asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government by how much the amount of Government grants to Dorset County Council will differ this year as compared with the year 1967–68.

The first estimate of the rate support grants payable to Dorset County Council for 1968–69 amounts to £8,597,532, an increase of no less than £572,182 or 7·1 per cent. over the latest estimate for 1967–68. Corresponding figures for specific revenue grants and capital grants are not yet available.

Would not the hon. Gentleman accept that, in the light of built-in increases, this will be insufficient to maintain existing standards? Is it the Government's policy to force up rates within the county?

I do not accept that the grants are not sufficient. Indeed, they are very generous. I think that, in the circumstances, the people in the county will applaud what the Government have done.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if, in view of the increase in twilight areas in Cheltenham, due to the uncertainty about future development, he will now give his decision on the Cheltenham development plan.

I appreciate the need for an early decision, but my right hon. Friend must be satisfied about the plan's traffic objectives in relation to Cheltenham's outstanding architectural and environmental qualities.

Even if it is taking the Government a long time to come to the right decision to keep the Argylls, why has it taken over one and a half years after the public inquiry to come to a decision on this most important matter to the whole future of Cheltenham? Can we not have some interim reply so that someone can get on with something?

As the hon. Gentleman is no doubt aware, following the inquiry the Cheltenham Borough Council had a change of heart and asked for the plan to be withdrawn. This has not been done, because it is the county plan and opposing views have to be carefully considered. As the line proposed for the new relief road has a very substantial impact on the character of Cheltenham, I want to make quite sure that we are doing what is best for the town before a decision is reached.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the delay, and the nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall do my best to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he expects to announce his decision on the St. Albans Central Area Development Plan.

My right hon. Friend has consulted the Hertfordshire County Council about proposed modifications. After it has consulted the St. Albans City Council, the proposed modifications will need to be published and comments invited before a decision can be taken.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this matter has been hanging fire for a long time and is causing not only increasing inconvenience but hardship to people in St. Albans, who find their property is affected by the plan and do not always find the city council able to purchase, even when it wishes to do so, because of the reluct- ance of the Government to give loan sanction in every case?

The proposals needed much detailed and careful consideration before any conclusion could be reached. The demolition of about 700 properties was involved and over 200 objections were received. But we will avoid any undue delay.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what he expects will be the average increase in local authority rates during the forthcoming financial year.

The rate poundage for 1969–70 will depend upon decisions yet to be taken by a large number of local authorities in the light of their individual assessments of needs. I see no reason, however, why the average increase should depart significantly from recent trends, particularly in view of the increase to 56 per cent. in the grant to be paid from central funds.

Can the hon. Gentleman identify inside that the amount of rate increase which will flow from the Government's action in restricting council rents? Whatever amount it is, does the hon. Gentleman appreciate that it is wholly contrary to the arguments used by his right hon. Friend for that imposition?

I do not accept that hypothesis, as I am sure the right hon. Gentleman realised before he asked the question. The Government have made the most massive contribution of help to the domestic ratepayer that has ever been made by any Government. I should think the right hon. Gentleman would appreciate it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the London ratepayers will be penalised by the empire-building of Conservative borough councils in splitting up the G.L.C. Parks Department, and that this will necessarily increase both bureaucracy and the rates.

I am not sure how far this arises from the original Question, but it is a matter which will have to come before my right hon. Friend in due course.

In view of the announcement by the Minister of Housing that the rate improvement grant did not include the November increase in, for example, petrol, will the hon. Gentleman immediately move an increase Order to meet the considerable additional burden of the November measures?

The last rate support grant Order included increases to mid-November. Increases after that will be taken care of in any further increase order.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will make a statement about the proposed new town of Leyland/ Chorley.

I hope to be able to make a statement later this week.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend. But will he bear in mind that North-East Lancashire wants an assurance that the needs of the area, particularly concerning better communications, will be taken into consideration before any final decision is reached, so that North-East Lancashire can share in the prosperity and vitality which it is expected the new town will bring to Lancashire?

