asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government the reasons for dismissing Mr. F. C. Jobson and Mr. M. Auliff from their membership of the Basildon, Essex, Development Corporation; and whether he will give a list of dismissals from similar corporations since October, 1951.

No one has been dismissed from membership of any new town corporation since October, 1951. These gentlemen were not reappointed after the expiry of their term of office.

Could the Minister answer the Question by telling me those who have not been re-appointed—the list of people—and confirm whether or not there are others than those mentioned in the Question?

If the hon. Member will put down a Question, I will certainly circulate the answer in detail, but I should like to emphasise that members are appointed for a limited period and it is very unfair to the individuals concerned to suggest that because that they may not be re-appointed they have therefore been dismissed.

Is it not strange that in the majority of cases those who have not been re-appointed have been members of the Labour Party?

But it is not the fact. For instance, I do not regard Lord Beveridge as a member of the Labour Party. He did not wish to continue at Peterlee and in that case I appointed a very distinguished member of the Labour Party to be chairman of that corporation.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government why the service of the Acton member of the Hemel Hempstead Development Corporation has been terminated; and what steps he is taking to safeguard the needs of the borough of Acton in the development policy of that corporation.

In reply to the first part of the Question, I would refer to the Answer I have given to the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. A. Lewis). In reply to the second part of the Question, development corporations are not constituted on a representative basis, but I am confident from recent discussions with the corporation that they will not overlook the needs of the Borough of Acton.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why he displaced the Acton member of this corporation, and whether he will consider appointing another member of Acton Borough Council, if necessary, in place of the one displaced, on account of the interest of the Borough of Acton in the new town of Hemel Hempstead?

Of course, the rest of London is also interested in this new town.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government (1) if he is aware that the proposal to erect a 100-foot gas holder in the centre of Farnworth contravenes every principle of town planning; and if he will, therefore, review the decision to allow it.

(2) on what grounds the decision to allow the erection of the 100-foot gas holder in the centre of the borough of Farnworth was taken.

(3) whether he has considered a communication from the Farnworth Borough Council protesting against his decision to allow the erection of a 100-foot gas holder in the centre of the town; and what reply he has sent to the communication.

The decision to allow a 100-foot gas holder in Farnworth was taken by the county council as local planning authority. They were influenced, I understand, by the fact that there is already a 50-foot gas holder on this site and that to keep the new one down nearer to the height of the existing one would involve considerable expenditure of money and materials. I would not feel justified in reversing this decision which was taken more than two years ago, and I am writing accordingly to the borough council, from whom I have heard. I am sending the right hon. Gentleman a copy of my letter.

Is the Minister aware that this holder is sited within 50 yards of the town hall, will dominate the centre of the town and render any question of the re-development of that part of the town impossible if it is erected?

I quite appreciate the right hon. Gentleman's feelings. I understand them, but in this case, where the planning authority gave its consent, and where such a very heavy additional cost in materials and labour would be concerned in altering that decision, I do not think it my duty as Minister to interfere.

Is the Minister also aware that every official associated with town planning, either locally or on the part of the authority itself, has condemned the scheme, and only the Tory-dominated planning committee of the county council is insisting upon it?

I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman ought to make that imputation, nor do I feel the difference between the existing stack of one height and another makes as much difference as all that.

Why has the Minister gone back on a decision of the previous Minister at least to reduce the height of this holder by 25 feet? Does he consider that 100 feet of ugliness is better than 75 feet?

I did not think that a reduction of 25 feet was worth £50,000 and the 270 tons of additional steel and 440 tons of additional cast iron which would be needed to build at the alternative height.

Are we to take it that in future no industrial town that was built without planning years ago is to derive any advantage from town planning today?

No, Sir.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government, in view of undertakings given, why he consulted the Devon County Council before making his national appointments to the Dartmoor Park Committee.

Because I thought it the proper thing to do.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in addition to the two-thirds representation on the local committee which the local authorities already have, this decision of the right hon. Gentleman means that the local authorities are also to select the remaining one-third?

