asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what steps are being taken to give greater publicity to the rate rebate scheme.

There has been a series of advertisements in the daily and Sunday Press during October to remind people to put in their applications for the second rebate period. I am also hoping to arrange further publicity on television and radio and, in the New Year, to have leaflets made available to people drawing pensions and family allowances.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that in the beginning there was a complete failure to publicise this excellent scheme? Is he aware that in Croydon there were 800 last-minute applications because of the added publicity? Could he say whether people who come along after the last month will be able to receive the full rebate and will not be discriminated against because they happen to be late?

I cannot agree that there has been no publicity. There have been 3 million leaflets, broadcasts on radio and television and two Ministerial notices to ratepayers in the Press. It is true that the crash programme which we undertook at the end of September had a marked effect. I asked local authorities to treat late applicants with generosity, but to go as far as the hon. Member suggests would require legislation, and I can hold out no hope of that.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are considerable anomalies in the operation of the Bill? Is he aware that one person with a small income and owning a house but working to supplement his income would get a considerable rate rebate, whereas another person owning a house and letting a couple of rooms and having no more income cannot get it? Will he look into this?

That is a very different point.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what explanation he has now received from the Greater London Council of their announced intention to set up a new Public Relations Office at an annual cost in excess of £600,000 a year; and whether he is now satisfied that such an increase in local authority expenditure by such a proposal is in accordance with Government policy.

The Greater London Council do not owe my right hon. Friend any explanation in this matter. But he understands that the appropriate Committees of the Council have now reviewed their current and future programme in the light of Government policy and have determined on considerable economies in their estimates for various services, including the public information service.

Does that Answer mean that the new project is shelved in toto, or is it merely to be reduced in size? Has the hon. Gentleman obtained from the Council any information about its sense of priorities in introducing this service at this time when the Government themselves are reducing local authority health and welfare services by £3 million a year?

The right hon. Gentleman's prejudice against the Greater London Council is well known. It is not only the largest authority in Britain but the largest in the world. I should have thought that the fact that it intended to have a public relations service would be welcomed, even by him. However, this is a matter entirely for the Council and not one in which my right hon. Friend can interfere.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many appeals from decisions of planning authorities are now pending with him; and what measures he is taking to expedite the disposal of such appeals.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he proposes to introduce legislation to alter the procedures for town and country planning.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he proposes to introduce legislation to change the system of planning appeals along the lines outlined by his predecessor on 24th May, 1966.

The number was 7,179; a drop of about 1,500 since the beginning of the year. The basis of recruitment for inspectors has been broadened; the departmental organisation for handling appeals has been strengthened; and local planning authorities are being asked to co-operate in arrangements to cut down delays. My right hon. Friend is also considering more radical changes, which would involve legislation and will make his intentions known before long.

Does not the Minister think that it might be better if planning authorities were required to inform adjacent occupiers of planning and development proposals so that they could, if necessary, make corrections in the first place instead of having to wait and clog up the appeal machinery?

That suggestion would probably increase rather than diminish the speed, although there may be something to be said for it on merits.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that these appeals cause a lot of dissatisfaction and that the Minister said as long ago as 24th May that he would consider changes in appeal procedure? When are those changes to me made?

My right hon. Friend is not complacent about this problem at all. We have decided 273 more appeals in the last quarter of this year than last, and, as I have already said, we have cut down the accumulation by 1,500, so I do not think we have done badly.

Does not the hon. Gentleman consider that arranging for some appeals to be heard on a regional basis would save time?

We are considering the whole question of appeals with a view to possible changes.

Would not my hon. Friend consider setting up regional offices of the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, instead of leaving this work in the hands of purely local authorities?

That suggestion sounds like a reform of local Government, which is a matter for the Royal Commission.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what the present time-lag is between the inquiry and the giving of a decision?

On average, it takes about 46 weeks for appeals by inquiry and 31 weeks if the appeals are settled by written procedure.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will publish his inspector's report made following the public inquiry of the proposed redevelopment of Horsham town centre.

My right hon. Friend will publish the report when he announces his final decision.