I can assure my hon. Friend that the proposal for a new town in central Lancashire and the needs of North-East Lancashire towns have been considered in parallel by the Government.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that nothing has so far come from the Government to reassure the people of North-East Lancashire on the very real fears voiced by his hon. Friend?

I would recommend the hon. and learned Gentleman to await the statement which I hope to make later this week.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the expenditure of £400 million in Lancashire, as against that in more prosperous parts of the country, would be very welcome to many people in Lancashire and would be recog- nised as being in accordance with the Government's regional policy?

Although not necessarily accepting my hon. Friend's figure, I know that there is great enthusiasm for this proposal on the part of the Lancashire County Council and a number of authorities in the county.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what action he proposes to take to diminish the pollution of the air from the factory of Wailes Dove (Bitumastic) Limited, Pelaw-on-Tyne.

Air pollution from the present operations, which are on a very limited scale, is being controlled by the best practicable means. The Alkali Inspectorate will continue to keep the factory under close observation and to give advice where necessary.

Will my right hon. Friend acknowledge publicly that this is a story that we have been hearing for two years, and that, in spite of the excellent work carried out by the alkali inspector and the inspectors of the local authority, the nuisance persists? Will he further recognise that the only solution is to revoke the planning approval given in 1966 and for the factory to be removed to a place away from residential property?

I know that this has gone on for a long time, and in 1968 alone the Alkali Inspectorate has visited the works 16 times; but the problems involved are extremely complicated. I hope that we shall be able to find the solution before it is necessary to resort to the drastic solution which my hon. Friend suggests.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will take steps to abolish rate relief for public schools.

The recommendations of the Public Schools Commission about the fiscal benefits which independent schools obtain as charities are being considered by the Government, but I cannot yet make a statement.

Is my hon. Friend not aware that this continued concession to privilege by the Labour Government is considered by those of us who believe in equality of opportunity in education to be somewhat contradictory in our present educational situation? Would he, therefore, consider the whole classification of charities, particularly as it applies to public schools?

The point of view which my hon. Friend puts is very much in the minds of Ministers.

Would the hon. Gentleman concede that in respect of any child privately educated the State makes a substantial net profit?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will inform me of exactly the basis for that statement, which is not altogether clear to me.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the ratepayers of Harrow have to bear an unnecessary burden as the result of the charity which they give to Harrow School? Is he further aware that it is the only comprehensive school in the borough and that my constituents cannot send their children there, although they have to help support it through the rates?

This also is a factor of which the Government are aware, although I think that if my hon. Friend examines the way in which the resources element in the rate support grant is given, he will see that what happens is that what Harrow loses by this concession is made up from central funds. But this still does not mean to say that the system is right.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the continuing pride of the people of Harrow in the contribution to the education of the people of this country which the school has provided over the years?

I do not think that this has anything to do with pride in the institution. The question is, what is a fair and just system of rating relief? This is something which the Government are considering.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will allow Bromley Council to advance an additional £160,000 under its home loans scheme, in view of the fact that this commitment had already been entered into before the Government's latest reduction in the council's quota.

An additional quota to meet these commitments was given to Bromley Council on 21st November.

That Answer is welcome as far as it goes, but will the Minister please always bear in mind that high property values in areas like Bromley mean that those of modest incomes must look to the council for loans to help them with house purchase; and, therefore, any restrictions he imposes in that respect strike very hard at young couples in particular in my constituency?

This is one of a number of competing criteria that we have to take into account.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will introduce legislation to make it obligatory for local authorities to purchase at market value any properties blighted by redevelopment proposals without the necessity of the owners having to prove hardship.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what progress he has made in his consideration of the memorandum submitted to him by the Chartered Lands Society on the question of compensation provision on planning and redevelopment; and if he will make a statement.