Everybody is agreed on this system. It seems to work very well. The important thing is that the people running the National Park and the people in the county where the National Park lies should get on amicably together, and that they will do.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is aware that the development plans which are being prepared under the Town and Country Planning Act, 1947, contain detail as to the situation of battle areas, Army, Navy and Air Force buildings, railway junctions and marshalling yards, docks and wharves and important industrial buildings; that these plans would be of assistance to any enemy in the event of war; and whether he has consulted with the Minister of Defence on the security aspects of the matter and on the steps to be taken to prevent copies of these plans becoming available to any potential enemy.

Yes, Sir. Measures have been taken, in consultation with Defence Departments, to ensure that these plans do not contain matter which ought not to be disclosed.

Is not it a fact that conditions have changed considerably since the security arrangements were laid down in the Ordnance Survey and that these maps, read in conjunction with Circular 92 issued by my right hon. Friend's predecessor, would give a potential enemy a picture more complete than could be obtained by air reconnaissance?

I thank my hon. and gallant Friend for calling my attention to this matter. I think that the fact that this Question has been put will call the attention of the Defence Departments to it, and I shall see that this matter is looked into.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether, in order to increase the income of local authorities, he will take steps to terminate the derating of industrial hereditaments and agricultural land.

This proposal raises large issues and will require the exploration of long avenues and the turning over of many stones.

The Government having now added considerably to the financial burden of all local authorities have introduced a new factor into the situation. Will the Minister see, therefore, that wealthy industrialists and landowners are no longer subsidised at the expense of less fortunate ratepayers? In Burton, for example, one firm costs the local rate fund far more than it ever pays in.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government the allocation under the capital investment programme for reconstruction in bombed cities during the year 1951; and the comparable figure proposed for the year 1952.

The allocation for 1951 was £4½ million. As regards the second part of the Question, the capital allocation for 1952 will be settled from time to time in accordance with the steel available.

Even if the actual figures of the capital investment programme have not been fixed for this year, is it not a fact that, in effect, there has been a severe reduction, and, if that is not the case, how can the right hon. Gentleman explain some of the answers which he has been giving to the local authorities on this matter?

We are now at the beginning of March, four weeks after the steel allocation came into being, and I am hopeful that, before the end of the year, we shall be able to make further progress in the work in which the hon. Gentleman and others are so much interested, but I do not want to tie myself to a capital investment programme, which might be hampering rather than helping.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that, if the blitzed cities are to plan their work, it is highly desirable to have this information several months ahead, and that, if he now says, as he did in the House last week, that we are not going to know the total amount until the end of the year, he will be holding up the whole reconstruction of blitzed cities?

I do not think there will be any difficulty of their taking delivery, if I can get them the steel.

As the right hon. Gentleman's Ministry has been inviting development in the blitzed cities and has been preparing plans whereby they will use much less steel, does he not realise that the whole of that proposal will be useless unless they are guaranteed in advance that they will be able to get licences under the capital investment programme?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government the most recent date on which a proposal for rebuilding the Plymouth Library was turned down by Her Majesty's Government; the cost involved; and the grounds for the Government's decision.

A scheme, estimated to cost £33,000, was turned down on 19th October, 1951, seven days before I took office, because it would have used building resources which are needed for more essential work.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consult with the Under-Secretary on this matter, because I think the Under-Secretary was misinformed on the subject, and probably the Minister is misinformed as well? Will he tell us whether he will be prepared to grant these licences now if, in fact, the steel can be secured from the old buildings amongst the blitzed parts?

The hon. Gentleman is rather pressing at an open door, for I am not, either by inclination or interest, allergic to libraries.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he has considered the resolution passed at a conference of a large number of West Midland local authorities, a copy of which has been sent to him, protesting against the proposal of the Forestry Commission to utilise the whole of Highgate Common, Enville, for afforestation purposes with the exception of 10 acres; and if he will refuse his planning authority for this project.

The resolution only reached me on the 1st March, and I am making inquiries.

Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that this particularly beautiful area is a source of much pleasure for recreational purposes for all industrial workers in the West Midland towns, and would he, therefore, study the amenity aspect very closely before allowing the Forestry Commission to take it?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what action he has taken on resolutions adopted and sent to him by the Buckinghamshire County Council expressing the opinion that the cost of works necessary to prevent flooding of streams and rivers due to the discharge of storm water or sewage effluent from a new town are directly attributable to its development and that the whole cost should be a charge on national funds and disapproving of the proposal that the question should be referred to the joint arbitration of two Government Departments having a direct interest in the outcome of such arbitration.

The Thames Conservancy and the development corporation have agreed to submit the matters in dispute to my right hon. and gallant Friend the Minister of Agriculture and myself, and I cannot, therefore, at this stage, express views on the merits of the resolution referred to.

Does the Minister think it fair that two Government Departments whose interests are involved in this dispute should be the arbitration authorities?

I am not really so interested as all that. I think we could probably give as fair an arbitration as any other two men.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he has considered the report of serious mismanagement by the Salford City Council, details of which have been sent him; and if he will take steps under Section 6 of the Local Government Act, 1948, to reduce the Exchequer grant to this council until the matter has been rectified.

I am advised that this matter does not come within the scope of my powers under Section 6 of the Act.

In that event, will not the Minister take some steps to try to end a scandalous mismanagement by the Socialist-dominated city council?

Will the right hon. Gentleman say exactly what this serious mismanagement is supposed to be rather than leave it to a nasty imputation by the hon. Member for Altrincham and Sale (Mr. Erroll)? Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is an example of the capacity of the hon. Member for Altrincham and Sale for butting in on matters that do not concern him?

I have seen some reference to this trouble, but I have answered the Question. I do not think that even if these allegations were correct or were absolutely true—[HON. MEMBERS: "What allegations?"] They have been referred to me. I simply say that Section 6 is intended to apply to very serious matters indeed, and I could not think it proper even to consider using it.

May I ask, Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the Minister says he has no control at all over this matter, how this Question comes to be on the Order Paper when hon. Members on other occasions have tried to put down questions with regard to local government and have been told that because the Minister has no responsibility the questions cannot appear on the Order Paper?

I see the hon. Lady's point. But the Question asks the Minister "if he will take steps under Section 6 of the Local Government Act." The Minister's answer, if I followed it aright, was in the negative because he did not think Section 6 applied to this sort if case.

The Minister said that it was already known that he had no powers under Section 6. Is not that sufficient reason for the Question not appearing on the Order Paper?

Perhaps the Minister can elucidate the matter further.

Does the Minister dismiss as mere allegations the report by the City Treasurer of Salford of serious mismanagement of a financial nature in the council?

No, Sir. The advice have given in reply to the Question is that I could not proceed under Section 6 of this Act.

Then the Question has no right to be on the Order Paper.

Could we have the assurance of the Minister that he does not regard this report as containing allegations of serious mismanagement?

I do not think it would benefit the position if I were drawn into a matter on which I have been advised that, although I have these powers, it would not be suitable for me to use them.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will recommend the establishment of a Royal Commission to consider the reform of local government in England and Wales and to make proposals.

No, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that the local government associations have been negotiating among themselves on this matter for some considerable time without appreciable result, and does not he think the best way to deal with the matter would be for all interested bodies, including the associations, to present their evidence on this important matter to the body I have suggested?

I do not think it would. We had six years of the previous Administration, we had the Boundary Commission which operated until it was abolished, and I do not see much object in having a Royal Commission now. Quite a lot of information exists about this subject, and if we are able to reach a decision and produce legislation we shall do so. I do not think that the suggestion of the hon. Gentleman would help at this stage, and there is nothing worse than the attitude of sending things to a Royal Commission in the hope that nobody will ever do anything about them.

Is not the Minister aware that this long delay is having a very bad effect on local government, and will he not make up his mind at long last?

I do not think the delay can be laid at my door.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what steps he is taking to return requisitioned premises to owners requiring them for their own residential occupation, if they are prepared to agree to a stipulated period before change of occupation.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when his policy to refuse permission for local authorities to requisition vacant property was decided.

The action which I have taken on requisitioning is indicated in a circular which I issued to local authorities on 19th February, of which I am sending copies to the hon. Members.

