§ Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for the Environment why he approved an urban development grant for the Spencerbeck estate in Langbaurgh which involves the loss of the second water closet in the threebedroomed houses.
§ Mr. John Patten[pursuant to his reply, 13 January 1986, c. 465–6]: Design and layout defects had resulted in part of this estate becoming difficult to let. Following an invitation from the local authority to housebuilders to submit proposals for refurbishment, urban development grant was approved for a scheme which was considered to provide the best overall solution to the problems. The only dwellings to lose a WC are 3-storey, 4-bedroom houses which had proved to be unpopular and which are being reduced to 2-storey, leaving each house with 2 bedrooms.
§ Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the totals for England of each aspect of housing needs appraisal listed on the numercial statement sent by housing authorities to his Department on form DOE 16314.
§ Mr John Patten[pursuant to his reply, 13 January 1986, c. 465–6]: Totals for England, including allowances for any missing figures, for each of the items in local authorities' 1985 housing investment programme housing needs appraisal statements (HIP1) are as follows: 575W
Section B: Households in need at 1 April 1985 Thousand households Total in need On housing list and in need 1. Overcrowded: (a) more than 1 but not more than 1.5 persons per room 415 168 (b) more than 1.5 persons per room 114 58 2. Needing accommodation as described in A2: (a) elderly 667 232 (b) disabled 111 13 3. Concealed: (a) married couples 193 105 (b) lone parents 170 69 4. Sharing: (a) single persons 244 168 (b) other 124 93 5. OthersA * *
Thousand households 6. Households accepted as homeless 1 April 1984 to 31 March 1985: (a) total 108 (b) of which, in priority need 81
Section C: Nominations made to housing association or new town dwellings between 1 April 1984 and 31 March 1985 Thousand households 1. Households taking up nominations to secure tenancies: (a) total 18 (b) of which, homeless households 2 576W
Section D: Relets (HRA stock) between 1 April 1984 and 31 March 1985 Thousand dwellings 1. Vacant and available for letting on 1 April 1984 33 2. Came into management during the period: (a) newly built 26 (b) through acquisition or following modernisation or, conversion 15 3. Other (including dwellings vacated by existing tenants, even if moving to another local authority dwelling) 412 4. Total available for letting 1 April 1984 to 31 March 1985 487 5. Let through the National Mobility Scheme and, for London, other schemes: (a) total 13 (b) which, homeless households 1 6. Let through the Tenants Exchange Scheme 7 7. Let to tenants of other authorities under Exchange Agreements (excluding D5 and D6) 7 8. Let to existing tenants transferring within an authority's own stock 163 9. Let to new secure tenants: (a) displaced through slum clearance or redevelopment 7 (b) homeless households 46
Thousand dwellings (c) housed from waiting list (normal allocation) 156 (d) other 20 10. Let to new tenants not on secure tenancies: (a) total 11 (b) of which, homeless households 8 11. Total let 1 April 1984 to 31 March 1985 429 12. Included at D4, but subsequently taken out of management and not available for letting 31 March 1985 26 13. Vacant and available for letting on 31 March 1985 32
Section E: Loans for purchase of dwellings in the private sector between 1 April 1984 and 31 March 1985 Thousands 1. Total applications in priority categories to local authorities 18 2. Of which: (a) granted loans by local authorities 2 (b) referred to building societies 13 3. Referrals resulting in building society loans 9 *Reliable totals cannot be estimated from those figures received less than 500.
n/a Not applicable.
Local authorities' figures for housing not in their ownership, are not usually based on detailed surveys and they are, therefore, less firm. Also, local authorities' criteria for some items might differ: for example, on unfitness, for which the totals are not consistent with the results of the English house condition survey. Authorities' coverage of other households in need (B5) varies so widely that meaningful totals cannot be estimated from the figures received.
The aggregate figures returned, with no adjustment for missing figures, are in the "HIP1 (1985) all items print" which is available in the Library.
§ Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish details of the updated returns which he requested by the end of December 1985 from local authorities in respect of additional resources required to operate the Housing Defects Act 1984.
§ Mr. John Patten[pursuant to his reply, 13 January 1986, c. 465–6]: To date only 25 returns have been received. As soon as a substantial number are available I shall arrange for details to be placed in the Library.
§ Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for the Environment how does the net provision for the total housing programme in 1986–87 compare with the expected outturn for 1985–86 and if he will show the difference in (a) cost and (b) real terms.
§ Mr. John Patten[pursuant to his reply, 13 January 1986, c. 465–6]: The net provision for the total housing programme in 1986–87 is £2,752 million in cash terms and £2,633 million when expressed in real terms at 1985–86 prices. The expected net outturn for 1985–86, based on first quarter estimates, is £2,742 million. In the 7 terminology used in the public expenditure White Papers, "real terms" are equivalent to "cost terms". Figures for net expenditure do not include the spending power available to local authorities and the Housing Corporation from capital receipts.
577W
§ Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the most recent estimate of the cost to local authorities of providing bed and breakfast accommodation for homeless families.
§ Mr. John Patten[pursuant to his reply, 13 January 1986, c. 465–6]: According to information published by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy gross expenditure by authorities on maintaining homeless households in bed and breakfast accommodation in 1984–85 was £14–4 million or £18.77 per household per day; net expenditure, taking into account income from fees and charges including income received direct from the Department of Health and Social Security in respect of such households, was £10.3 million or £13.35 per household per day.