This issue is being considered as part of the present review of compensation which will take into account the views among others of the Chartered Land Societies, with whom there have been three meetings.

In the meantime, will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that hardship is a very difficult factor to define and that it is a very shattering experience for people to find overnight that their home has become subject to redevelopment proposals; we should be able to afford to be generous to people who have suffered this kind of uneasiness and unhappiness?

The Government recognise this problem, and in what might be called "near" cases of blight local authorities have been asked to purchase on a discretionary basis where there is hardship.

Is it not the case that redevelopment proposals are published so that public opinion can be brought to bear on them and, if necessary, alterations made to them? Therefore, if there were to be instant purchase, as is here suggested, would not the council possibly be buying properties for which it might have no use? Why should I as a ratepayer in Bromley have my money wasted in this way?

One has to balance a number of considerations here. One must always have regard to hardship in the case of the individual.

In view of the very real hardship caused on an increasing scale by planning blight, would not the Government urgently look at the possibility of at least guaranteeing building societies which are willing to provide mortgages for such properties? This is one of the very real problems involved.

I should like to await the result of the review, which we expect some time next year.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what consultations are taking place with local authorities on the question of selling land in their possession which was meant for council accommodation, but which such local authorities are now considering selling to private developers.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many local authorities in the last two years have sold land in their possession which was designed for council housing; and what is his policy in this matter.

Local authorities do not need my right hon. Friend's consent to sell housing land unless it was acquired by compulsory purchase or is being sold below market price. Where his consent is required, he examines the case in the light of housing needs in the area.

Is it not absolutely disgraceful that some councils, obviously Conservative-controlled, with housing shortages in their areas are willing to sell land in their possession for private development? If it was right for the Government to ban the sale of council houses in certain circumstances, would they not be willing to take the same action with councils willing to sell such land?

I think that the present powers that we have to interfere in those two cases are enough to give us a general control over housing development.

Will not my hon. Friend agree that this selling of council housing land is accompanied by the selling of council houses? In Slough, 90 houses have been sold to date and 335 sales are going through the pipeline. Does he not think that these two happenings are likely to cause housing shortage in the rented area?

The housing need is one of the points we particularly take into account, because one has to look at the whole picture—the number of council houses there are already and the possibility of getting more.

What is the Minister's advice to local authorities which are refused loan sanction for the development of land which they already own, in view of the heavy land charges they have to carry while the land is undeveloped?

I would not give any advice unless I knew the particulars of the case.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he proposes to fulfil the undertaking given during the Second Reading of the Caravan Sites Bill last Session to bring in a Bill that will give to caravan dwellers similar protection to that which the Rent Act gives to the occupiers of houses.

I cannot yet forecast when the introduction of further Measures to protect caravan dwellers may be feasible. The Act of last Session has given a substantial measure of protection, and I am keeping the matter under review.

As Part I of the Act was just a holding exercise, and as Part II is still inoperative because the Minister will not give it his O.K., does not this delay mean that the good work of the last Session is, in large measure, abortive?

No, Sir. I think that my hon. Friend is going too far. The Act provides protection against eviction without court order and thus gives considerable protection to caravan dwellers. I am sorry that I cannot, at this stage, say when the amending legislation I hope for will be possible.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will seek to amend the Prices and Incomes Act, 1968, so as to enable him to control increases in local authority charges for services related to council dwellings, and also for rents of pram sheds, garages and other buildings which may be rented by the tenants of these dwellings.

Under the present Act my right hon. Friend can prevent unreasonable increases in charges for services which an existing tenant must meet as a condition of his tenancy. Under the Prices and Incomes Acts, a reference could be made to the Prices and Incomes Board of unreasonable increases in charges for optional facilities if the evidence warranted such a reference.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that these increases should have been brought within the scope of the Prices and Incomes Act? Would he not further agree that an increase of 200 per cent. for the rent of a shed in which to keep the family pram is exorbitant and mercenary, especially when the particular revenue account of the Greater London Council is in the black? Does he not think that there are serious anomalies here which need action now by the Government to bring these matters within the control of the Prices and Incomes Act?