While I am not aware of the contents of the circular, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he appreciates that as far as I am aware any action by the local authority is dependent on agreement between the owner and occupier as to what can be regarded as suitable alternative accommodation, and would he perhaps consider giving power to the local authority to decide what is or is not suitable alternative accommodation?

We are doing what we can to secure both the rights of the owners and the meeting of the needs of housing.

To ask the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many local authorities have applied to him for permission to purchase or requisition owner-occupied dwellings for the purpose of rehousing the occupants in smaller houses and replacing them with tenants from the local authority housing lists; how many houses were involved; and in how many cases was permission granted.

On a point of order. May I call your attention, Mr. Speaker, to a misprint in the Question, which probably wrecks its meaning. For "owner-occupied" the right hon. Gentleman should read "under-occupied." If he cannot answer the Question in that form, may I withdraw the Question?

Perhaps I may give the hon. Gentleman the answer, and we might get together and see what we might make of this. The answer is:

My Ministry has no record of any such case.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is aware that the block of flats Viceroy Court in St. Marylebone remains empty because of failure to settle up dilapidation damages caused by Government occupation; and if he will take steps to expedite this, in view of the delay and the urgent need for accommodation in St. Marylebone.

No, Sir. I understand that all claims outstanding in respect of the requisitioning of these flats by the Air Ministry have been settled.

Is the Minister aware that this block of flats, which contains a considerable number of separate flats, was derequisitioned 18 months ago in order to make more housing accommodation available, and is it not now time that this accommodation was made available?

Yes, Sir, but the question this time was whether some blame was attached to a Ministry of which both the right hon. and learned Gentleman and I have very happy memories. I was trying to point out in reply that the Air Ministry were not to blame in this matter.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what steps he is taking to improve the rate of housing in those districts where building labour is most difficult to obtain.

In districts where building labour is scarce, and indeed elsewhere, I am encouraging building by so-called "non-traditional" methods. This will supplement the maximum attainable production of traditional houses. Several well-proven types are available in a variety of designs at about the same cost as ordinary brick built houses. They save man-hours on the site and so can be put up more quickly. I will send the hon. Member a copy of a circular I am addressing to all local housing authorities on the subject in a day or two.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that already there is growing evidence that in many parts of the country there is a movement of labour and raw materials to residential areas for houses to be built for sale to the detriment of local authorities and contractors to local authorities who cannot get labour or raw materials?

That is not my information.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he intends introducing his promised amending legislation of the Rent Restriction Acts; and to give an assurance that it will deal with the anomalies associated with the tied house and cottage problem.

As far as I can remember, I have never promised to introduce legislation, but to review the problem. In the light of this review, a decision will be taken by the Government as to whether legislation is required and if so what it should be. It will cover the whole of the subject.

Can the Minister give an assurance in respect of the last part of the Question? Will it or will it not deal with the tied cottage and house problem?

The review will deal with every aspect of the subject.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether the recent increases in the rate of interest on housing loans from the Public Works Loan Board, will be met wholly out of higher subsidies from the Exchequer, or partly out of local rates.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government the offer made and the result of his negotiations with the local authority associations on the subject of the housing subsidy; and whether his offer to them completely compensates for the rise in interest rates on the whole amount of the Exchequer and local subsidy.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government the estimated cost to his Department of implementing his promise that the increase in the housing subsidies will be sufficient to cover the whole of the increased costs to local housing authorities arising from the new interest rates.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government the new rate of subsidy for houses built by local authorities; and whether this will involve an increase in the subsidy payable from local rates.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will make a statement on the results of his conversations with representatives of local authorities concerning the increased subsidy for housing purposes.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government now to inform the House concerning his discussions with the local authorities about housing subsidies.

I would refer the hon. Members to the reply given to the hon. Member for Southend, East (Mr. McAdden) on 28th February.

Can the Minister explain why he gave a misleading answer and, even if he had been having a very fierce quarrel with the Treasury, would it not have given rather less blatant advertisement to the confusion in the Government on this subject if he had given the correct answer the first time?

The right hon. Gentleman makes this imputation against me. I gave no misleading answer. Why should I? I have been a long time in this House and I have never been accused previously of giving a misleading answer.

