Inner City Poverty (Hansard, 4 December 1985)

§ Lord Beaumont of Whitley
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The Minister of State, Department of the Environment (Lord Elton)
My Lords, we shall engage the resources of both the public and the private sectors. The effect will be to encourage private investors to provide jobs. In addition to the successful urban development and derelict land grant schemes we shall further increase the enterprise allowance scheme and, next April, we shall introduce a new local enterprise agency scheme. We shall improve the ability of the young to take these jobs by a new two-year youth training scheme, also starting in April.

§ Lord Beaumont of Whitley
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that statement. May I ask him how much of what he has said will happen is new and how much of it requires new money which would not otherwise be forthcoming? Would he not agree that, in view of the report which has just been produced by the Church of England on the state of the inner cities, something rather more thoroughgoing is called for?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, unfortunately I lost the very last syllable of the noble Lord's question. I think he said something after "rather more thoroughgoing".

§ Lord Beaumont of Whitley
My Lords, I asked whether something more thoroughgoing was "called for".

§ Lord Elton
I am sorry, my Lords, but I have now forgotten the first half of the question. I think I shall just say to the noble Lord that the Government's response to the report is not something to be given at once. It is a weighty matter to be considered. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Environment has said as much, and it has been acknowledged by the most reverend Primate.
As to the quantification of what is to be done, what I have described is continuing Government policy with emphases shifting in favour of the places where we see the need to be greatest. As our perception sharpens, no doubt our policies will also change.

§ The Earl of Lauderdale
My Lords, will my noble friend agree that it is misleading to describe this report as being a Church of England report, as it has not yet been accepted by the Synod? Would he also agree that the measures which he has outlined are really summed up by the development corporation approach, as is very well illustrated in the Docklands Development Corporation?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, the report is a report to the Archbishop of Canterbury. I think it is right to point out that rather more of the recommendations were directed to the Church than were directed to the state. I think it is for us to look carefully at what is said about the state, and no doubt the Church will look carefully at what is said about the Church. As to the development corporation, that is indeed a success story, but I think it is probably another question.

§ Lord Dean of Beswick
My Lords, is the Minister aware that the report which has been referred to is the last of a series of reports by various non-politically motivated bodies which all point to the same problem? May I say to the noble Lord that the increase he mentioned, if it is such in financial terms, is of course welcome but it is totally insufficient. Is the Minister aware that the inner cities are in fact dying at an accelerating rate despite the measures that he has announced and that it is becoming a matter of extreme urgency that a rescue operation should be mounted before our city centres become total deserts?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, in response to the noble Lord's first supplementary question, it would be better not to leap to any conclusions about this report, particularly that it is the last in a series. As to the question of diminishing resources or the increase being inadequate, I think I ought to ask your Lordships to note that since 1979, in real terms, support for housing associations has gone up by 9 per cent., the value of the urban programme has doubled, the derelict land programme value has doubled, Home Office support for local government posts dealing with the special needs of Commonwealth immigrants has doubled, and the cost of employment and training measures has doubled. What is more, we plan a further substantial increase in 1986–87 by the expansion of the YTS, the Community Programme and the Enterprise Allowance Scheme. Moreover, support for all programmes in the voluntary sector has trebled since 1979. We are not standing still. The question is how fast we run and in what direction. I believe that we are making very considerable efforts in the right direction.

§ Baroness David
My Lords, is it not the case—

Noble Lords
The Bishop!

§ The Lord Bishop of Birmingham
My Lords, with reference to the recommendations of the report that has been mentioned, will the noble Lord the Minister consider arranging for a debate on inner cities in this House after noble Lords have had the opportunity to read the report's close-packed and well-documented pages? Does not the noble Lord think that this would provide a better occasion for discussion than hasty 1297 utterances that deeply wound those of us who yearn for better relations between the Church and the Government of the day?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, the convention demands that I reply to the right reverend Prelate's first question in the precise formula. That is a matter for the usual channels. As to the second, I have no wish to distance myself in any way from the Church of which I am a member. I have been careful to say nothing that might appear hasty. I have merely stated the development of Government policy since 1979 in directions of which I believe the Church can approve.

§ Lord Diamond
My Lords, in view of the Minister's welcome statement that in future important reports will be read carefully before comments are made upon them and indeed, if I may quote, before "rubbishing them" prior to their publication to the public, how does he reconcile what he has now said with the fact that all the media have told us that the Government's response was one of deep criticism, even before we had got the report, with allegations of Marxist influence, and so on?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, I am not precisely aware of what the noble Lord is referring to—

Noble Lords
Oh!

