asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many gipsy sites have been provided up to September, 1971.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many local authorities have not prepared sites for gipsies.

I would refer my hon. Friends to the reply given in answer to a Question by my right hon. Friend the Member for Chislehurst (Dame Patricia Hornsby-Smith) on 21st January.—[Vol. 829, c. 284–5.]

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that local authorities are acting with sufficient speed to provide areas for gipsy encampments? Is he satisfied, too, that the Gipsy Council is doing all that it might to promote closer co-operation with local authorities to try to avoid the difficulties that arise?

I cannot be satisfied that this matter is being dealt with as speedily as I should like it to be, but I realise the difficulties with which local authorities are faced because of objections from local residents in the neighbourhood of the sites. So far 42 sites have been established, and I think that good progress is being made.

Does my hon. Friend agree that when gipsy sites are constructed they make for better relations between gipsies and the local community, as gipsies then have a definite place of residence, rather than having to wander around? Will my hon. Friend therefore push local authorities to construct sites as soon as possible?

I am doing that by as much persuasion as I can. Well-equipped, controlled sites are the only practical alternative to the squalid, unauthorised encampments which cause such a nuisance.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the feeling is still abroad that insufficient speed is being shown in the provision of sites? One does not wish to discriminate against gipsies, but the fact has to be faced that they cause considerable annoyance and inconvenience to residents in the area.

I hope that local authorities will take note of these Questions and the answers and will proceed as quickly as possible with the provision of sites. The great advantage to a county borough if it sets up 15 sites is that it can take all the necessary powers to clear unauthorised sites.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many ratepayers object to paying for parking space for itinerant scrap merchants, who are distinct from genuine gipsies?

We are having consultations on the question of possible grants in respect of genuine gipsies.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many dewellings there are per 1,000 inhabitants in Great Britain and France, respectively; and what further action he proposes to take to increase the British figure.

Crude figures of this kind do not provide a reliable way of comparing housing in the two countries. In 1968, the latest date for which figures are available for both countries, France had rather more houses per 1,000 population than Great Britain—342 as against 336—but ours provided better standards of accommodation.

While recognising that what the hon. Gentleman says is true, that the quality of British houses is better than that of French houses, may I ask him to recognise that much private house building is the building of a second house, with a publicly subsidised mortgage, for someone who already has one house? Will he reverse the present trend and encourage the building of council houses, which is the building of houses for people who have no house?

My right hon. Friend has made it clear that we wish to see a substantial increase in housing of all kinds.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made in the examination of box-girder bridges on the Mersey Tunnel fly-overs at Birkenhead; and when he expects them to be available for use for the purpose for which they were designed.

The steel box-girder flyovers on the Birkenhead side of the Mersey Tunnel are the responsibility of the County Borough of Birkenhead, with whom I suggest my hon. Friend should get in touch.

In view of the fiasco of box-girder bridges, will my hon. Friend ensure that those responsible for their design are not employed on further building—bridges, motorways or otherwise—in future?

That is another question, which I shall consider. I should not have said that it was disastrous all over the country. My Department is helping those local authorities responsible—such as Birkenhead—with advice, and it is doing all it can to see that the bridges are thoroughly examined as quickly as possible.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that box-girder bridges are on both sides of the Mersey? No box-girder bridge has ever failed once it has been put on site. Is the Minister's Department, and the Departments of his colleagues, not being a little overcautious in the length of time that is being taken on tests?

It is perfectly true that none has failed, once completed. However, I would not regard it as an abundance of caution to examine them all to make certain that on collapse will occur.

Does not the cost fall, at least partially, on the ratepayers on both sides of the Mersey? Is that not wrong?

No, because the roads were entirely the responsibility of the local highway authorities. No grant was made out of Government funds for the building of the roads.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will issue a general direction to British Railways to ensure the continued and efficient working of mineral-carrying branch lines when employment in industries served by such lines is immediately and directly affected by restriction of their working and in particular by their closure.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in my constituency, which has a male unemployment rate of over 7 per cent., a local quarry company was obliged to dismiss 25 of its workmen because of a decision by British Railways first to increase substantially their charges for the carrying of minerals and, secondly, to close within a few months the branch line serving the quarry?