Withdraw.

In view of the fact that the Minister's previous answer to the House indicated that local authorities would be completely covered in respect of the increased interest, will he now either apologise or make his position clear?

I thought it was rather for the right hon. Gentleman to apologise, but I will try to make my position clear if hon. Members will study the figures which were given; they are complete, if somewhat complicated.

The subsidy structure covers a wide range and, so far as I know, "housing subsidy" has always, since introduced in 1945, meant a payment to support the rent structure, of which three-quarters has always been paid by the Exchequer and a quarter by the rates. I used the term "housing subsidy" in that sense; that is the common form of it. I observe that I have been very much blamed in other quarters for having been so generous. What has really happened is that the right hon. Gentleman and his friends are annoyed at having been deprived of a grievance.

While I acquit the Minister of any desire to mislead the House—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh"]—I can only speak for myself—I would ask him if he is aware that his answer did convey the impression that the local authorities would be entirely reimbursed? May I refer the Minister to his answer given to my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle - upon - Tyne, East (Mr. Blenkinsop), which appears in c. 26 of the OFFICIAL REPORT of 19th February? I will read the answer in which—

This is getting much too long for a supplementary question.

The hon. Gentleman has been very courteous in the way be has put his supplementary question. If there has been any misunderstanding, I am sorry, but I have always understood the expression to mean a payment, three-quarters of which was paid by the Exchequer and a quarter by the local authority. That, at any rate, is what it does now clearly mean. I would add that I think no one who wants to see the strengthening of local government would ever like a system in which 100 per cent. subsidies were paid.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the increased housing subsidy, so far as it falls locally, will mean a 2d. rate in the City of Nottingham, and can he say how that helps the nation's balance of payment by transferring money from the pockets of the ratepayers to those of the bankers?

Is the Minister aware that in Question No. 11 I have quoted the actual reply to the statement made by my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, East (Mr. Blenkinsop) and in that the Minister did say there would be no increase in the local rates? Can he explain this?

If there was any difficulty about hon. Members understanding what I intended to say or did say, the matter is all now settled, so that I do not see that the point arises.

May I further ask the Minister to recall the reply he gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham, South (Mr. Norman Smith), who particularly asked:

"Will the Minister bear in mind that there is grave anxiety among the local authorities lest any increase in the subsidy should not be sufficient to off-set the extra cost of borrowing…"

to which the Minister replied:

"…if that be their anxiety I can allay it immediately."—[OFFICIAL REPORT. 19th February, 1952; Vol. 496, c. 26.]

We took that as a promise that the value of the subsidy would cover the whole cost.

No local authority has ever asked for this. I have met them all. Nobody has ever raised this or doubted what they have always known, that a quarter lay upon the rates. I still think that hon. Gentlemen opposite are annoyed at being deprived of their grievance—[Interruption.]

Order. This matter must be pursued some other time.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall endeavour to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

On a point of order, I understood the Minister to say, he said it rather quickly, that he was also answering Question No. 22. If he did, may I ask him—

No.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether his attention has been drawn to the timber houses now being built by the Forestry Division of the Eireann Government for their forest workers; and whether he will arrange to obtain examples of these houses from the Eireann Government for erection in this country as an experiment.

We know the potentialities of timber houses, but with the present need to restrict imports I would not feel justified in encouraging their use.

In view of the claims for the rapid method employed in erecting these houses and also their low cost, does the right hon. Gentleman consider this experiment is worth while, particularly as no dollar currency is involved?

It is not only, alas, a question of dollar currency. What I have to try to do, and I admit that the balance changes from time to time and from month to month, is to try to get the maximum out of what we must import, and I think that for the moment I would rather get this timber in a form in which we can use it for other houses, whether of conventional or non-conventional type.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how much steel he is allocating to local authorities for all purposes in the first quarter of 1952.

It is not the practice to publish information about steel allocations.

Why is the Minister so reluctant to give this information? How can Parliament form a judgment on his policy if we are denied this vital information?

It is the practice followed by all Governments with regard to the allocation system. I think the hon. Member and others will realise that it would be extremely difficult to operate the allocation system, either centrally or departmentally, if we had to give detailed replies as to their allocations.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when granting building licences, to make it a condition that the completed buildings must pass the test of a qualified building inspector when they are ready for occupation.

Local authorities by whom licences are issued are asked already to exercise supervision equivalent to that laid down in the scheme of the National House Builders Registration Council.

May I ask what further steps the Minister is taking to protect the tenant or prospective owner from jerry builders, and to see that the right materials are used and that the right kind of house is built?

The byelaws cover this to some extent, and the growth and authority of the National House Builders Registration Council has, I think, filled up any gaps which remain.

Lieut.-Colonel Lipton, Question No. 19.

rose—

The hon. Member's Question No. 18 was answered with Question No. 2. The hon. Member was not present.

As you have quite rightly said, Mr. Speaker, I was not in the House when my Question was answered with Question No. 2. May I ask—[Interruption.]

Order. I must have order on a point of order.

May I ask if it is not necessary to get my permission to answer that Question with another Question and who gave that permission in my absence?

As the hon. Member was not here, neither his permission nor his denial of permission could have been ascertained. It is quite usual for Questions to be answered together.

Is it not necessary for permission to be granted, and therefore is it in order for the Question to be answered when that permission has not been given?

If the hon. Member is present in the House he can say that he does not want his Question answered with another, but if he is not here he has no remedy.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many local authorities have given private building licences on the maximum permitted basis of one for each house built by the council.

I regret that the information is not available. Time will show.

If the Minister has not got the actual figures, is he aware that, despite the hope he expressed that very few local authorities would adopt the 50–50 basis, some of the more reactionary local authorities, like that of Hornsey, have gone to the limit, and even beyond the limit, because they are now giving the full amount of private licences in anticipation of what they may be able to build as council houses?

I have not got the information, and will not get it in this form for some time.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what changes he has made in the allocation of building licences for Cardiff as compared with the allocations for 1949, 1950 and 1951.

I assume the hon. Member has in mind the issue of licences for the building of new houses by private persons. Allocations of such licences are not made by me, but are determined by the housing authority within the permissible ratio of their housing programme. The numbers of licences issued by the city council in 1949, 1950 and 1951 were 316, 104 and 203, respectively. I understand that the council have still to reach a final decision as to the number of licences they will issue in 1952, but to date they have issued licences for 300 houses.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many local authorities have increased the proportion of private building licences; and how many have submitted proposals for the sale of council houses since October, 1951.

As regards the first part of the Question, I regret that the information is not available. Time will show. As regards the second part, a considerable number of local authorities have made inquiries, but I am preparing to issue a circular on this subject shortly.

How can the right hon. Gentleman carry out the undertaking which he gave to maintain the full level of houses to be available for letting if he does not have the full information before him?

That is another question. This is a question of the sale of houses, on which I said I would issue a Circular.

The first part of the Question asked if there had been any change in the proportion of houses to be sold to the general public on private licence, and that, obviously, must affect the number of houses available for letting.

I will see how it works out. I think I shall not be far wrong.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government the amount of loan taken up by local authorities from the Public Works Loan Board for housing purposes since 7th November, 1951; the estimated annual increase in total amount of interest repayments above the rate of 3 per cent. and the increased cost per average dwelling disregarding all subsidies.

The amount up to 22nd February was £49,001,111. So many factors enter into the other parts of the Question that I regret no useful estimate can be made.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a very substantial part of this increase must fall on the local rates, and must also cause increases in the rent of new dwellings?

This is a problem which, with the best will in the world, the experts in my Department could not readily solve, because there are too many unknowns in respect of such a large variety of things as the purchase of land for the future, draining and all kinds of things. It is impossible to produce the reply for which the hon. Gentleman asked, and, therefore, I gave him the best answer I could.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how far he has approved housing contracts providing that local authorities shall refund out-of-pocket expenses incurred by builders when shortage of steel causes stoppage of work.

The forms of contract used by housing authorities are not subject to my approval.