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, I am not precisely aware of what the noble Lord is referring to. I am aware that a number of Members of another place, some of whom are connected with the Government, have made comments immediately upon seeing the report. If comments of that nature are to be elevated into statements of Government policy, then, of course, the noble Lord is saying that no one should ever comment on anything until a very long time has elapsed since publication.

§ Lord Diamond
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the report was embargoed? No Member of the other place connected with the Government was entitled to break the embargo, breach a confidence and say the things that were said unless he wanted to make an absolute fool of himself, which he succeeded in doing.

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, the publication in question was available in Dillon's bookshop on Saturday last week.

§ Lord Harmar-Nicholls
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that no one with any sense of decency would disagree with the aims set out in the report? If, however, it gets to the point of being debated in this House, will he see to it that proper costings and the financial commitments that would be involved are attached to it so that we can truly evaluate what we can afford in regard to the speed with which we move towards its recommendations?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, it is always incumbent on the Government and writers of reports with recommendations to consider not only what it is desirable to 1298 spend money on but also what other programmes must lose the money in order to make that possible.

§ Lord Wells-Pestell
My Lords, is the Minister aware that his reply that the Government have done so much by doubling so much is meaningless unless we know what the figures are? After all, twopence doubles a penny.

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, I am not certain that I follow the noble Lord's question. It is, I believe, an admonition to me that if I make statements they should be backed by figures. If we have the debate that I am sure the right reverend Prelate is going to press for, they will be.

§ Baroness David
My Lords, may I make the point that I was hoping to make earlier?

Noble Lords
Question!

§ Baroness David
My Lords, may I ask whether the Minister, having listed the number of things the Government are doing, will also state the amount of rate support grant that has been lost by inner cities in the last six years since the Government took over?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, the question asks what we are doing about poverty in the inner cities. Although I have an answer prepared to the noble Baroness, I do not think that it fits into that context.

Lord Paget of Northampton
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the figure in the report that astonished me was that 1 per cent. of those in the inner cities go to church? That would make it very nearly equal with football. I had no idea that the Church was as attractive as that.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, is the Minister aware that it is regarded as deplorable that Ministers of the Crown should react instantaneously to reports of this kind—for example, a report of the Select Committee of this House and the report from the Church of England that has recently been published—without reading them in the first place? Is he aware that we welcome his assurance today that in future Ministers will study reports before they come out with statements about them? Will he be good enough to respond rather more sympathetically to the appeal of the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Birmingham for a debate? The Church is not the usual channels. It speaks with far more authority than the usual channels. Would the Minister be good enough to be rather more helpful?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, the noble Lord invites me to ask my colleagues to refrain from instant comment on one set of matters and to give an instant comment on the other. In the first case, my friends are well experienced in how to conduct themselves. I said before that I am not familiar with the minutiae but, in principle, I defend them and their right to say what they wish when they wish. As to the debate, the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition must be familiar with the convention of the House that forbids me to say anything other than that this is a matter for the normal channels.

§ Lord Mellish
My Lords, is the Minister aware that today over 20 of their Lordships have visited Millwall docks and have there seen for themselves the regeneration of something of London's docklands? Their Lordships have seen an area where, when docklands were at their peak, there were 1,700 jobs, and today there are over 5,000. Would the noble Lord like to comment on that?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, the noble Lord has pointed out a very good example of how to generate jobs and therefore wealth in inner cities and eliminate poverty therein. That is within the terms of the Question.

§ Baroness Fisher of Rednal
My Lords in the inner cities there is a larger proportion of young people than in any other parts of the country. Can the noble Lord give us some details as to how these young people in the inner cities can be helped where there is a shortage of employer-led provision in the YTS schemes? If there is no employer-led provision for these young people in inner cities their chances of getting on to a YTS scheme are almost nil.

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, young people will benefit from the general economic approach which I have illustrated and which is reflected in the London Dock Development Scheme which has been spoken of. They will also be helped by the expansion of training which I mentioned in the substantive Answer, which will make them qualify for the vacant places that sometimes exist already in Government programmes.

§ Baroness Fisher of Rednal
My Lords, I think that perhaps the noble Lord—

§ The Earl of Swinton
My Lords, we have had 13 minutes on this Question. The coincidence of it being on the Order Paper the day after the report has been produced has, I am sure, led to this. I know that it is obviously a very important Question, but 13 minutes on one Question when the House is meant to spend 20 minutes in total is perhaps long enough. I suggest that we move on to the next Question.