HL Deb 26 March 1981 vol 418 cc1278-81

3.12 p.m.

Lord Moyne

My 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 is a lack of housing accommodation in the Tidworth area; and if so, whether they will reconsider their decision to demolish 400 modernised Army houses there; and whether they will confirm the report in The Times that there is a shortage of space on Salisbury Plain for tank training which can only be met on the site of these houses.

The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Viscount Trenchard)

My Lords, these old Army quarters are currently surplus to MOD requirements. They cannot be sold, because they are situated within Army barracks adjacent to a training area. Up to 100 of the quarters will need to be demolished shortly, as the site is required for buildings to meet our immediate operational needs. We are still exploring any appropriate possibilities for the remainder. We are in touch with the Kennet District Council as to whether there is demand for houses in this particular part of their area and we are prepared to discuss whether short-term civilian occupation of some of them is practical.

Lord Moyne

My Lords, while thanking the noble Viscount for his reply, and also for his assurance that the question is under consideration with the Kennet District Council, would it surprise him to know that there are 250 applicants in the Tidworth area, of which the council believe—this is only a guess on their part—that at least 50 would be prepared to take up these houses? Would it also surprise him to know that the Test Valley Borough Council estimate that they could find tenants for 30 or 40? Has the noble Viscount considered the possibility of selling some of the houses to first-time buyers—since they front on to a public road—and, conceivably, making shorter or longer leases of the houses?

Viscount Trenchard

My Lords, I think I can say to my noble friend that neither of those two statements surprises either me or the Ministry of Defence, because we are, in fact, in touch with both councils. My noble friend spoke of their estimate or guess of the numbers who might be interested in living in this area, but that still has to be confirmed. As regards my noble friend's question as to whether we would be prepared to sell, we are not able to do that at the moment, until we have the longer term plans for the reorganisation of Tidworth a lot clearer than we have them at the present time. The same applies, of course, to long leases. But, as I have said, we are prepared to look at and to discuss with the local authorities what more can be done in the short-term.

Baroness Birk

My Lords, at a time when the housing lists are getting longer and longer, and when there has been such a complete cutback in house building and in the construction industry, would the noble Viscount not agree that to demolish any houses which would be suitable for civilians, or anybody else, to live in, would be absolutely awful?

Viscount Trenchard

My Lords, the noble Baroness's starting point is exactly the same as mine when I first heard of this matter. There is a requirement in the short-term, for really urgent operational reasons, to demolish the 100 of which I have spoken. We are dealing with approximately 400 houses. The noble Baroness has just heard my noble friend describe the number of possible, tentative inquiries from people who live in this district, which cover only a very small proportion of the houses which are not under a demolition order at the present time, and which may be reprieved on a permanent basis, in so far as the local need for housing can be reconciled with operational requirements. The Government are trying to ensure the maximum degree of reconciliation, so that we do not leave unhoused families who would accept accommodation in this area.

Lord Avebury

My Lords, is the Minister aware that there cannot be any reason of security for refusing to sell these houses to the local borough council, since the military have recently agreed that properties in Lady Godley Close, which is also within the base area, should be available for sale to their tenants? Is the Minister further aware that the Army families, who are catered for by this base, are occupying properties belonging to the local authority to the extent of about 100 dwellings; that the Army have recently asked the local authorities to provide them with further dwellings out of their limited stock; and that, if these Army families were to move back into properties which they already own, this would free the equivalent of something like 100 dwellings for allocation to the 2,000 families who are on the waiting list of the Test Valley Borough Council?

Viscount Trenchard

My Lords, it is not just a question of security, though the operational requirements of every barracks are different. My right honourable friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Army has himself visited this area and looked at the practical problems of housing civilians within a barracks, or a barracks on one side and a training area on the other—a training area used by night as well as by day. So that there really are major problems. As regards the noble Lord's point about other council houses being occupied by current members of the forces, I should like to look into that a little further. My information is that, while the local councils have housed retired members of the forces, and are housing a number of widows or deserted wives and families, they have not, in fact, used council accommodation for active serving members. But I should just like to check that in relation to the Test Valley area. I have checked it in relation to the Kennet.

Lord Avebury

My Lords, may I ask the Minister to examine the minutes of the Test Valley Borough Council Housing Services Committee of 4th November 1980, where it is stated The M.O.D. will therefore continue to look to your Council (together with the Kennet District Council) to maintain an adequate supply of accommodation for renting to M.O.D. employees in the Tidworth area"? If the Ministry of Defence did not make these demands on local authorities, would it not free accommodation for local residents?

Viscount Eccles

My Lords, further to that question, may I say that I happen to live very close to Tidworth. I know that the Ministry of Defence also own 30 houses in Andover which are occupied by military personnel and that the Andover council would very much like those 30 houses for housing their own people. Why could not an exchange be made?

Viscount Trenchard

My Lords, I thank both noble Lords for their supplementary information on the details of the Tidworth area. I will look into the details which they have raised. We remain, I think, in the situation that for the vast bulk of houses of this kind in this area—they are old houses and fairly small—we have not got at the moment a demand for even one-half.

Lord Bruce of Donington

My Lords, does the noble Viscount propose to reply to the second part of the Question put by his noble friend which, so far as one can see, relates specifically to tank training and is not confined within the broad, general term "operational reasons", to which the noble Viscount referred? Would he refer specifically to that part of the Question which deals with tank training?

Viscount Trenchard

My Lords, as I have tried to explain, the barracks and the houses are on one side, while on the other side there is the training area which is used both night and day for mixed training, including tanks and infantry carrying vehicles. It is a mixed force barracks. Both the vehicles and the people proceed from the barracks across to the training area and back again. One of the reasons why the demand for accommodation may be a bit limited is the noise that this creates, including at night.