The Minister must appreciate that, when considering his decision, there will be no harm whatever, if the outline suggestions are accepted, in publishing the inspector's report straight away. What possible objection can there be, if it is correct that the implications of his decision are already well known?

What have been published already are proposals for changing the final decision, but it has always been the normal practice not to publish the report until the final decision because that might involve discussion of the whole of the inspector's report, which would not be relevant to the matters under inquiry.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will shortly introduce legislation to amend the Rating Act, 1966.

No, Sir.

Is it not becoming increasingly evident that the disregards are a quite inaccurate forecast of the position? I ask the Minister not to be stubborn about this and to look at the facts as they are?

I do not think it is a question of being stubborn. The House debated this at considerable length. All of us have great sympathy for the class of people for whom the hon. Gentleman is primarily concerned, but the House expressed its opinion only this year. It is much too early to talk about amending legislation.

Is the Minister aware of the great welcome there has been in the country for the very large number of cases throughout the country who have gained benefit from this Act, unlike its predecessor, where hardly anybody got any benefit at all?

I appreciate what my hon. Friend has said. The purpose of the Act was to reduce the impact of rates on people on low incomes from any source at all, and it compares very favourably, as my hon. Friend said, with the proposals put forward by hon. Members opposite. The amount disbursed so far is about 40 times what it was under the previous Tory Government.

Would the Minister stop being complacent, particularly with regard to disabled people? Does the Minister realise that the Act at the present moment is causing grave hardship to people who fought in the First World War and who have to have a dependant living with them? Would he look into this and see if he can do something about it?

I do not think that anything I have said indicates complacency. If there was complacency, it was on the part of the previous Government.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what will be the cost of the pilot survey of historic towns; and how this cost is to be apportioned.

The consultants fees for these studies are being negotiated separately for each of the towns, and the total amount has not yet been settled It is proposed that the cost should be shared equally between my Department and the local authorities concerned.

Does not the Joint Parliamentary Secretary agree that it is very unfair that King's Lynn should already have spent £2,000 on a survey for the preservation of this ancient centre? Does he not agree that since the benefits of this new survey will be available to the whole nation there is no reason in the world why the local authority should bear any of this cost?

The present survey will go much beyond the previous survey to which my hon. Friend has referred. King's Lynn will benefit from the great amount of information which will be collected on the comprehensive preservation of ancient towns.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what proposals he has for increasing the level of loan sanctions for local authority mortgages over the next six months.

I have this matter under review in the light of other factors affecting the housing market.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, whereas in the first half of 1965 £95 million was given to local authorities for the purpose. in the first half of this year under £32 million was given?

Reading.

Does he not think that the £75 million being given to the Land Commission to acquire private property would be better spent in enabling ordinary men and women——

Reading.

—to become the proud owners of their homes?

Hear, hear.

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his ovation. This is part of a much bigger picture and we can view it only in the light of the amounts available to other lending institutions. We have the matter constantly under review.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government in how many cases, where rent assessment committees have increased the rent proposed by rent officers, such increases have been back-dated; and whether he is aware of the hardship caused to many tenants in these circumstances.

Whether and when a rent increase can become effective in any case depends on the status and terms of the tenancy. Up to 7th October, the original rent was increased in only 24 of the 259 cases determined by the London Rent Panel, and I have no evidence of hardship due to arrears in such cases.

Is my hon. Friend not aware that in some cases there is such a long delay between the rent officer's original decision and the hearing of the appeal that in the meanwhile repairs have sometimes been carried out and the unfortunate tenant has to pay rent backdated to the original application when he was not enjoying the amenities on which the new level was assessed?

I would agree that in a case of that sort I would think that the increase should go back only to when the repairs were done.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in many cases where there is failure to back-date there is very grave hardship for the small landlord?

The object of the Act is to hold the balance evenly, which is why it is sometimes criticised by hon. Members on both sides of the House.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when his new mortgage option scheme will go ahead.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will now make a further statement on his discussions with representatives of the Building Societies Association regarding the mortgage option scheme.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what is the reason for the delay in introducing the legislation to implement the mortgage option scheme which was first announced to Parliament on 1st March, 1966.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he proposes to introduce legislation to implement the mortgage option scheme.

The building societies saw difficulties in the administration of the scheme originally announced in March, but in subsequent discussions with them and other mortgage agencies we have now evolved arrangements which will be easier for them to administer. I expect to introduce the necessary legislation in the near future.

Can the Minister tell the House why there has been this long delay since the original announcement on 1st March? The country is very shocked that yet another Government pledge has been broken. Will the right hon. Gentleman also explain how, when this new scheme comes forward, the building societies can possibly work it if even at the present rate of interest they are without funds?

As to the second point of the hon. Member's supplementary question, perhaps we had better wait for the report of the National Board for Prices and Incomes on building societies. I do not think that there has been any unreasonable delay. The original proposals were extremely complicated and would have involved building societies in a great deal of work they felt unable to contemplate, During the months that have elapsed we have evolved a much simpler and, I think, more satisfactory system.

Does not this lay the Government open again to the same charge of too little and too late?

I do not think that there is any charge that the hon. Member would hesitate to make against the Government, but when he sees the Bill he will find that he is quite wrong.

Is the Minister aware of the uncertainty created in the house market generally by the substantial delay in the implementation of the Government's promise? Does he intend to do anything to reassure the building industry, and particularly the smaller house builders?

This has, perhaps, been one of the factors—there have been a number of factors—producing uncertainty, but we are in constant contact with the building industry, the building societies and local authorities, and I hope that any uncertainty will be allayed.

Is not this a very great change from the so-called scheme outlined by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 1st March, in which he indicated just quick discussions with the building societies followed by a simple scheme, the second phase of which would come into operation early next year? Is not this a gigantic confidence trick?

This is a much simpler scheme, and I think that the hon. Gentleman will welcome it when the Bill finally appears, accompanied by a White Paper.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us on this side hope that the Bill will make this considerable reduction in interest rates apply to those with existing mortgages; and that, in that case, all the criticisms from hon. Gentlemen opposite will fall to the ground?

Yes, Sir. I am fully aware of that.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether this legislation will be introduced before Christmas, and whether it will help with the deposit, which is one of the greatest difficulties for people at present?

I very much hope that the Bill will be introduced well before Christmas. As to the details, I think that the right hon. and learned Gentleman had better wait until the Bill is published.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what recent consultation he has had with local authorities about condensation and dampness in recently-completed houses.

None, except the day-today contacts of the Department's officers, but my right hon. Friend and his right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Minister of Public Building and Works are preparing a publicity campaign to help and advise householders as well as the building trade on how to avoid these troubles.

In co-operation with the Secretary of State and the Minister of Public Building and Works, can we have a vigorous national campaign to combat the evils of condensation and dampness, which cause misery in new houses?

We will do all we possibly can. Regional conferences will be starting early in the new year, the first one being in Manchester. Before then, leaflets will be made available to householders and tenants by local authority distribution. We will do all we can.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will seek to amend the Rating and Valuation Act of 1925 so as to allow exemption from rates for any change in amenities designed to alleviate a physical disability of the householder or his dependants.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will seek power to provide that, where the occupier of a house becomes paralysed or loses the use of his legs and has on that account to instal a lift or garage for a disabled person's car, or other essential apparatus, the property shall not be charged additional rates so long as it is occupied by the disabled person.

Alterations to a house can only attract additional rates if they add to its letting value. In addition, the law already requires valuation officers to disregard the value of garages and other structures which cater for the special needs of the disabled. My right hon. Friend is not aware that anything further is needed.

Is my hon. Friend aware that disabled people who install downstairs lavatories or bathrooms—vital necessities—have to answer for it by paying extra rates? Surely, this is an anomaly which, like that of garages, needs to be corrected?

The difficulty is that that is a conversion within the premises, which is more difficult to single out than is an extra structure, though in cases of difficulty it has always been possible to apply to the valuation officer for exemption.

Is the Minister aware that reports of a number of cases in the last few weeks do not bear out what he says? Will he look into those cases? Is it not a fact that it is the duty of any civilised community not further to penalise those who are disabled already, who bear such a burden but who seek to be self-reliant?

I know of only one case that has attracted some publicity, and I understand that there the valuation officer has revisited the premises and is reconsidering a possible change of valuation. On the whole, our experience has been that there are not many cases, but if the hon. Gentleman has any case to which he wishes to draw my attention, I shall, of course, be very pleased to look into it.

Does not my hon. Friend recognise that any conversion makes a house more valuable for letting purposes, so that the Answer he gave a few moments ago was slightly misleading?

The Answer expressed the position as it is, which is that things like a ramp or wider doors may reduce rateable value.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government, if he will seek to accelerate the improvement of old houses by the installing of baths, inside water closets and hot water systems, by removing some of the many steps in the procedure which local authorities have at present to follow before proceeding with improvement area schemes.

My right hon. Friend is anxious to see more improvement done, but the procedure could not be altered without legislation.

Does it not call for legislation? Does the Parliamentary Secretary agree that it is unnecessary and delaying that up to seven visits to each house are required under the present procedure of the 1964 Act, and up to 24 individual notices? Surely that is too much?

This legislation has not been on the Statute Book for long and we are anxious that it should be given a fair trial and a good run. Many authorities which have accepted the arrangements are doing a first-class job. I wish some authorities which spend all their time criticising would get on and do the job. We shall need to amend the law, but not yet.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that in many cases the standard grant is quite insufficient to provide improvement to a dwelling and that Socialist-controlled authorities are refusing to operate the discretionary grant although this would solve many of these problems?

Of the number of those which applied the full value in the main has not been taken up. The greatest problem is lack of information as to what the public are entitled to have. One of the problems for the Ministry is to get this over to those who want to get the work done.

Does not my hon. Friend think that there will be plenty of time for legislation in future, because obviously there are not going to be any more Motions of censure for another year or two?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will instruct the New Towns Commission to increase the proportion of houses provided for owner-occupiers.

The Commission is already doing so and my right hon. Friend sees no need for any such instruction.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the Commission for new towns did not seem to have heard of his welcome intention of increasing the proportion of owner-occupiers? Does it include the sale to tenants of their existing new town houses? Would he instruct the New Towns Commission to get moving on this, because its present policy is that of go very slow indeed?

I do not know what the hon. Member is complaining about. Our record since we have been in office, both in regard to development corporations and new towns in selling houses, has been much better than that of the previous Government. In the hon. Member's constituency of Hemel Hempstead at Grove Hill, we shall sell at least 100 houses which are to be put up for sale.

Mr. Hamilton.

I have a letter here——

Order. The hon. Member has no special privilege in this House. Mr. Hamilton.

I wish to apologise to the hon. Member for Hemel Hempstead (Mr. Allason). I realise now that when I called Mr. Hamilton he may have thought that I said Mr. Allason.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what plans he has for speeding up the house building programme as an essential part of the policy of redeployment of labour.

We are pressing on with the housing programme as fast as economic circumstances permit. In particular, the public sector contribution is steadily rising, and the authorities in the principal industrial towns have been given three-year programmes limited only by their capacity to build.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that the financial arrangements which the present Government have introduced will have the required effect in this matter? Could he say whether he is satisfied with the rate of acceleration of the provision of industrialised buildings, since the important matter here is getting on with the job as quickly as possible?

My hon. Friend will be glad to know that, in our Housing Subsidies Bill which we shall be introducing soon, we shall provide a special subsidy of £30 a year on top of the ordinary subsidy for houses built as part of a plan for providing houses for industry. He will see that we shall take advantage of all methods of speeding up house-building. On that matter, we also come out pretty well.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that while the public sector may be holding its own, the private sector is steadily falling? What does he propose to do about that? Does he agree that now there is very little chance of building 400,000 houses even by 1967?

The right hon. and learned Gentleman is very impatient. There is a Question which will be answered in a moment or two which is addressed to my right hon. Friend on that matter.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many permanent dwellings will be completed in Great Britain in 1966.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what estimate he has made of the number of permanent dwellings likely to be completed in Great Britain in 1966.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many dwellings are now likely to be completed in 1966.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what estimate he has made of the likelihood of reaching the target of 400,000 houses to be completed in 1966 announced by his predecessor on 1st March, 1966.

In present economic circumstances prediction is difficult, but I anticipate that the total of completions in 1966 will be approximately the same as in 1965, when a record 382,000 homes were completed.

Surely the predecessor of the right hon. Gentleman, now the Lord President of the Council, promised that the Government would reach the target of 400,000 houses this year. Now the right hon. Gentleman has denied it for the second time. Will he also admit that this is a gross failure by the Government?

No. Indeed, if the hon. Member counts that a gross failure, I do not know how he accounts for the record of his own Government, who never reached the figure which we reached last year and will reach this year.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the Question which I put to the Parliamentary Secretary and say what the Government are doing about the serious fall in private house-building? Will he agree that there is very little prospect of building 400,000 houses next year?

The measures of July inevitably had some effect, but this year we shall be completing about 200,000 in the private sector and 180,000 in the public sector. The right hon. and learned Gentleman will have read with interest today the statement by the Governor of the Bank of England saying that temporary bridging finance will be made available for house purchase. This is one of the measures which I hope will restore confidence in the building industry.

Will my right hon. Friend now consider the proposal which his predecessor was not prepared to consider for setting up a national housing authority to release finance to a national housing corporation which could build in any part of the country where the local authority or private enterprise is not willing to do so?

I would consider any suggestion my hon. Friend made, but I could not at this moment pledge myself to accept the suggestion and make a specific pledge about it.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, in view of the very clear assurance given to this House by his predecessor that 400,000 houses will be built this year, the Government's total this year is one which is very disappointing to hon. Members on both sides of the House? Will he today give his forecast—and let it be an accurate forecast—of what he thinks will be built next year?

I think everyone is disappointed that 400,000 houses probably will not be built this year, but the public as a whole is gratified to know that we shall be on just about the same level as last year.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, now we have had the Third Reading of the Land Commission Bill, there is a possibility of getting these houses built?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many houses were started in the first six months of 1966; and what was the comparative figure for 1965 and for 1964.

I would refer the hon. Member to the appropriate tables in the Monthly Digest of Statistics and in the published Housing Statistics.

Is not the Joint Parliamentary Secretary aware that the figures in those statistics reveal the fact that, if the rate of deceleration in starts, namely, twice fewer houses being started than in the year before, is maintained, half of those being public authority houses, by 1970, instead of reaching 500,000 houses a year, we shall reach nine—I beg the House's pardon.

Hear, hear.

Nine—period—or nil—in other words, the housing programme will have ground to a standstill.

The hon. Gentleman must not be pessimistic. Figures for starts tell only part of the story. Completions rose to a record level in 1965, and so far this year a similar level has been maintained. Moreover—I should think the hon. Gentleman would be glad of this—public sector completions are over 4 per cent. higher this year than they were last and 12 per cent. higher than they were in 1964.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he has studied the report by the district auditor on the accounts of the London Borough of Camden, which discloses that in respect of local authority dwellings the amount paid by the ratepayers by way of subsidy in 1966–67 will exceed the amount of rent paid by tenants; and whether, in view of the fact that the Camden Borough Council have failed to discharge their duty under Section 111 of the Housing Act, 1957, to impose reasonable charges for the tenancy, he will set up a local inquiry under Section 173 of that Act.

No, Sir. The district auditor's report does not allege any failure of duty. It refers to an urgent need for the council to review the housing revenue financial position. My right hon. Friend knows the council has had these matters under consideration and he has no reason to suppose that this advice will not be acted on.

Is not this a situation which has been developing for the last 18 months? Is the Parliamentary Secretary prepared to connive at a position in which the ratepayers of this borough will be forced to find something like half the rents of their colleagues who have the good fortune to be council tenants? Is it not necessary for a Minister of Housing and Local Government to take action?

I think the position has been arising for much longer than 18 months. The trouble arose from the fact that the new council inherited a very difficult position from the three boroughs of which it is constituted. It is tackling the problem. It has had a survey and is developing a rents policy. I have no reason to suppose that it will not get on with its statutory duty.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government, whether he will now withdraw Ministry of Housing Circular 50/65.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will now withdraw Circular 50/65.

No, Sir.

Surely this Circular is monstrously unfair and will undermine the confidence of many builders? Will the hon. Gentleman take steps to ensure that where a local authority employs direct labour, one out of three contracts shall be given to competitive tender?

Let us get the question in the right proportion. Ninety-one per cent. of all that is built for public authorities is built by private enterprise. Only 9 per cent. is built by direct labour. The circular which we sent out advised local authorities to put schemes out for competition if they felt any doubt about their cost. They were also warned in the circular that we, as a Ministry, would thoroughly check the estimates they put in. We are quite satisfied that we shall not withdraw the circular.

Is the Minister aware of the growing anxiety about the activities of the Salford direct labour department, and can we be sure the House will be given all the facts, including the highly critical report of the district auditor?

The hon. Member should have put that Question down if he has things to say about Salford. He should have asked a separate Question about this, and I have no doubt that there are other people in the House qualified to speak on this question.

Is it not true to say that this particular circular in fact puts local authority direct building departments on precisely the same level as those of private enterprise, and therefore this is much fairer than it was in the past?

The one-in-three rule which prevailed until we issued this circular prevented continuity of work in the direct labour departments. Continuity makes for efficiency, particularly now that we are in the field of industrialised building. I do not know why there is so much prejudice on the part of hon. Members against direct labour departments. I should have thought that people would want to wish them well.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will now issue a revised edition of Command Paper No. 2838.

No, Sir.

In view of the dismal record of the Government in house building, in spite of what they say, is the figure of half a million by 1970 still feasible? Surely it is time for some revision?

The figure is not a dismal one, and the broad objectives and general policy contained in the White Paper have not changed.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will now make a further statement on the housing returns.

I am considering whether changes should be made in the present form of the housing returns now that so much more housing information is regularly published in Housing Statistics.

Would the Minister agree that the reason we have had no housing return recently is that it would reflect the poor state of affairs? Is the responsibility for this to be laid at the door of the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor?

There is a monthly housing return and a brief monthly summary of construction. There is a full quarterly statement and a quarterly Appendix. Also Housing Statistics are prepared for quarterly publication. I do not think there is any lack of information on this very important subject.

Is the Minister aware that I wrote to his predecessor asking if statistics on industrialised buildings could be included in the quarterly housing return and that he promised this would be considered favourably? Yet no action has been taken.

I did not know about that. I will look into what the hon. Gentleman has suggested and, if it is practicable, I will see that it is done.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will introduce legislation to include multi-occupied furnished lettings in the same way as unfurnished lettings within the framework of the Rent Act, 1965.

No, Sir. Furnished lettings in multi-occupied properties enjoy the same rights to rent fixing and security of tenure under the Furnished Houses (Rent Control) Act, 1946, as other furnished lettings. The machinery of this Act seems to me better adapted to the special features of furnished lettings than that of the Rent Act, 1965.

Is my hon. Friend aware that a number of unscrupulous property companies and private landlords put in tatty bits of furniture in order to avoid tenants having full security for unfurnished premises under the Rent Act, 1965? Would he not agree that multi-occupied furnished premises are quite different from furnished premises?

The hon. Gentleman was good enough to write to me about a particular case into which I am looking and will reply. On the more general part of the question, it is for the rent officer to decide in the first place whether the furniture is merely a few scraps to get out of the Act.

Is it necessary for the Government to have two lots of tribunals, one dealing with furnished lettings and the other with unfurnished lettings? Cannot we have one machinery to deal with rents, whether the premises are furnished or unfurnished?

As the hon. Member knows, we have taken the first steps towards having a common panel for the two different types of tribunals, but at the moment it is not opportune completely to fuse the two.

Does not the Minister recognise that since the Land Commission Bill robs tenants of a great many of the rights to which they were entitled under the Rent Act, 1965, it would be ludicrous to extend those paper privileges at this time?

If I thought there was any likelihood of a General Election soon, I would like to see the judgment of the tenants in the ballot box as to which was best for them, the Land Commission Bill or the Rent Act.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what was the proportion of industrialised to traditional building in the housing output in the past 10 years.

