§ Mr. Hanleyasked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he is able to make a statement about housing outside London for retired council tenants from the capital after the abolition of the Greater London council.
§ Sir George YoungWe have already announced our intention that, if Parliament agrees to our proposals for the abolition of the Greater London council, the ownership of that council's seaside and country homes should pass to the district councils in whose areas they lie. We have also announced that there should be statutory arrangements to ensure that the great majority of the lettings remain available to London's elderly. Certain nomination rights to the transferred dwellings will therefore be formally vested under the abolition legislation in my right hon. Friend and there will be full consultation with the local authority associations concerned about the detailed arrangements to be adopted.
The financial basis of transfer will fairly reflect the benefits to be gained both by the councils in London and by the district councils. We intend that they should enable the district councils broadly to maintain on abolition the existing levels of rent and management and maintenance expenditure, although we do not guarantee to take on board any changes the GLC makes between now and 1986.
Further provision of homes for retired people will be a matter for the councils of the London boroughs, as the local housing authorities for the capital. The Government do, however, attach high priority to concentrating resources within the housing programme on capital provision for those in greatest housing need, including the elderly and the disabled. While boroughs may normally wish to build new homes for these groups within their own areas, we recognise that some may wish to exercise their powers to develop outside London, subject to my right hon. Friend's consent under Section 21(3) of the London Government Act 1963.
My right hon. Friend has now decided that he will look sympathetically on applications by boroughs for such consent where they intend to provide dwellings exclusively for the use of the elderly or the disabled and where the prospective host authorities are content with the proposals. Once consent has been granted, my right hon. Friend would not expect subsequently to transfer to the district council ownership of whatever properties were developed within its terms, unless requested to do so under section 23 of the Act by the councils of both the district and the London borough concerned.
This announcement demonstrates our concern that the interests of the elderly and the disabled should not be affected by the abolition of the GLC. It confirms the priority we attach in housing programmes to provision for special needs groups, and our intention that the London boroughs should be able to continue the development of homes outside London for the retired and the disabled if they so wish. Some of the GLC's tenants have I know been worried that abolition would cause changes in their rents or the management expenditure on their estates. This statement shows that the terms of transfer will be designed so that rents and maintenance spending need not be affected on abolition, and will provide reassurance to those tenants who have expressed concern.