No, Sir. I think that the present powers give my right hon. Friend sufficient control in the present circumstances. The increase in service charges generally proposed by the Greater London Council was not unreasonable in my right hon. Friend's opinion and appeared to be justified by increased costs. Having given his decision, my right hon. Friend could not now vary or revoke it.

How could an increase of 50 per cent. in the charges made for lodgers be justified by increases in costs incurred by the Greater London Council? Will the right hon. Gentleman also say whether he thinks 12 per cent. increase in service charges for garages is not too high?

I can only tell the hon. Gentleman that when authorities submit proposals for rent increases they must state whether those increases are accompanied by increases in service charges. My right hon. Friend has no evidence that any proposed increases in charges are unreasonable, but he would certainly take action if he came across an unreasonable proposal.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that certain local authorities are trying to get round the Prices and Incomes Act by seeking to transfer from the council to the tenant certain repair charges formerly borne by the council?

If my hon. Friend has evidence of such a case, perhaps he will let me have particulars.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will seek to amend the Prices and Incomes Act, 1968, so as to bring rents of new local authority dwellings within the control provisions of Part III, section 10.

The Prices and Incomes Act gives my right hon. Friend power for the duration of the Act to limit increases, in rents of existing houses as part of the Government's prices and incomes policy. While the fixing of rents for new houses raises different issues and in the Government's view must remain the responsibility of local authorities, my right hon. Friend expects authorities to exercise moderation in present circumstances.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that at the present rate of house building over 200,000 local authority tenancies will be created each year which are not brought within the scope of this Act? Are tenants to be sorted out according to whether they occupy a new or an old flat, or is the principle to be that all tenants ought to be protected under the prices and incomes legislation?

No. The principle was that the House gave power to my right hon. Friend to control rents of existing tenancies. I think the House generally will accept that an existing tenant is in a different position from the prospective tenant of a property which has not yet been let

Is the Minister aware that the Government's prices and incomes legislation is a complete fraud from beginning to end, and nowhere more fraudulent than in its relation to council house rents?

The answer to those supplementary questions is No Sir, and No Sir.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government (1) whether he will make a statement on the review of housing cost yardsticks;

When my right hon. Friend introduced the housing cost yardsticks he undertook to review them at intervals of a year or less. The first review is now proceeding, in consultation with the local authority associations, but he is not yet ready to make a statement.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary give some indication of when he will be ready? Is it not a fact that it is now two years since this review was promised in the appropriate circular? What is happening at the Ministry which prevents the Minister carrying out announced programmes?

As a result of the review, we are getting interesting and sometimes rather varied experience and criticisms of the yardsticks. To be fair, we are anxious to get the right answers, but I hope that before long we shall be able to make a statement.

Will the hon. Gentleman agree that the Government themselves have added so much to the cost of houses by S.E.T., import deposits, etcetera that this review should be not annual but whenever the Government increase the cost by their own actions?

No. We have such good new subsidies and a tremendous response to our claim to get a larger number of house completions that we have to control public expenditure by having yardsticks to do it.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what estimate he has made of the effect of the recent measures proposed by the Government on 22nd November on the cost of house building.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what is his estimate of the increase in house building costs resulting from the financial measures of November 1968.

The measures announced on 22nd November 1968 are likely to add about a quarter of 1 per cent. to the cost of housing construction.

Is the Minister not aware that this adds approximately £5 to the cost of each house and the building industry depends a great deal—probably more than any other industry—on road transport for its materials? When will he begin to show some concern about the Measures of this Government which, one after the other, add cost to the housing of the people?

The first priority is to get the economy of the country right.

What representations has the Minister made to the President of the Board of Trade on the exclusion from the import deposits scheme of essential imported materials such as semi-processed wood?

It is not for me to tell the hon. Member what discussions I have had with the President of the Board of Trade, but timber raises important problems because raw and sawn timber are exempt and only in the case of planed timber does the deposit apply.

In view of the fact that in 1964 and 1966 the main plank in the Labour Party's platform was to cut the cost of housing, is the right hon. Gentleman pleased or disappointed with the Government's performance?

No one welcomes increases in prices of housing, and I welcome co-operation by right hon. Gentlemen opposite in our endeavours to keep them down. The important thing is the number of houses that have been built and the very generous subsidies given by this Government, which are about four times those given by the Government of hon. Members opposite.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will make a statement about the recent £7½ million project by Southwark Council's Direct Labour Department.

This scheme for about 1,400 dwellings was approved in 1966 on the basis that a separate management team should be employed, as advised by the National Building Agency. This team was set up, with the assistance of management consultants. I understand that work proceeded well to start with, but the month-to-month cost control revealed early this year that costs were beginning to exceed estimates; progress was also falling behind schedule. The council has now decided to bring in Messrs. Bovis Ltd. on a fee basis to manage the remainder of the work for it. Messrs. Bovis estimates that the cost will exceed the original estimate by about 13 per cent.

In view of the fact that excess costs are already in the nature of £400,000 and that the consultants' fee is £20,000, will the Minister confirm or deny that further excessive cost, in excess of £150,000, are very likely to take place?

I think it too early to reach a final figure on what the increase will be.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will now take steps to bring into the system of fair rent regulation those controlled tenancies at present exempt.

My right hon. Friend has no proposals in respect of controlled tenancies other than those set out in the White Paper, "Old Houses into New Homes".

In view of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has had statutory powers for the past three years and it is already eight months since the White Paper was issued, is it not a disgrace that all the problems and claims of small landlords have not been attended to before now?

The hon. Member will know that legislation is likely to come before the House in this Session. It will be for Parliament ultimately to decide on the form of the legislation, but in framing it we are taking into account the views expressed on the White Paper proposals.

Will my right hon. Friend note the eagerness of hon. Members opposite to increase rents as widely and generally as possible?

I noted it, but I was not unduly surprised.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also take note that it is to stop slums that we require to increase rents? Is the Minister of State aware that his right hon. Friend, now Secretary of State for Social Services, in Committee on the Rent Act, 1965, gave an assurance that controlled tenancies would become regulated tenancies? Does he repudiate that assurance now?

No. I should like to study the terms of the assurance before commenting upon it, but I certainly note the efforts of hon. Members opposite to put a respectable aura around their desire to help the landlords.

Will my right hon. Friend take note of the continued bleats we have; from the Opposition about the plight of private landlords? Will he consider legislation to give the right to private tenants to buy their property from the private landlord, which probably would solve this problem?

I take note of the proposal made by my hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether, in the light of the Government's new proposals to restrict consumer expenditure, he will reconsider his decision to impose the present cuts in rents charged by local authorities.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government to what extent he takes into account increases in general rates when exercising his powers under the Prices and Incomes Act.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will suspend the operation of his power under Section 10 of the Prices and Incomes Act, 1968, under which local authorities need prior approval for rent increases, in order to assist local authorities to minimise rate increases in 1969.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government to what extent, when considering proposals from local authorities for reducing increases in council house rents, he takes into account the local authority rate contributions to such rents.

This temporary control is an important element in the Government's prices and incomes policy and it would be quite wrong to abandon it. In considering local authorities' proposals, I expect them to raise their rate contributions only where the rent increases would otherwise exceed the recommended limits; but at the present time I consider it right to reject pro- posals for rent increases which involve a substantial cut in a rate contribution normally made by the authority concerned.

In view of that Answer, is not the right hon. Gentleman, by restraining local authorities from raising rents to come somewhere near an economic level of those of their tenants on differential schemes who can afford it, working dead against the Chancellor of the Exchequer's policy of deliberately raising prices to restrict consumption? Both cannot be right.