As the Answer contains a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is the Minister satisfied that progress has been sufficient for us to reach our industrialised building target of 40 per cent. by 1970?

Yes. We can only talk here of the public sector. I am very glad to say that the figures have been steadily rising. In the eight months of this year, it has gone up in the public sector by 25·7 per cent. I expect by the end of the year that figure will have reached 30 per cent. I cannot give any figures for the private sector.

Will the Minister not be mesmerised by the words "industrialised" and "traditional"? Is there not a grave risk that in our anxiety to house people we shall cover the countryside with unattractive dwellings?

The hon. Gentleman must clearly understand that there has been a great deal of trial and error already in this field, and much industrialised building today is not only good but is better in many instances than some of the traditional forms of building.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how the unit costs of industrialised and traditional building compare; and what are the relative times in man-years per house for industrialised and traditional building.

No simple comparison of unit costs is very useful because averages conceal great diversity according to the systems used, the type of site, the size of contract and other factors. Comprehensive details of man-years per house are not available. However, it is known that with some systems the saving of site labour is substantial and with others only marginal.

Is the Minister satisfied that unit costs are low enough to attract more contracts and programmes from local authorities?

The figures we have at the moment show that on high rise, two to four-storeys, housing and in flats five or more storeys, in the main it is cheaper by industrialised methods. One of the problems is on the low rise. The difficulty is that there are not enough sites to give a continuous run, which makes this more economic. That is a problem for the industry.

Would my right hon. Friend consider taking steps to increase the flow of technical and related information regarding industrial building between his Department and local authorities?

A great deal of work has already been done on this. The National Building Agency is responsible for the appraisal certificates for industrialised building, particularly on low rise, and I think that any information which any local authority requires is in fact available, and what is more important, they are aware of it.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he proposes to introduce the foreshadowed legislation to amend the improvement grants procedure set out in the Housing Acts, 1961 and 1964.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when his Departmental inquiries into the level of standard and discretionary improvement grants will be completed.

My right hon. Friend cannot yet say when these inquiries will be completed or legislation would be introduced.

I thank the Joint Parliamentary Secretary for that reply. What emphasis are schemes of conversion and improvement given in his Ministry's housing policy? To what extent is he prepared to make further funds available to local authorities for schemes of area improvement?

My right hon. Friend has in fact given me personal responsibility for encouraging local authorities to do more of this work. That I have been trying to do. As was said earlier today, one problem arises from the lack of knowledge, not only on the part of citizens, but on the part of local authorities. We are trying very hard to get a propaganda drive going to make the facts known to the people.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will now make a statement on his consultations with the local authority associations, which have been in progress for some time, about the rent structure of local authorities.

Formal consultations with the local authority associations on rent rebate schemes will start shortly in connection with the proposed new legislation on housing subsidies.

Is not the Minister aware that 12 months ago, in November, 1965, paragraph 41 of The Housing Programme 1965 to 1970 White Paper said that both on tenancy and rent policies there would be consultations with local authorities? Is he telling the House that this has been delayed for 12 months?

It has been delayed because it was connected with the Bill which was introduced before the General Election and which then lapsed. That Bill will now be reintroduced in the near future and the discussions will take place in the light of the Bill we shall introduce. Our policy remains exactly the same as that set out in paragraph 41 of the White Paper.

On the subject of rent structure, would not my right hon. Friend agree that it would be most unfair for council rents to be raised during the present freeze on incomes?

We appealed to councils not to increase their rents during the current six months. Only 14 out of 1,200 housing authorities raised their rents.

Does the Minister agree that on the same assumption it would be wrong to raise rates?

Answer.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will make a statement concerning the development of the National House Builders' Registration Council; and whether he is satisfied that this council is able to give sufficient protection to house purchasers.

The Government believe that the scheme can provide the most satisfactory means of protecting purchasers of new houses. To be fully effective, however, its coverage needs to be practically universal. The number of registered builders has increased since March from 2,700 to over 4,500 and the scheme is estimated to cover over 60 per cent. of new private houses.

May I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for that reply and ask him Question No. 34?

Order. There is now no time for Question No. 34. Questions to the Prime Minister.