In view of the efforts which the Government claim they are making to improve the unemployment situation, may I ask the Minister to appreciate that a small but appropriate and simple remedy in this instance would be for him to have a word with British Railways and get them to agree, first, to keep; pen this branch line and, next, to reduce their exorbitant freight rates?

While I have every sympathy with the background which the hon. Gentleman has outlined, I nevertheless have no powers to direct British Railways on this subject. It must be a management decision whether to withdraw a freight service, which in the instance which the hon. Gentleman has in mind, I believe, is totally unprofitable.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will give a general direction to the British Railways Board in considering the reorganisation of the headquarters of their various territories to have regard to social considerations and the needs of development areas.

No, Sir.

Is it not wrong for a nationalised industry to create unemployment in a development area and to produce jobs in an area such as Manchester, which is much more prosperous than Merseyside?

I would not wish to enter into the controversy between Liverpool and Manchester to which my hon. Friend referred. It is for British Railways or any other nationalised industry to conduct their business as efficiently as they can.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the entire proposal of British Railways for a new territorial organisation is an elaborate piece of nonsense that should be stopped forthwith? Does the proposal require the right hon. Gentleman's approval?

I think the hon. Gentleman will be aware that any major reorganisation requires my approval. I have not yet received any proposals.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will seek to ensure an adequate independent system of appeals against decisions of the future regional water authorities, relating to consent conditions and abstractions.

The existing system of appeals will continue.

Would my right hon. Friend care to comment on the subject of public accountability in connection with his proposals for regional water authorities?

My hon. Friend will appreciate that the paper is basically a consultative document. Thus, if any views are expressed about improving or obtaining public accountability, I shall of course consider them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this aspect of his proposals is causing widespread concern, that it is thought generally to be an engineers' plan—it is conceded that this may have merit—and that there can be no case for nationalising these authorities while removing public control and accountability, which appears to be the purpose of the paper?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for asking that supplementary question because it enables me to reply that there is no need for such public concern.

When is the right hon. Gentleman likely to introduce the Bill dealing with this subject?

I hope so to introduce the Bill that the new proposals can come in at the same time as the new authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made on the question of the siting of the runways and stacking areas and routes of flight paths for the proposed Foulness Airport; when he expects to be able to announce his decisions on these matters; and if he will make a statement.

As promised, we will be consulting local authorities in Kent and Essex on runway siting and related problems before taking a decision. We hope to start discussions shortly.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise the crucial importance of this decision to the people of Kent and the threat it represents to the environment of our county? Will he confirm that he intends to give full priority to the noise factor from the point of view of Kent and that even if extra cost is involved, the runways will be sited as far to the north east as is feasible?

Yes, Sir. I can guarantee that the siting of the runways will particularly take into account the noise factor. We shall be closely consulting the people of Kent on this subject.

As at least one of the comprehensive development plans for Foulness shows the feasibility of placing the airport at least seven miles from the coast, with the minimum of noise to the inhabitants of Essex and Kent, may I ask my right hon. Friend to lay that down as a minimum condition for any plan he approves?

I have assured the House that, in deciding the basis of the airport and its communications, we shall take as No. 1 priority the environmental considerations.

May we have an assurance that my right hon. Friend will consult not only the local authorities but also the large number of other organisations, many of which have written to him, which wish to be consulted?

I am aware of that and I have been in close consultation with the various organisations and hon. Members, and I shall continue to be so.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many coach parking spaces have been made available by his Department along the Mall Horse Ride and along Constitution Hill for coach drivers bringing visitors to see the Changing of the Guard; and whether he will make additional spaces available next year.

Forty spaces are provided on the Buckingham Palace side of Constitution Hill. Although parking had to be withdrawn last year from the Green Park side of Constitution Hill to provide safe passage for the Queen's Life Guard, 70 additional spaces were made available in the Mall Horse Ride for the entire tourist season for the first time. My right hon. Friend will continue to make these spaces available again during the 1972 tourist season, but it is impossible to provide more parking room without seriously impairing the amenities of the area.

Concerning the last part of that answer, may I ask the hon. Gentleman to agree that conditions for coach parking are becoming more desperate each summer in Central London? Will he have urgent consultations with the local authorities and the police to see whether, in this area of great tourist attraction, more coach parking facilities can be provided, for the sake of coach drivers and tourists?

I note what the right hon. Gentleman says and I assure him that we are in constant touch with the Greater London Council, the Westminster City Council and the police about these matters. He will agree, however, that we do not want to ruin the amenities of the area.

Will my hon. Friend ensure that not so many coaches are parked in Constitution Hill that the traffic becomes so congested at Hyde Park Corner that it seizes up, which happened in the summer of 1970, with widespread effect on the West End? Will he see that that does not happen again?

That is a relevant factor in considering this issue, but it is beyond any powers I may have to give such an absolute guarantee.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many tenants of local authorities were required to forgo all or part of the compensation on the compulsory acquisition of their homes as a condition of the grant of their tenancy.

This information is not available.

Will the Minister endeavour to obtain this information? Does he agree that whether the figures are large or small, they are certainly substantial, and that those who have been required to forgo compensation in the expectation of receiving premises at the sort of rent which has hitherto been charged by local authorities will be effectively defrauded by being required to pay the fair rents required under the Bill which is at present in Standing Committee? Does the hon. Gentleman agree that this virtually amounts to obtaining money by false pretences?

When an owner asks a council to buy his house and to rehouse him—where rehousing is part of the bargain—I regard that practice as acceptable. Otherwise I regard it as wholly deplorable and unacceptable.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what further capital investment plans he will now bring forward in order to provide employment in the building industry; and if he will make a statement.

I cannot anticipate what further measures the Government might take to stimulate employment to this end.

That is a disappointing answer. Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind the suggestion that he should approach local authorities with a view to bringing forward council-house building programmes by six months in view of the fact that 147,000 building workers are unemployed, over 10,000 of them in the London area, where we have the greatest housing stress?

I draw the attention of the hon. Gentleman to the statement made by the Chairman of the National Federation of Building Trades Employers in which he said:

"Confidence is returning to the building industry not least because of the successive steps which have been taken by the Government to promote increased activity."

Had the hon. Gentleman had time to read this morning's newspapers he would have read that building in public-sector housing is up by over 40 per cent. compared with November last year.

Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that more employment could be forthcoming in the building industry if there were a speeding up of planning consents and office development permission?

I assure my hon. Friend that the Department of the Environment is very conscious of this problem and speeds things up as much as possible.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the statement of the Chairman of the National Federation of Building Trades Employers from which he quoted there was no reference to local authority house building, which is the subject of this Question? Is he aware of the major reduction in housing starts by local authorities and that he has powers under Section 91 of the Housing Act, 1957 to do what my hon. Friends have been asking him to do? Will he please use them?

There is a Question a little later on the Order Paper, on which I shall be able to show the hon. Gentleman that public-sector housing is very much improving in comparison with last year.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how long the Barrow-Arnside Link Road has been under consideration in his Department; and when he will make a decision on this matter.

A link road to the A6 was first proposed to the Minister of Transport in 1963. The inquiry report reached my Department in February, 1971. My right hon. Friend will announce his decision as soon as possible but the proposals and alternative possibilities together with their environmental and economic effects are having to be considered.

Will the Minister accept that all those in the area, who have waited for nine years for a decision on this matter, feel that they have been very shabbily treated, and that the Furness Area Development Committee, which has been seeking to retain industry and attract new industry into areas where it is badly needed, feels that unless it has an assurance of this major improvement in inland communications it is doomed to a very difficult task?

I share the hon. Gentleman's concern to get a quick decision on this matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make the stretch of the M1 between Watford and Hemel Hempstead, on which many deaths have occurred, into a six-lane carriageway.

My right hon. Friend hopes to make an announcement shortly about plans to improve this stretch of the M1.

Is the Minister aware that recent research by the Hertfordshire County Council has revealed that traffic on this stretch, known as the killer stretch, is 160 per cent. more than it ought to be? Why will the Minister not take action? Accidents will not wait. They are mounting and they will not wait while he jumps about like a cat on hot bricks.

We are certainly aware of this, and we share the hon. Gentleman's concern about accidents. We hope to make a decision shortly.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will now take further steps to secure the release of more land for private house building.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied with the response to date of local authorities to his Circular 10/70; and if he will make a statement on land availability.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will now make a further statement on the Government's policy to curtail rising land prices.

I would refer the hon. Members to the Answer which I gave my hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire, South-East (Mr. Rost) on 8th December last. I then outlined the many steps we are taking to meet the need for additional supplies of land, particularly in pressure areas where the upsurge of demand for housing has created shortages in land appropriate for development.—[Vol. 827, c. 1287–89.]

Would my hon. Friend agree that although until recently the responsibility for the inflation of house prices has lain at the doors of those who crippled the building industry under the last Government, the new cause in future will arise from a shortage of building land? Would he take the opportunity today of pledging the Government to a programme under which the release of enough land to build, say, three or four million houses in the next decade is guaranteed?

I agree with the first part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question. I doubt whether a target of available land is purposeful. I suppose that Hyde Park could be called available land. It is a question of suitability as well as of availability. But, as my hon. Friend invites me, I take the opportunity to pledge that the Government will make every effort to meet the demand for the right land in the right place at the right time.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that certain authorities, such as Stoke-on-Trent, which are on the verge of releasing a considerable acreage of white land for housing purposes, are faced with the fact that, on the one hand, developers will make very substantial personal fortunes and, on the other hand, local authorities will be involved in enormous development costs? Could he offer a development subsidy to these local authorities which are falling in with the Government's plan?

There are appropriate grants and subsidies for that purpose. I am very pleased to see local authorities developing on a comprehensive development basis. This is what we want to bring forward.

What has my hon. Friend to say on the subject of the lack of availability of residential land for development where there is clear reluctance on the part of county councils to approve planning applications?

I am not finding a reluctance at present. County councils are bringing forward schemes and considering partnerships with private enterprise and various ways of bringing forward comprehensive developments. It takes time to plan the services for the land.

Is not the Minister aware that, judged against the criteria of Government policy to make land available at prices that people can afford, Government policy is completely disastrous? Is he aware that the price of land is rocketing so much that it has been estimated by Birmingham builders, for instance, to have put £500 on the price of a house in the last three months? In London it is quite impossible for an ordinary working person to obtain a mortgage. For example, a clerk earning £25 a week in London can get a mortgage of only £3,900. What sort of slum will that buy in London? What will the Government do about this?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, mortgage rates have gone down. On average, land costs account for only the same proportion over the years, and the price of land has risen only as much as wages.

The hon. Gentleman must be joking.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many country parks were approved in the third quarter of 1971.

Four country parks were approved for grant by my right hon. Friend during this period.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that local authorities are doing enough to provide parks and other zones for amenity and recreational facilities?

A lot more can be done. After all, there is a 75 per cent. Exchequer grant for local authorities for approved schemes. Up to date, there are 43 local authority schemes, and I hope that they can go much faster. There are 135 projects under consideration by the Countryside Commission of my Department, and I think that we shall see quicker progress in future.

Does the Minister realise that this niggardly figure of four represents a slow down in the number of country parks created? For example, in the first quarter of 1971 10 country parks were created, but in the third quarter only four were created. What will the Minister do about this?

The figure of four is not representative. As I said, there are 135 under consideration. In 1971, the total number of country parks approved for grant by my right hon. Friend was 26, which compares well with 11 in 1970. I am disappointed with the figure of four but it is not representative of the whole system.

Can the Minister say how many of these proposals are concerned with reclaimed land, which offers an interesting possibility for development in this respect?

I should like the hon. Gentleman to put down a Question about that so that I may study it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment, in the context of the reorganisation of water services, if he intends the regional water authorities to have responsibility for fluoridation.

Whether fluoride should be added to water in a particular area will be decided by the local health authorities.

Will my right hon. Friend encourage water authorities to encourage health authorities to fluoridate water? Would he agree that improvement in the water supply over the decades has helped to eliminate cholera, typhoid, polio and dysentery? Would he agree that it is impossible to draw a line between purification and improvement—lime is an example—and that therefore fluoridation should be encouraged.

On the first half of the question, No. Sir. I do not believe that this is a task for the new water authorities to perform. On the second half of the question, it is up to the health authorities to decide.

Will the Secretary of State do something urgently to cut through the red tape surrounding the situation of eight million Londoners? There are 32 county boroughs. Twenty-seven want to fluoridate, but because it is a metropolitan water authority, one council is sufficient to prevent this happening. Would the Secretary of State do something in order to get the will of the majority acceded to?

I will pass this matter on to my right hon. Friend, who is responsible for health matters.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that it is rather dangerous to enforce medication of water? If we did that, should we not cater for the most prevalent of modern complaints and put Epsom salts in the water?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend will take note of my hon. Friend's suggestion about Epsom salts. But it is not the task of the water authorities to decide on this point.

Would the Secretary of State think again about this matter? His answer that it was a matter for health authorities is correct at present, but when we get regional water authorities we shall not have regional health authorities. We shall certainly have a great deal of conflict, and we need some new thinking about this.

I will certainly give consideration to any problems which may arise in this sphere. But it is a matter for health authorities, and not water authorities, to decide.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to announce additions to the London Green Belt.

I am very anxious to see that throughout the country more areas of Green Belt are approved; but so far as the London area is concerned, any further additions will depend on the outcome of current consultations with the county councils concerned.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Is he satisfied that the Green Belt around London is adequately protected at present?

It is very well protected at present, but in the South-East in general there is a long-overdue need to review the whole Green Belt policy and to extend the amount of Green Belt.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he is now in a position to give the total num ber of houses built in the public sector for 1971 together with the comparative total for 1970 and 1969.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many new houses were completed in the public sector in 1971; how many were started: and what steps he is taking to increase these numbers in the current year.

No, Sir. The figures for 1971 will not be available until 31st January.

I can understand the Minister's reluctance to get the figures out. Does he realise that these figures, when published, will show that council-house building will be the lowest for a decade? Does not that make an utter farce of what the Prime Minister said on Monday about retraining to get the unemployment level down, when there are 147,000 trained, ready and able construction workers who, if given the chance, would be off the labour exchanges and building the houses which the country needs?

I do not think the hon. Gentleman can have read the figures which were published this morning, showing that new orders for public-sector housing in November were 45·3 per cent. higher than in October, 1971 and 47·5 per cent. higher than in November, 1970. These are welcome statistics, which I am sure the hon. Gentleman will join me in welcoming.

Would my right hon Friend care to remind us all that one local authority in Surrey has recently had to postpone a council-house building programme because of a lack of building workers and that there are very few people who seriously believe this grossly inflated figure of unemployed persons in the building industry?

My hon. Friend is perfectly right in the sense that both the employers and the trade unions tell me that there is a serious shortage of skilled men in many parts of the country and that our programme is in some danger of overheating the industry.

Is the Minister aware that a very modest improvement in the employment figures could take place if society generally took advantage of the improvement grants which are available? Local authorities are becoming anxious and tenants who are eager to improve their property are becoming anxious. Is not the date for completion of June, 1973, completely artificial? Will the Minister take account of the views which I have expressed?

Much more certainly could be done on the improvement side. However, the improvement figures are nearly 100 per cent. better than those for last year. Naturally I would welcome any additional support which the hon. Gentleman can give in his constituency and throughout the country.

What about the date?

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many houses were built in the period from November, 1970 to November, 1971.

375,500 were completed in Great Britain in the period of 13 months from 1st November, 1970, to 30th November, 1971.

Are not those deplorably low figures when set against our desperate housing need? In view of the unemployment in the construtcion industry, is not the time ripe for the Government to present the House with a programme of massive urban renewal?

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right in saying that the figures are disappointing. He will appreciate that completions up to the early months of 1971 depended on starts undertaken before the General Election, so I do not think there is a party issue between us. I have already said, in answer to the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner), that public-sector building is improving. Private-sector building is booming. I shall be able to make a further statement on 31st January when we have the final figures for the year. I do not think that those will be discouraging.

Even though the public-sector picture may look slightly brighter now, on the basis of the orders only, taking the number of starts, which is the most critical figure, is it not the case that in the third quarter of last year—the last quarter for which we have figures—starts were 18 per cent. below those for the third quarter of 1970 and, as far as I can trace, lower than in any quarter since 1961? Is not that deplorable?

The hon. Gentleman seems determined to look a gift horse in the mouth. I hope that he will await the figures which are due to be published on 31st January. Meanwhile, I hope that he will join me in rejoicing at the improvement which is taking place in slum clearance.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what study he had made of apparatus for injecting steam into car petrol, which smooths the combustion process and enable engines to run on lower octane fuels; and what estimate he has made of carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide in exhaust gases.

Independent tests have been arranged.

If this has a future, can it expect any financial advantages in the fight against pollution?

Before I answer that question I should like to see the results of the tests, but the hon. Gentleman can be assured that this project is being taken seriously.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment in what main areas he proposes to seek to influence the formulation of European Economic Community transport policy; and if he will make a statement.

In the economic regulation of transport and the environmental aspects of transport policy, including lorry weights.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied, following the statement he gave in The Times recently, that adequate consideration will be given to high British standards in all these fields and that we shall make an impact on European policy?

Yes. I shall certainly do my best to ensure that this is so.

Will the Minister confirm or deny that, come what may, the position is that none of the rules and regulations that have been agreed—the right hon. Gentleman will remember that I showed a parcel of them to the House the other day—is alterable or amendable by the Minister or by the House and that we must agree to them in toto?

We have agreed to the rules already existing in the Community. That does not mean that those rules are not subject to discussion in the future.

Discussion, but not amendment.

Before we start talking about influencing European policy, will the Minister say what is the present policy of his Department with regard to large vehicles in Britain, even before we join the E.E.C.? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that very large numbers of articulated vehicles, which greatly exceed in length, size and weight the limits permitted under the Motor Vehicle (Construction and Use) Act, are infesting British roads? Many of them originate from as far afield as Eastern Europe. They are constantly passing North into Manchester and other places and are a complete nuisance and an offence against laws passed by the House of Commons.

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for reminding the House of this problem, which has existed for many years. A Bill which was recently introduced in another place has now reached this House and is designed to do precisely that for which the hon. Gentleman asks. I take it that that Bill will have the almost unanimous support of the House of Commons.

I assume that we shall be allowed to keep our existing axle weights and that they will not be increased in line with those existing in the Common Market.

The Community has not agreed on an axle weight. I believe that the retention of the 10-ton limit is very important indeed. There is no widespread agreement throughout the Continent of Europe on this important subject, but I think it essential that we should have in mind the strength of our roads and bridges and the vibration caused to ancient buildings by a heavy increase in the laden weights.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the difference between permitted axleweight and size of lorries in the countries of the European Economic Community compared with Great Britain; and, on the basis that carriers are to have mutual access, what is his estimate of the cost of strengthening the bridges of Great Britain to stand the additional loads.

The European Economic Community has not yet agreed harmonised standards for vehicles weights and dimensions.

Will the Minister use his influence to ensure that we do not agree to the increase? Will he pay heed to the views expressed on both sides of the House and realise that the large articulated lorries now travelling on our roads are an abomination from the point of view of the nuisance they create and the number of decibels of sound they emit? Will the right hon. Gentleman make representations to the Government that this is likely to be one of the hidden costs of the bargain we have made and that there will be many others about which the House can only guess at the moment, as we are so short of information?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that I take this matter very seriously. However, I hope that he will not go too far down the road in regarding all heavy lorries, wherever they are, as a nuisance. They make a very useful and valuable contribution to our transport system.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when the Tinsley Viaduct section of the Ml will be open to four-lane traffic.

The section of Ml carried by the top deck of Tinsley Viaduct is dual three lanes of which dual two lanes are open to traffic.

As my hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and Development stated in reply to a Question by the right hon. Member for Sheffield, Park (Mr. Mulley), proposals for strengthening the viaduct should be available by the end of April, 1972. Until these are received I cannot estimate how long it will take to put them into effect.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this important viaduct has been restricted to two-lane traffic since June, 1971, and, in view of what he has just said, seems likely to be so restricted for a further six to 12 months? Does he think it good enough, in the face of current unemployment and surplus factory capacity, that there should be delays of up to a year before undertaking necessary modifications of this kind?

Until I have the report, I cannot decide whether the modifications are necessary. But I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will agree that public safety is paramount in such cases.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the information which he conveyed to the Sheffield Chamber of Commerce in a letter has caused concern in Sheffield? While I accept that there are technical difficulties—the engineers recently had a meeting on standards and improvements—is there no way of improving the position and having normal traffic across the viaduct, which is in a steel city, as soon as possible?

I cannot give any undertakings before seeing the report, which is due in April.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what proportion of collisions with standard lamp columns has resulted in fatal and serious accidents to car users and passengers in each of the last three years.

It is not possible to answer this Question in these terms. But of the accidents which resulted in personal injury, the percentages which resulted in serious or fatal injury were in 1971, 45 per cent.; in 1970, 41 per cent.; and in 1969, 46 per cent.

In view of the number of bad accidents caused by cars crashing into standard lamp columns, will my right hon Friend consider issuing a circular to local authorities asking them whether they would consider the use of breakaway lamp standards, in the hope that this will help road safety?

Yes, Sir. Breakaway lamp standards are already under fairly active consideration and test. When any useful information is available I will consider circulating it to local authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the major public transport investment projects approved for grants since 1968; and if he will make a statement.

Since the inception of the infrastructure grant scheme in October, 1968, grants totalling £107 million have been approved. Of this sum about £100 million is accounted for by 11 major schemes, details of which I will, with permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that in the South-East of England, and particularly Kent, we feel that a forward project with regard to the E.E.C. is required?

I will bear that in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made regarding the sale of Thomas Cook and Son, Limited; and if he will make a statement.

A prospectus was published on 16th December.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Bearing in mind the intense interest in the matter on this side of the House, will he give an assurance that he will keep the House fully informed at all stages?

Yes, Sir, of course.

Will B.O.A.C. or B.E.A. be permitted to make a bid for Thomas Cook?

I am not responsible for the actions of either of the nationalised air corporations, but no one has been inhibited from putting in a bid.

Does not my right hon. Friend think that the general public, particularly the small investor, should also be allowed the opportunity to buy a stake in Thomas Cook? Would not a public offer for sale by subscription be a method to be considered?

My hon. Friend has raised that point on a number of occasions, including last night. The advice given to me was that the best way of securing the best price for the public interest was to proceed along the path we have taken.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many dwellings are involved in housing schemes which are being held back because of the Docklands Study.

I can well understand the hon. Member's concern on this topic. There is a Greater London Council development of 420 dwellings at Deptford Wharf and a few small schemes which are being delayed.

We are already seeing whether some tens of acres can be released quickly in the London Docks and at Beckton.

The study should result in substantial new areas being allocated for housing.

I appreciate that the Docklands Study is very worthwhile, and I hope, as I am sure does the right hon. Gentleman, that some good will come out of it. But is the right hon. Gentleman aware—he has indicated that he is—that there is great urgency about the matter? I hope that he will do his best to push it along fast.

We have seen the consultants and I have asked them to release such land as can definitely be released for housing as quickly as possible.

On behalf of my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for West Ham, South (Sir Elwyn Jones), may I say that he and I are very concerned about the right hon. Gentleman's reference to Beckton. The Newham Council is very anxious to get the project moving. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to use his undoubted knowledge and expertise to get those concerned in the Civil Service cracking, because West Ham—Newham, as it is now called—wants action on the Beckton site.

The hon. Gentleman and his right hon. and learned Friend will agree that it would be disastrous if this unique opportunity to develop 2,000 acres and to improve the environment of the East End were lost. Within that context, we must wait for the study. Apart from doing that, I shall certainly do everything I can to hurry up development.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what action he has taken to bring to the attention of the highway authority responsible for street lighting on the A19 in the town of Easingwold his letter of 26th October, 1971, to local authorities on the subject of street lighting.

The Easingwold Parish Council is responsible for the existing street lighting, which is only footway lighting, and I asked rural district councils to bring my letter of 26th October to the attention of parish councils who are street lighting authorities.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the town of Easingwold is the only stretch of the A 19 trunk road inadequately lit, and that elderly people are afraid to cross the street after dark? Surely, as a trunk road and street lighting authority, my hon. Friend has a responsibility and should not disregard his own circular?

Additional funds are becoming available for trunk road lighting. A new scheme is under consideration, and we shall let my right hon. Friend know the results as soon as we have made up our mind on the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will now introduce legislation governing pollution levels from motor vehicle exhaust systems.

I have almost completed my review of pollution from motor vehicles. I will be making an announcement in the near future.

I did in fact yesterday have talks with the French Government and did agree with them an immediate exchange of information which should assist further consideration of this topic.

Whilst I welcome my right lion. Friend's statement that the legislation will come forward very soon, may we have an assurance from him that he will make it binding on other-than-new vehicles, because other-than-new vehicles are always the worst offenders?

There is a wide range of topics concerning emissions from motor vehicles. We are pushing research as quickly as possible on a filter that could be fitted to all vehicles, but it may not be possible to apply other regulations we might make, such as regulations about the future construction of an engine, to existing vehicles.

