as they do if they had not that sort of burning faith in their own movement. It is for this reason that I am sure your Lordships will agree that they ought not to be entrusted with very wide powers of their own motion. It is clear that gentlemen of that temperament—magnificent and useful as it is from the point of view of the country—ought to be subjected to all the safeguards generally applied to private persons (for they are private persons) when they come to the State to ask for compulsory powers. The question I would like to put to the noble Viscount therefore is, As the Bill now stands, after his Amendments upon the earlier clause of the Bill, what safe-guards are there with regard to garden city companies when they apply for the compulsory acquisition of land?

VISCOUNT PEEL

I think I had better confine myself to Clause 10, because I understand that the noble Marquess is dealing only with that clause?

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

That is right.

THE LORD CHAIRMAN

We are now upon Clause 14.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

Then I will move my Amendment. The reason why I do so is to suggest to your Lordships that the garden city part of the Bill should be made temporary like the rest, as I am doubtful about the safeguards included in Clause 10. In the famine of houses at this moment I am willing to go a very great length in allowing the garden city companies to have a free hand. The present is a time of emergency, and we should allow all the agencies which make for building to go any length so long as we can get the people housed; two years are over I think the ordinary limitations ought to be applied.

Amendment moved— Page 9, line 27, after ("1919") — ("and") (The Marquess of Salisbury.)

VISCOUNT PEEL

The purpose of the Amendment, I understand, is to limit the operation of Clause 10 to two years?

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

That is right.

VISCOUNT PEEL

May I point out that in this case I am afraid Clause 10 will have exceedingly little operation? Clause 10 applies not only to those bodies of whom the noble Marquess has spoken but also to local authorities. They have to plan out these schemes, show that they have the money, and finally go to the Ministry of Health and ask them if they approve of the scheme, and, if so, to acquire the land for them. Those are fairly lengthy processes, and if the operation of the clause is limited to two years it is almost equivalent to a negative of the clause in both cases. I may, perhaps, respectfully congratulate the noble Marquess on being so successful a procreator and begetter of garden cities, but I wish to point out that the garden city companies, in order to set the wheels of the Ministry of Health in motion, have to have their schemes approved. It is only when the schemes are approved that the Ministry can, if it likes, merely as an agent, step forward and acquire the land for them. But if these people are sometimes animated by zeal without discretion (as the noble Marquess suggests) I cannot imagine a better cure for them than to meet the cold and unsympathetic eye of the Ministry of Health. That is enough, I think, to damp the enthusiasm of any one. Therefore the fact that they have to persuade the Ministry of Health that it is a good scheme will at least convey to most people that the zeal of these excellent business men is well-and not ill-directed. Consequently I would urge the noble Marquess not to press this limitation of two years.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

VISCOUNT PEEL

The next Amendment is obviously necessary. If the bonds were limited to two years there would be no point in investing in them.

Amendment moved— Page 9, line 28, after ("1916") insert ("trustee securities").—(Viscount Peel).

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 14, as amended, agreed to.

Schedule: