asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many civil servants in his Department are concerned with approving applications or schemes submitted by local authorities; and what plans he has for reducing them.

Most members of the Department are concerned in one way or another in handling proposals by local authorities. But, since for many officers this work is only part of the whole job they have to do, it is not practicable to give meaningful figures in reply to the first part of the Question.

The Town and Country Planning Bill now before Parliament is designed to reduce one kind of statutory control, and I shall have the matter in mind when the time comes to consider the report of the Royal Commission on Local Government.

I thank the Minister for his reply. Is there not a great chance here, if the policy of the Town and Country Planning Bill is pursued, of cutting Government expenditure?

I should like to reduce expenditure and the unnecessary use of manpower in every way. The Department is discharging functions laid upon it by Parliament, and the extent of our discretion in that respect is limited.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what steps he is taking to determine the impact of betterment levy on land prices.

It would be impossible to isolate statistically any one factor, such as the impact of levy, from the many factors which influence the movement of land prices. But my right hon. Friend is taking steps to improve the information about land prices available to him.

Is the Minister of State aware that land prices have risen by between 20 per cent. and 40 per cent. since the introduction of the levy? What does he intend to do to stop this trend?

No; I discount such wild figures as that which are being bandied about. I am certain that land prices overall have not risen by that amount. Particular cases in high pressure areas may support figures of that kind, but the general trend is nothing like what the hon. Gentleman suggests.

Is not the Minister of State aware that there is a great deal of evidence now from auction prices all over the country? Do not these show that land prices are at least 20 per cent. above the level which obtained before the Land Commission Act?

No; I do not agree that the increase is as much as that. If the evidence comes from auctions I should think it rather tends to show that it is not due to the impact of the levy.

Has not the Land Commission been an expensive flop? Will not the Government scrap it and start again with the straight acquisition at fair prices of all development land?

It is quite unfair to try to judge the Land Commission on its acquisitions to date, for reasons which will become apparent from the Answer to a later Question.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government to what extent the number of staff in the regional offices of the Land Commission has been reduced: and what further reductions are due to take place during the next six months.

Ninety-two since 1st January, 1968. The extent of further reductions depends on organisation and methods studies now taking place.

Is the Minister aware that getting rid of staff so recently recruited makes it evident that the Act was a mistake and unworkable? Will he undertake to speed the process of reducing unwarrantable public expenditure?

That would be a wholly illogical conclusion to draw. It would be very surprising if the staffing arrangements made before the Act proved to be exactly the right figures. It is quite normal in setting up new organisations for some variations in the numbers of staff to take place in the early stages.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that when the Act was passed one of the chief criticisms of hon. Members opposite was that it would take too many staff to operate?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will make a statement on the work to date of the Midlands Division of the Land Commission based on Birmingham; how many officials are employed there; what building development land they have acquired to date since the establishment of the Commission; and, having regard to diminished operations of the Commission, what attenuation of duties in the Midlands he now proposes for the Commission.

The Commission is at present negotiating for the acquisition of 391 acres in the West Midlands Region. None of the negotiations has yet reached completion. The Commission is investigating a further 2,900 acres. The present staff of the region is 124. The Commission's operations are not diminishing.

Is it not an accepted fact that the purpose of the Commission is to acquire building development land first, and to collect the betterment levy second? As both those purposes are unfulfilled—no progress has been made in the Midlands whatever—and in view of the derisory figures given by the right hon. Gentleman today, why does not he wind up the outfit—write it off as an expensive flop, in the words of his hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (Mr. William Price)?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will wait for the answers to later Questions which deal with the subject matter of his supplementary question.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what was the staff of the Land Commission at 6th April, 1968; what is the total cost of such staff per annum, including salaries, pensions, accommodation and perquisites; and, having regard to the diminishing work of the Commission in its second year of operation, what economies in costs for the Land Commission he proposes.

1,389, Sir. In 1967–68 total costs were £3,334,000—including £1,140,000 for services provided by other Departments. These cost figures are provisional until the Accounts are published. Assessed pension liability would add approximately £317,000. I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I have just given to a Question from the hon. Member for Birmingham, Hall Green (Mr. Eyre) concerning staff reductions. Other economies are being made where appropriate.

Is not the Minister thoroughly ashamed of those extravagant figures, which represent no progress whatever? Would not he now join the Tory philosophy and say that this outfit will be disbanded at an early date as a total flop?

The hon. Gentleman's supplementary questions are becoming a little repetitious. The answer is "No".

Is the Minister aware that the Treasury has advised his Department that it should send to the Land Commission only those people who are near retirement age? Will he, therefore, try to speed up some of the reductions in staff and bear in mind that we on this side of the House intend to repeal the Act and abolish the Commission at the earliest opportunity?

I am not aware of what the right hon. and learned Gentleman asserted.

rose——

On a point of order. In view of the thoroughly unsatisfactory answers, I beg leave to give notice that I will raise this matter on the Adjournment at a very early date. I apologise to my hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he expects to be in a position to make a statement about the confirmation of the green belt to the south of Birmingham.

I cannot add to my previous Answers to the hon. Member on this subject.

Surely the hon. and learned Gentleman must have some idea when we are to get this information? In view of the rapid progress of the development of the new town of Redditch, is it not essential to have a permanent breathing line between Redditch and the City of Birmingham?

I am not sure what information the hon. Gentleman is referring to. The study being made by the Standing Conference of the long-term pattern of development around conurbations is bound to take a considerable time—about two years. It would be wrong to try to pronounce upon the green belt and confirm it in advance of that study.

Is the hon. and learned Gentleman aware that, with the continued erosion of the green belt around Birmingham by both overspill and new installations of the nationalised industries, this problem will eventually solve itself, because there will be no green belt to confirm?

I do not agree. I am anxious that as much as possible of the unspoiled area should be kept free from development, but the best means for doing this will have to be considered in the light of the study.

Will the Minister of State bear in mind, when this inquiry is being made, the acute need of Birmingham's overcrowded population with its great waiting list for more houses and the demand of all political parties in Birmingham for more land in this area?

Yes, I am very well aware of that, and it is for that reason that the Standing Conference has set up this study to find what is the best way from a planning point of view in which that need can be met.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he now expects to receive the Report of the Royal Commission on Local Government.

Towards the end of this year, 1968, Sir.

Will it be in time to introduce the major reform of local government finance which the Labour Party promised in its election manifesto, before a General Election, or is this to be another broken promise?

The Government have always made it absolutely clear, since and even before the setting up of the Royal Commission, that it would be impossible to embark upon a wide-scale alteration in local government finance until the structure had been established. That is common sense, and I should have thought that it would have been acceptable to everybody.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what study he has made of the possibility of a sales tax to supplement rates as a means of collecting local government revenue.

A local sales tax was among the possible new sources of local revenue studied before the Government concluded that fundamental changes in local finance were not practicable within the existing local government structure. This and other possibilities will be considered again in the light of what emerges from the Royal Commissions on Local Government.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, at the last election, the Labour Party said that the most urgent area of tax reform was the rating system? When are the Government to make this reform?

The Government are absolutely clear that this is a reform which should have been tackled many years ago. The present Government have taken the first step of setting up a comprehensive review of the whole structure of local government, which will enable a reform of finance to be made.

Will my hon. Friend invite the hon. Gentleman to attend meetings of the Finance Bill Committee to see how bitterly opposed his hon. Friends are to any increase in indirect taxation?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will seek to amend the Local Government (Financial Provisions) Act, 1963, in order to give parish councils greater freedom to determine their own expenditure.

The freedom of parish councils to spend money is bound up with their rôle and their relationship to other local authorities. Evidence on these matters has been given by the National Association of Parish Councils to the Royal Commission on English Local Government. I think that we ought now to wait for the report before forming an opinion on changes.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, with my current rate demand, there is a note which tells me that the rural district council is backing Britain by stopping street cleaning? Is he aware that many parish councils would willingly undertake to pay for this work themselves if the law allowed? Irrespective of the Report of the Royal Commission, will he not allow a little local civic initiative?

My Department and I are always anxious to encourage enterprising parish councils, many of which do a magnificent job, but a change in the law must await the Report of the Royal Commission.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government arising out of a recent case where a member of Whitworth Urban District Council in Lancashire was found by the courts not to have even qualified privilege in respect of a speech by him in Council, if he will review the whole question of the privilege of councillors, with a view to amending the law; and if he will make a statement.

The general rules relating to qualified privilege apply to members of local authorities when speaking at council meetings and this defence is available to them if the facts of the case support it. This has long been the recognised position and my right hon. Friend is not persuaded that a review of the situation is needed.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the grave danger that this case presents to thousands of local councillors—able and conscientious councillors like this—who are facing costs of something like £5,000? Is he aware that they cannot appeal against the verdict, because they cannot afford further costs? Will he look into the matter again and reconsider his Answer?

This matter has been very carefully looked at. It is a fact that in the normal course of the law a councillor can speak so long as he is speaking on matters which are in the course of his duties and so long as he does so in good faith. Then these defences are open to him. It would be wrong for me to comment on an individual case, but if my hon. Friend has any further point I would be glad to look at it. Generally speaking, we are not dissuaded that the law is wrong or unfair as at present stated.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that the whole law of defamation needs looking at? Is he aware that it is very unsatisfactory, and that there is a strong feeling in the legal profession, and certainly among newspaper editors, that it is not operating fairly or satisfactorily? Will he have a look at the whole law on this subject?

My hon. Friend should direct his question elsewhere.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how much betterment levy has so far been collected by the Land Commission; and what was the cost of collecting the levy.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what is the total sum so far collected by the Land Commission in betterment levy; and how many acres of land have been acquired.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will make a statement on the current programme of the Land Commission for the acquisition and disposal of land.

The levy collected in 1967–68 was £463,300 and the total up to 24th April was £747,300. The rate of collection has now risen to about £3·5 million a year, and the expected yield in 1968–69 is £8·3 million. The annual cost of assessment and collection is about £2·3 million.

The Land Commission is at present negotiating for the acquisition of 76 sites totalling 3,245 acres at an estimated cost price of £11·1 million. Two small sites, amounting to 1¾ acres have vested in the Commission. The Commission is investigating additional sites extending to over 23,000 acres.

Are not those figures fantastic? Does the hon. and learned Gentleman not realise that if this money had been collected by the Inland Revenue it would cost only 3·2d. per cent.? Is it not time that this thing was abolished completely? It is wasted public expenditure.

Not at all. The reason why the collection of levy at present is at a relatively low rate is because of the transition provisions, which exempt builders' stocks. This has been explained many times previously.

Is it not a fact that there is a requirement on the right hon. Gentleman's Department, the same as all other Departments, to save money at this time? If this is so, how can he possibly come to that Box and defend this farcical situation?

As is made clear from my Answer, when the hon. Gentleman studies it, we are gaining money through the collection of levies.

Mr. Rippon—Mr. Willey.

Will my hon. and learned Friend see that the acquisition and disposal programme of the Land Commission is considerably stepped up?

Yes. Again I think that the figures I have given show that this is happening.

rose——

Order. Questions to the Prime Minister.

On a point of order. I understood that you had called me to ask a supplementary question.

I am awfully sorry, but I must stick to time.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what estimate he has now made of the increased cost to local authorities in the present financial year of their housing programmes due to the increase in the Selective Employment Tax, in cost of materials due to devaluation and to increased interest rates since 1st November, 1967.

The increase in materials added about 1 per cent. to the cost of the average dwelling and the rise in the Bank Rate may have added a further ¼per cent. Selective Employment Tax will not be increased until September and the effect for this financial year will be less than 1 per cent. These increases in costs need not increase tender prices to the same extent.

Does not this mean that ratepayers and council tenants will suffer by paying more due to the incompetence of the Government's economic policy?

No. If they are paying more, it is because of the tremendous success of the Government's housing policy.

Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that his figures are not accepted by practical builders throughout the trade and that the increase is generally accepted to be 4 per cent.?

That is a considerable exaggeration. The figures I gave were in answer to the Question. They do not deal with the other causes of increases in cost.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what is his estimate of the percentage increase in the cost of a three-bedroomed house during 1968.

The costs which builders have to take into account in fixing tender or sale prices will rise on account of the Budget by about 1½ per cent. over the year. But this increase need not give rise to the same increase in tender or sale prices.

Between October, 1964, and early 1967 did not the cost of housing rise by 25 per cent.? Is not this further increase caused by rising land prices, devaluation and higher interest rates?

These increases need not necessary be reflected in the increases in tenders because of the possibilities of increasing productivity and the advantages of fixed-price contracts.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what was the average value of the output per operative employed by a private contractor on the construction of new council houses during 1967; and what was the comparable figure for an operative employed by a local authority direct labour department.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend, the Minister of Public Building and Works on 29th April to the hon. Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Costain).—[Vol. 763, c. 775–6.]

Is it not a fact that direct labour building costs have proved to be 30 per cent. higher than those of comparable private contractors? Should not the Minister rescind his predecessor's original instruction, and allow one in three tenders to be put out to private contractors?

No, Sir. The trouble about the one-in-three rule was that it was far too rigid to enable direct labour forces to take advantage of large-scale contracts and obtain economies from large-scale enterprises.

How can the hon. Gentleman possibly say that a provision to put one in three out is too rigid? Surely that gives sufficient flexibility to any local authority? It was in operation for years. Will not the hon. Gentleman reconsider this?

As the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows better than anyone, the important thing is to get a good run so that one can obtain economies, particularly from industrialised building. That should apply equally to direct labour forces as to other tenders.

Is it not a fact that it is perfectly open to local authorities to put these matters out to tender if they desire?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will now make a statement on the position of proposed council rent increases which were referred to the National Board for Prices and Incomes.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will now make a statement on the Government's proposals for phasing rent increases outlined in Command Paper No. 3590.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what steps he has taken or intends to take, to reduce council rents following recent increases.

I explained the Government's proposals for dealing with increases in local authority rents in the reply which I gave to a Question by my right hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland, North (Mr. Willey) on 25th April. The Government's proposals on increases in private rents were outlined in the White Paper (Cmnd. 3590).—[Vol. 763, c. 486–493.]

Is my right hon. Friend aware that large numbers of G.L.C. tenants are grateful that they are being saved by the Government from the proposed outrageous Tory rent increases? Is not it also important that local authorities should not feel encouraged to think that they must put 7s. 6d. on the rent?

I have sent a circular to local authorities urging on them the need to keep rents to the very minimum and not to regard 7s. 6d. as an ordinary level of increase. I hope that every local authority will do its utmost to keep well below that level. Some local authorities need not raise rents at all.

Has my right hon. Friend said what the limits will be for increases in private rents? Does not he agree that some aspects of the policy set out in the White Paper, "Old Houses Into New Homes", could have very serious implications for many low-income families?

My hon. Friend's second point looks rather further ahead than the Question on the Order Paper. On the question of our immediate proposals about private rents, I hope that my hon. Friends will await the legislation which is due very soon.

In view of the statutory duty to balance the housing revenue account, has the Minister any proposals for a deferment of the capital repayment for authorities with large building programmes, as otherwise they cannot make both ends meet?

There are many ways in which local authorites can make a contribution to keeping down rents. I suggested some of them when I made my statement in the House on 25th April. I shall look very carefully at every case which comes before me and decide what is reasonable for the local authority in all the local circumstances obtaining.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in view of all the Government have done for the ratepayers, which in my borough of Lewisham has led to a reduction in the rates of 5d. in the £, if he makes up his mind to stand no nonsense from the Tory G.L.C. he will have my enthusiastic support and that of many of my hon. Friend's?

I am grateful for that somewhat qualified support. Perhaps I should remind the House that it is not only in respect of rates that we have given great help. We have also given great help to council tenants through the generous subsidies provided in the 1967 Act.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that rates have been rising far more rapidly over the past four years than ever before, and that if there is to be any sort of limitation on rent increases it would be far better done on a percentage basis rather than with an arbitrary fixed limit?

I completely disagree with the suggestion in the latter half of the right hon. and learned Gentleman's question. He is completely wrong about increases in rates.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what representations he has received about the current mortgage interest rate; and whether he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what recent discussions he has had with building societies regarding interest rates; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what discussions he has had with building societies about a change in mortgage rates; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what discussions he has had with the Building Societies Association about their decision to increase the interest rate to 7⅜ per cent.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will make a statement about the increase in mortgage interest rates announced by the building societies on Saturday, 20th April.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what action he proposes to take in relation to the proposal of the building societies to increase the rate of interest for home loans by ½ per cent.

I maintain continuing contact with the Building Societies' Association about the availability of finance for house purchase. Building societies need to pay interest rates to investors which will attract sufficient funds to meet the demand for mortgages for house purchase. This in turn affects the rate which societies charge for mortgages. There has been a very sharp fall in the amount of money available for lending, and the recent recommendation of the Building Societies' Association for increases in borrowing and lending rates was made because they considered this necessary to avert a mortgage famine. This is a matter for the judgment of the Association. I am glad to note that some societies have found it possible to postpone the raising of the mortgage rate to existing borrowers. I am sure that societies will wherever possible give existing borrowers the option of extending the mortgage period instead of increasing monthly repayments.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that, as a result of these very high interest rates, the average borrower, after tax relief, is having to pay 10s. per week more than in October, 1964, or, if his term has been extended, the liability may be extended by up to seven years? How does he reconcile these facts with his radio broadcast last night boasting—[Interruption.]—of the Government's record on housing?

Order. Questions and answers are getting rather long.

I did not catch the last part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. But hon. Members opposite will have to make up their minds whether they want money to be available for private house purchase or not. If they do, then they must accept also that attractive terms must be offered in order to bring money into the building societies.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the time has come for a full-scale investigation into the operations of building societies? In the meantime, will not he suggest to them that, in return for their holding down interest rates, the Government will underwrite the difference between the chosen rate and the rate at which they borrow?

I cannot give the assurance sought by my hon. Friend in the latter part of that supplementary question. As to the first part, I know of no evidence to suggest that the sort of inquiry he has in mind would serve any useful purpose. The National Board for Prices and Incomes investigated the building societies in autumn, 1966, and since then they have had their own Hardie Committee investigating the situation. As far as I know, the situation is satisfactory so far as the problems considered by the Board and the Hardie Committee are concerned.

What, in the longer term, does my right hon. Friend regard as an acceptable level of interest rates?

The lowest possible.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the ½ per cent. rise is greater than the 3½ per cent. norm for incomes? Will he suggest to the building societies that they look at their investment policy? Will he also suggest to them that, after they have raised interest rates, it does not do their public image any good to lunch at the Dorchester on our money?

I am certain that the building societies are well aware of the need to keep their investment policy under constant review. I remind the House that, despite the difficulties they have been going through, their lending has been at a very high figure in the last three months.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the decision of the building societies was unavoidable in view of the generally high interests rates prevailing and the lack of confidence in fixed interest securities engendered by Government policy over the last three years? Will he enter into discussions with the building societies so that, over the long term, policies can be evolved whereby borrowers do not suffer such fluctuations, which put them into great difficulties?

I maintain constant discussion with the Building Societies' Association and this is one of the points which I shall discuss with it at the appopriate moment. In relation to interest rates, I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman spoiled an otherwise excellent supplementary question by attributing some of the responsibility to the Government. To some extent, the situation is due to international monetary forces beyond the control of any national Government.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that it does not really meet the case to say that the period of repayment can be prolonged, since where there is a substantial increase in interest charges the principal sum in the end can be greater than the amount originally borrowed? The difference will have to be found from somewhere. Could this not be phased like rent increases so that a maximum increase of, say, 7s. 6d., was charged?

That would not be practicable. Because of the proposal to spread out repayments many people will get more concessions through Income Tax relief and consequently any damaging effect will to some extent be offset.

Is not the extension of repayment disreputable economic conduct? Surely, at the end of the day, the borrower who hopes to retire on pension will have a very substantial amount of capital to repay purely as a result of the Government's high interest policy?

That is not entirely due to the Government's short-term high interest policy. I explained as much to the hon. Member for Orpington (Mr. Lubbock). But it is important that, at a time of particular pressure on salaries and incomes generally, it should be the policy of the Government to keep down all increases of this kind. If it means phasing repayments over a longer period, that will relax pressure in the immediate future.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what are the latest figures for the number of people who have taken advantage of the option mortgage scheme, expressed as a percentage of existing and new borrowers.

According to the latest information from the 10 largest building societies, over 10 per cent. of their new borrowers are choosing option mortgages; about 4 per cent. of the existing borrowers who had to make their decision by 31st December, 1967, changed to option mortgages.

Do not these figures mean that 96 per cent. of all existing borrowers and 90 per cent. of all new borrowers see no advantage in the option mortgage scheme and that even those who have taken it up are, due to high prices and interest rates, paying significantly more than in October, 1964?

I do not share the hon. Gentleman's premise. The object of the scheme was to make available home ownership to people of moderate incomes, particularly young families, who could not otherwise take advantage of loans. The scheme has worked in this very important sector.

Why will my right hon. Friend not extend the date by which mortgage payers with existing mortgages can opt for the option mortgage scheme?

There are difficulties about varying the dates. For administrative reasons, it has not proved possible to do this in all cases, except in those where there is hardship.

But why alter the date? This is a once-for-all decision. The Government are changing the rules in the middle of the game by Clause 14 of the Finance Bill in relation to child allowances. Does not this put those who have opted in a worse position? Is not this cheating them?

When the scheme was being prepared, we went carefully into the possibilities of giving opportunities to change and it was found that administrative difficulties—not ours but those of the lenders, who have to operate the scheme—made it very difficult to do.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will make a statement about the current availability of mortgages for house purchase.

In the first quarter of this year, building societies advanced £428 million for house purchase and at the end of March their commitments for advances amounted to nearly £450 million. The funds available for lending have been affected by the low net inflow of money in the same quarter and there are reports that some societies are at present being compelled to limit the number of their new mortgage commitments but I hope that the recent change in the investment rate will restore the position and enable societies to continue to make loans freely.

By what date does the right hon. Gentleman imagine that the position will be restored? What steps is he taking in the long term to secure mortgage finance for borrowers?

The hon. Gentleman will no doubt have noticed that some of the building societies have not found it necessary to increase interest rates. They have found it possible to defer a decision. This points to the fact that they are confident that the inflow of money will improve over the next few months. That is the confident expectation of the Government as well.

In the long term, in an age of rapidly appreciating property values, should we not ensure that build- ing societies and depositors get some advantage from this appreciation by giving societies equity shares in the mortgages they advance?

My hon. Friend has a Question later about that subject.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what plans he now has to give additional help to those local authorities with a large immigrant population in order to relieve overcrowding.

Special priority has already been given to authorities with severe housing problems, many of these being areas with large immigrant populations; as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has announced, further consideration is being given to the needs of these areas, and this will extend to both the provision of new houses and to the improvement of conditions in older housing areas.

Is my hon. Friend aware that all of us in the West Midlands very much welcome the speech made by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in Birmingham on Sunday? It gave the lie to those supporters of the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Powell), who claim that the Government have no concern for the people. [Interruption.] Will my hon. Friend see that some urgency is given to the problem of providing houses for both the local population and immigrant families? To this end—[HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."]—will he modernise the National Building Agency so that we can get prefabricated system-built flats and houses as speedily as possible?

Every long supplementary question means one Question fewer can be put.

Interruptions make them longer.

Wolverhampton is a priority area and we are not holding up its housing programme in any way. In the current year, it has a programme of 1,603 new houses as compared with 797 approvals last year. We are most anxious that it should build to full capacity.

Will the hon. Gentleman make clear whether such additional help to these local authorities will mean a reduction in help to other local authorities without this problem, but whose overcrowding needs are just as acute?

No, Sir.

Will my hon. Friend give any figures which he has to show how much has already been given by the Government to local authorities, particularly in the London area?

My right hon. Friend gave some figures in his speech. If my hon. Friend would like some more figures, perhaps he will write to me and I shall be happy to help him.

If the Prime Minister is to be called in aid, will not the hon. Gentleman complete the quotation and point out that the Prime Minister said quite definitely that any additional help given to areas of heavy immigration would have to be at the expense of normal local authority areas and out of existing resources? Will he make it clear that Wolverhampton will not be allowed to build at the expense of Worcestershire?

The Government's policy has always been directed to concentrating on priority areas in housing. The West Midlands area qualifies as such and the Government subsidy, which has already been approved, will enable Wolverhampton to extend its building programme.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that while we can read what the Prime Minister said, once again nobody knows what he meant? Will he, therefore, issue some guidance to local authorities about what the Government now propose and who is to pay for it?

There is no problem about what my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government means about the housing programme. He is determined to concentrate on those areas where houses are most needed and not try to bolster up his housing completions by building houses in areas of low priority.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will seek powers to amend the standard grant procedure to enable tenants on council housing estates to be provided with bathrooms.

Under the existing standard grant procedure local authorities already receive Exchequer contributions towards installing the basic amenities, including a bath in a bathroom, in any of their older houses which lack them.

Will my hon. Friend have discussions with local authorities to see whether more effective use can be made of these procedures so that council tenants, such as those on the Greater London Council White Hart Lane Estate, may be provided with baths before they are too senile to use them?

I am sure that the result of my right hon. Friend's White Paper will be to make all local authorities consider their programmes for improving older houses. On the general problem, although I do not want to criticise the Greater London Council's priorities in this matter, I agree that local authorities should give the lead in the way in which they modernise their properties.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will now make an order, under Section 11 of the Rent, Act, 1965, bringing all controlled tenancies within the rent regulation system.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he intends to implement Section 11 of the Rent Act, 1965.

My right hon. Friend has no proposals for making an order under Section 11 of the Rent Act, 1965.

The hon. Gentleman must be aware by now that there is great injustice to people who have invested small savings in real property rather than stocks and shares, and that the rents that they are receiving make it quite impossible for them to keep their properties in decent repair? When will he do something about it?

My right hon. Friend has explained on many occasions that he wishes to see more of the working of the Rent Act before he introduces Section 11.

Is it not a fact that in some parts of the country rent officers are becoming redundant through lack of work? Is there not a case in those special areas, for bringing more rent-controlled properties within the scope of the 1965 Act, thus helping those small landlords, who may not be able to muster many votes in the country, but who deserve to be treated with equity and justice by this House?

My right hon. Friend has often said that he is very anxious to see more use made of the Rent Act by the tenants and the landlords, who would both benefit from it. There will be very great difficulties and anomalies in bringing Section 11 in force in certain areas and not others.

Is my hon. Friend aware that to do as the hon. Member has suggested would mean trebling the rents in London, Birmingham, and some other areas? Is that not a very odd way of keeping down the cost of living?

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.