§ 2.43 p.m.
§ LORD LEATHERLANDMy Lords. I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether there have been any increases in land prices during the past two years; and, if so, to what extent such increases have been due to increases in wages.
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (LORD SANDFORD)My Lords, information on the price of land for all purposes is not available, but it is estimated that the average price per plot of housing land in the private sector rose by about 35 per cent. between the second half of 1969 and the second half of 1971. Wage increases do not directly affect housing land prices, but they do enable people to pay more for houses and this in turn can affect land prices.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, is the noble Lord not aware that the Chancellor of the Exchequer said that the profits that have been made on land are offensive? Is it not now time that the Government came forward with firm proposals to see that land is at a price which will enable young people, at least, now to have a chance of being able to buy their own property?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, we are all concerned with land prices and with measures that can be taken to reduce the rate of increase in land prices. But I ought to point out that in 1968 and 1969—a shorter period than the one we are speaking about—the increase in land prices was even greater: just under 40 per cent.
§ BARONESS GAITSKELLMy Lords, when will the Government stop hiding behind percentages and rates of increase and give us round, oblong, square figures?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I will do my best to help the noble Baroness. Land prices are rising too fast under this Government, but they were rising faster under the previous Government.
§ LORD LEATHERLANDMy Lords, as the Government are fond of blaming inflation on increasing wages, may I ask whether the noble Lord is aware that many sites that are now fetching enormous prices have not had a single pennyworth of wages paid on them for many years? Secondly, is he aware that some sites worth £300 to-day suddenly become worth £200,000 to-morrow? Furthermore, is he aware that during the last few weeks building sites have been sold at prices ranging from £45,000 an acre to £130,000 an acre, and that these are all outside the London area? Moreover, does not the noble Lord regard this inflation of land values as a symptom, or a cause, of the terrible economic mess into which the Government have got the country?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I wonder whether I might just remind noble Lords of the steps that have been taken to deal with this situation. Over the last three years the National Coal Board sold 6,000 acres and the British Railways Board disposed of £36 million worth of land. We are proposing that in the New Towns another 5,000 acres should be made available in the next three years. And, as my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Environment announced recently, we are making another £80 million available to local authorities to make land available for house building over the next two years. All this is compared with a total of 300 acres disposed of and an expenditure of £8 million during the whole of the three years the Land Commission was in existence.
§ LORD LEATHERLANDMy Lords, will not the Government confess that the land speculator is behind this business? Has the noble Lord seen the Daily Mail this morning saying that six houses built for £6,000 each have been bought for £500,000 so that bulldozers can knock down the houses and allow fresh development to take place? Are the Government ever going to do something to deal with this terrible scandal?
§ LORD ROBBINSMy Lords, would not the noble Lord agree that there is all 572 the difference in the world between a rise in prices which is a symptom and a rise in prices which is a cause? Would he not further agree that the owner of real property at this moment is at the mercy of forces which he has done nothing to create and which he can do very little to control? If the noble Lord would permit me to offer an illustration of the question I am asking: is he not aware that in 1930 I bought a house in Hampstead Garden Suburb for £3,300 and that if I were to dispose of it now it would be worth between £35,000 and £40,000? Is this due to reprehensible conduct on my part, or would the noble Lord not agree that it was simply the inevitable by-product of whatever has happened when there was an inflationary movement of the strength of that which takes place at the present time? Furthermore, would not the noble Lord agree that attempts to control the prices of houses and the prices of land run into greater administrative difficulties than any other form of price control one can think of?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I am sure that all noble Lords will have been greatly helped by those questions from the noble Lord, Lord Robbins—
§ BARONESS LLEWELYN-DAVIES OF HASTOEIncluding the Minister, my Lords.
§ LORD SANDFORD—including the Minister. But the noble Lord is perfectly right. To succumb to temptation to control these prices in an administrative fashion would be disastrous. What has to be done is to ensure that more land is made available; and this is what we are doing by the measures I have outlined and by several other measures—notably the point which my noble friend Lord Nugent of Guildford made only last week when we were discussing a rather similar topic.
§ LORD LEATHERLANDMy Lords, I want to thank the noble Lord for having replied to my question, and to ask him whether he will please look up the Conservative Manifesto issued at the last Election, which states on page 6:
In implementing all our policies the need to curb inflation will come first.
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I agree.
§ LORD HARVEY OF PRESTBURY:My Lords, so far as houses are concerned would not the situation be improved if more local authorities sold council houses, as Birmingham have done, to get the spread more even?
§ LORD SANDFORDYes, my Lords. As I mentioned last week, the trend is encouraging: 17,000 last year, and running at the rate of 28,000 this year.
§ LORD LEATHERLANDMy Lords, I hardly see the logic in the noble Lord's reply. If a council house is sold it does not provide one additional house, whereas the reason why land is being purchased—
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (EARL JELLICOE)My Lords, I hesitate to intervene, and it is, as it were, coming down to earth with a hump. But I would suggest to the noble Lord, Lord Leatherland, first, that he was not asking a question, and, secondly, that it would be a mistake if we were to turn this question-and-answer period on this particular Question into a general debate on land and housing policy.
§ LORD LEATHERLANDMy Lords, of course I obey the noble Earl the Leader of the House immediately, and I congratulate him on rescuing his noble friend.