Has the Minister any official statement to make upon what seems to be the growing practice of building firms requiring the inclusion of such a clause in building contracts?

Such information as I am getting upon these matters suggests that they are being settled fairly amicably between the contractors and those who place the contracts.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government the number of houses he anticipates will be built in Wales during 1952–53.

I shall not tempt fortune by hazarding a guess. We shall do our best, and I know we have the good wishes of the hon. Member. Meanwhile, detailed information about actual progress at various stages of the housing programme is contained in the published returns.

Is the Minister aware that, while he naturally has my good wishes in this regard, his answer leaves me without any idea of his target for Wales for the forthcoming year? May I ask him if he has a definite figure in mind with regard to housing in Wales?

I am not obliged to impart to the hon. Gentleman the gift of prophecy which I have not got myself.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government why the rate of dwellings completed and the number of dwellings in local authority schemes approved by him since 7th November, 1951, has fallen.

The hon. Member is quite wrong. More houses were completed in the three months ended 31st January, 1952, and more were included in tenders approved in that period, than in the corresponding period a year ago.

Will the right hon. Gentleman then explain the figures which appear in the latest Housing Summary, dated 31st January, which shows that the rate of completions is lower than for the past three months, and is now running at an annual rate of 188,000 a year?

I think the hon. Gentleman has mis-read the figures. The precise figure for the period was 40,000 in the one case, and nearly 46,000 in the other. In the numbers of tenders approved, the figure was 41,000 rising to 46,000.

That does not apply to the original licence.

The first figure I gave was of completions, and the second related to tenders.

asked the Minister of Works which controls he proposes to remove in order to secure an expansion of building materials and equipment.

I presume the hon. Member refers to my request to brick manufacturers for information regarding controls on the building industry in general. These controls are operated by a number of Departments. So far as my Ministry is concerned, price-controls and licensing are the main controls. I am considering whether price-control can be removed. Licensing is being reviewed to see whether it can be simplified.

Will the Minister let us know more clearly whether in his view the ordinary physical controls over buildings have any direct relation to the building materials industry? Will he not really apply himself to the job of trying to expand building materials, which at the present as in the past have held up building which we all want, instead of relying on these rather vague and doctrinaire phrases when he addresses himself to the subject in public?

The hon. Gentleman will find that the output of building materials is increasing very satisfactorily.

asked the Minister of Works how many firms manufacturing housing fitments have received cuts in their iron and steel allocations, as compared with their consumption in 1951; and what is the estimated reduction in the supply in the current year, as compared with 1951, of fitments which require iron and steel for their manufacture.

My Department is responsible for the allocation of steel to 1,170 firms making housing fitments and all have received a reduced allocation as compared with 1951. But I hope that, including those made of substitute materials, there will be sufficient fitments for the house building programme.

Will the Minister take all possible steps to control the reduction in allocations in order to enable firms to switch over steadily from this work to defence work instead of by sudden cuts which mean that the working forces of these firms which will be needed when the position improves are dismissed?

I am watching that position.

asked the Minister of Works what consideration he has given to the relative merits of sheet-steel and cast-iron for the manufacture of gutters, drain and soil-pipes, baths and cookers for the housing programme; and what is the policy of his Department in regard to the substitution of sheet-steel for cast-iron in respect of such housing requisites.

I am aware of the saving in ferrous metal which theoretically can be obtained by substituting pressed steel for cast-iron. There are, however, certain drawbacks. The steel product is not always so satisfactory in use as cast-iron. There is a shortage of zinc for galvanising. There is no surplus of steel sheet, and in some cases retooling would be involved. I cannot risk any shortage of fitments for building, but my hon. Friend may rest assured that I shall continue to watch the matter closely and secure economies where those are practicable.

In view of the very satisfactory nature of the Minister's reply, may I ask whether he would take steps to bring the technicalities of this matter to the notice of certain steel makers who are endeavouring, quite ill-advisedly, to substitute sheet-steel for cast-iron in these essential requisites for the building trade?

I am doing it.

asked the Minister of Works the practical objections to granting the request of the London County Council that the Dome of Discovery should remain on its present site for two or three years, subject to a full technical investigation to show that its removal for use elsewhere when national conditions permit is a practical proposition.

As I explained in my reply to the hon. Member for Peckham (Mrs. Corbet) on 26th February, whatever may be the cost and technical difficulties in re-erecting the Dome of Discovery, I am unwilling to become the caretaker of empty and deteriorating structures, more especially because the site should be cleared and put to a good purpose in time for the Coronation.

What is the urgency of the development which the right hon. Gentleman has in mind on this site which makes further negotiation impracticable?

The urgency is that we want the site cleared and laid out, possibly as a garden, in time for next year. I do not want to become the caretaker of a slum.

Is it not really a shocking waste to pull down a magnificent building and sell it for scrap when it might well be used in some other part of London for very good purposes for a very long time? Surely, it is worth while bearing the small expense of upkeep for six months or a year in order that full consideration may be given to the proper use of this building elsewhere in London?

On 10th December, I asked the L.C.C. to give me their decision by 6th February. They then asked whether they could have until 5th March, that is, three months in which to discover the technical possibilities. I have offered to support a licence to re-erect the building now if they so wish, but I must have the site cleared.

Could not the Minister make it clear—I think I am right in saying this—that it is a practical engineering impossibility to move the Dome of Discovery to such a place as, for example, the Crystal Palace?

The technical opinions differ on this subject, and I do not feel able to come down on either one side or the other.

Has the Minister considered using the Dome as the central air terminus in London for B.E.A. and B.O.A.C., rather like Les Invalides in Paris, which he may know?

I do not think aircraft could land on a convex roof.

I am sure the right hon. Gentleman is being facetious. Perhaps I ought to explain to him that an air terminus is a place where passengers when travelling by air arrive or depart. In Paris there is a place called Les Invalides, which the right hon. Gentleman may at some time have to use. This would be an ideal central site for a London air terminus, and as the right hon. Gentleman has obviously given no consideration to this possibility, would he now promise to do so?

I am in negotiation with B.E.A. for the use of the station building, which is opposite Waterloo Station, as their new terminus. The Dome does not come into it.

asked the Minister of Works the original estimate of the cost of the new British Embassy in Rio de Janeiro; its final total cost; how much was paid in architects' fees; whether British or Brazilian architects were employed; and when the original expenditure was sanctioned.

The original estimated cost of the new British Embassy at Rio de Janeiro was £150,000; its final total cost was £414,000 including architect's fees and expenses. Twenty-five thousand pounds was paid in architect's fees; a British architect practising in Rio de Janeiro was employed. The original expenditure was sanctioned in the Vote for 1945–46.

While exonerating my right hon. Friend from any responsibility, does he realise that, thanks to the erection of this very expensive building, there will be additional maintenance cost, and will he see that in his administration no such administrative extravagance is allowed?

My hon. and gallant Friend will appreciate that once a building is put up we must maintain it.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the amount of sterling that has accrued to Japan mainly from the sale of cotton goods to Pakistan; how far steps have been taken to reduce this liability; whether he is aware that the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is seeking to obtain this sterling by sales to Japan; and to what extent his arrangements will enable it to be freely available for Soviet use.

I regret that I am not in a position to give the figures asked for in the first part of my hon. Friend's Question. Under the Anglo-Japanese Sterling Payments Agreement of 31st August, 1951, and the Exchange of Notes annexed thereto, Japan may use her sterling earnings for payments to the sterling area and also, in respect of direct current transactions, for payments to countries in the "Transferable Account Area," in which the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is included. I am aware of reports that U.S.S.R. is willing to sell certain goods to Japan for sterling under these arrangements.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the sterling balances have accrued because Japan has displaced this country as the principal supplier of cotton goods to Pakistan? Could he persuade the President of the Board of Trade to announce the Government's policy in respect of Japanese competition?

I am sure that if the hon. Gentleman puts a Question to the President of the Board of Trade he will get a very satisfactory answer.

Is it not desirable that we should encourage the Soviet Union to earn sterling?

I must remind hon. Members that there is a certain trade in essentials between us and the Soviet Union and that we must expect the Soviet Union to use the sterling in some way or another.