While I appreciate further steps to deal with the pollution problem, does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that there are an enormous number of vehicles on the road, particularly heavy lorries, that are infringing the existing regulations? Therefore, will he take steps, possibly with the police authorities, to see that the existing regulations are observed?

Yes, Sir. I should warmly welcome far more enforcement than takes place in a whole range of activities. One is fumes from vehicles, another is noise from vehicles, and another is the dropping of litter.

Mr. Benyon.

Question No. 38.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I draw your attention to the fact that we have jumped from Question No. 36 to Question No. 38?

Order. The hon. Gentleman's Question, No. 37, was answered with No. 18.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he has reached a decision concerning future office development in Greater London; and if he will make a statement.

My aim is to continue to encourage those concerns which can do so to operate outside London, while ensuring that those who can best contribute to the economy by being in London are able to operate or develop there.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Does he agree that London of all the major capital cities of the Western world is in the best position to improve its environment because of its falling population? If the G.L.C. proposals to increase office employment by 75,000 in the next decade came to fruition, does he agree that there would be absolutely no possibility of reaching that goal?

I assure my hon. Friend that the considerations he has just expressed are not ignored. The important thing is to have some kind of balanced measure of control in the South-East, where there is great congestion, and at the same time to give reasonable opportunities in London.

May the House be informed whether the Minister responsible for transport has taken over planning responsibility from the Minister responsible for planning?

That was announced some months ago. I do my best to satisfy any questions which the right hon. Gentleman has to ask on the subject.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the statutory provisions which govern the rights of private tenants to discuss rent proposals with the rent officer and the rent assessment committee, and their rights to expert representation before these persons.

The tenant's rights to discuss with rent officers and, on appeal, with rent assessment committees the fair rent proposed are set out in Schedule 6 to the Rent Act, 1968. Where the landlord first applies for a Certificate of Fair Rent, the tenant's similar rights are set out in Schedule 7 to the Act. The specific rights to be represented by any person are provided in paragraphs 4(3) and 8 of Schedule 6 and paragraphs 4(2), 7(3) and 9(b) of Schedule 7.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply. Can he explain why he is refusing to give the same rights under the Housing Finance Bill to council tenants?

Council tenants are being given for the first time the opportunity to appeal in writing against assessments. Under the present system they are given no choice of any kind.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations have been made to him expressing disapproval of his proposals for the reform of the administrative framework of the national parks.

Such representations have been received from voluntary amenity bodies and private individuals.

Does the Secretary of State realise that there is a great disparity between the most effective and the least effective national parks and that there is considerable public concern that his proposals would reduce the national parks to the level of the least effective?

That is not true. We have already announced a series of proposals recommended to us by the Countryside Commission to improve and strengthen the administration of national parks. I shall try to bring forward legislation to improve the present administrative set-up and to see that the national parks are better staffed than in the past and that the lessons from the best are applied to the worst.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many general improvement areas have been declared since January, 1971.

:A total of 125 have been declared in England.

That is a very welcome answer. Does my hon. Friend agree that from every point of view—social, political and economic—renovation is far better than demolition, and will he expedite general improvement areas in the cities so that the near-slum areas of today become the modern, fashionable areas of tomorrow?

I agree that we should do everything we can to stimulate general improvement areas. That is the general view on both sides of the House.

Is the Minister aware that in the city of Manchester many more such areas could be declared, thus assisting us in our grave housing difficulties and alleviating the grave unemployment among construction workers? Will he at last relent and extend the provisions of the Housing Act, 1971 to the city?

The provisions of the Act were limited to the development areas and other assisted areas, and the hon. Gentleman knows the reasons that prompted that decision.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish the comments he has received from public bodies on his consultative document on the proposed reorganisation of water and sewerage services in England and Wales.

No, Sir. Any publicity for any comments on this proposed reorganisation must be a matter for those making the comments.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that the consultative document left a great deal to consult about, that in this case the general principle of multi-purpose authorities has been agreed and that it would be a great help to the good will of everyone concerned if the Minister would publish these comments so that we know what the major bodies concerned are thinking?

I do not think that there is any need to do so. I am perfectly willing to have the maximum dialogue and discussion with the major bodies concerned in this sphere. I am certain that there will be no complaint from them that they have not been fully consulted and have not had every opportunity to put their views.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that sailing clubs which use the canals are concerned about this reorganisation, and will he have consultations with them?