HC Deb 23 July 1969 vol 787 cc413-4W
Mr. Herbert Butler

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement showing for the London Borough of Hackney the initial four-year and seven-year housing programmes, progress in realising the programmes, and the prospect of getting the whole of the programmes into tender on time, respectively, as submitted to him by the council.

Mr. MacColl

Figures for the four-and seven-year programmes are as follows:

Initial Programme (dwellings) Tenders Approved (dwellings)
1965 700 529
1966 975 1,294
1967 1,050 275
1968 1,100 1,771
3,825 3,869
1969 1,200 433
1970 1,200 (to date)
1971 1,200

Discussions between officers during the early part of 1968 indicated that the proposals for the years 1969 to 1971 were certainly attainable but the present prospects for these three years are not so clear.

Mr. Weitzman

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what level of housing activity in Hackney is proposed to him by the borough council; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. MacColl

At a recent meeting the Council endorsed a statement of policy which proposed, inter alia, an increased emphasis on rehabilitation and improvement, a greater use of housing associations and other private agencies, and annual programmes of 2,000 new or improved dwellings all told, of which only 600 would be new dwellings provided by the Council. These are long-term proposals. Further survey work is, I understand, being put in hand to determine the practicability of saving so many of the older houses and bringing them up to a satisfactory standard. Until this survey work is completed I am not in a position to comment on the long-term proposals in detail. The Council should receive valuable assistance for rehabilitation and improvement, from the new Housing Bill. They have also assured the Department that insofar as 1,400 new or improved dwellings annually cannot be provided by the private sector as proposed the Council will be prepared to make good any deficit by expanded public sector programmes. Inevitably the kind of combined programme they have in mind will take several years to evolve, and my main concern at present is that they should not cut down their present highly efficient new-building organisation, at least until it becomes clear what the right balance should be and how it can best be attained.

In view of the many problems still facing the borough, I hope that as a practical issue the Council will agree to keep their present organisation in full operation while the alternative policies they propose are being further considered.

Back to