No. Reduction in rent increases is important to the tenants concerned. The total amount concerned is not significant in relation to total consumer demand, but a restraint in rent increases is important to the prices and incomes policy because housing is a necessity.

Is the Minister aware that as a result of his directive in Harrow there will be a substantially extra burden on the ratepayers there? Is his intention that the rates should go up, or to put off the evil day until he is ousted from office?

I am aware that my right hon. Friend's decisions in the case of Harrow have resulted in considerable easement of the burden on tenants. All these considerations were taken into account when the matter was considered, and they have been discussed with the council.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that in a number of local authorities, such as Harrow, council tenants pay an unfair proportion of the cost of running old folks home and places like that? Will he also confirm that council tenants are ratepayers?

Yes. I should think that the latter part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question was self-evident. He will be interested to know that in Harrow the direction was that the rent increase average should be reduced from 20s. to 7s. 6d. a week and that the highest individual increase should be reduced from 31s. to 11s. 7d. a week.

Mr. Molloy.

On a point of order. In ciew of the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply, I give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

Order. I had already called Mr. Molloy.

On the general question of rents, would my right hon. Friend look at the existing legislation which allows Tory councils to cheat by including in the housing revenue account many aspects of housing estate administration, such as lighting, roads and footpaths, which should be on the general rate account but are included and put on council house tenant's rents?

My hon. Friend may like to know that we are currently discussing the housing revenue account with the local authority associations.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say definitely whether it is Government policy to keep down the rents of council tenants and make the ratepayers pay?

The Government's policy during the continuation of this phase of the Price and Incomes Act is to mitigate the increases in council rents in the interests of the policy.

On a point of order. As the Minister's answer is still unsatisfactory, I give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

On a point of order. In view of the satisfactory nature of my right hon. Friend's reply, I look forward to the debate with interest.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what steps is he taking to ensure that the measures to be taken as a result of his advice to local authorities arising from the Ronan Point report do not hold back the housing programme.

The re-appraisal of designs for high blocks of flats and the carrying out of any necessary remedial work will inevitably mean delay in starting and completing some of these blocks and may have an adverse effect on other housebuilding aspects. It may be that some authorities will change the emphasis of their housing programmes, and such a change could involve delay.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind, in resisting some of the rather potty engineers who have been very vociferous recently, that perfectly good and adequate international standards have been laid down by the C.E.B. and that these should not be exceeded? Will he also bear in mind that costs of new building could be considerably increased, which would be a matter of concern for all, if too stringent standards are adopted by his Department?

I appreciate the help that my hon. Friend has given throughout the Ronan Point discussions, which she has given from a well-informed point of view, and I will take into consideration the points that she has made.

The Minister has admitted that this will adversely affect the building of flats and houses generally. Will he, concerning the area where this occurred, have discussions quickly to try to help the council regarding new building, rates and the costs involved in the disaster?

The Ministry is in close consultation with the London Borough of Newham on these subjects. We will bear in mind what my hon. Friend has just said.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will take steps to transfer the functions of furnished rent tribunals to rent officers and rent assessment committees.

Integration of the two systems would require legislation, and I cannot at present say when this would be possible. In the meantime membership of rent tribunals and of rent assessment panels outside Greater London have been integrated and a similar step within Greater London is now being considered.

I do not quite understand. Will the Minister explain how he can integrate if he cannot do it, combine, without legislation?

I said that integration of the two systems would require legislation. It is possible to arrange integration of individual membership without.

Will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that he will give special consideration to the furnished tenant in view of the deep anxiety about many individual cases which might be helped by the kind of change proposed in the Question?

I will certainly pay regard to the point made by my hon. Friend.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that during the Committee stage of the London Government Bill, 1965, I drew attention to the risk that landlords of unfurnished properties would stick in a few pieces of furniture and thereby escape the machinery of regulation? Will he make inquiries about the extent to which this has happened since 1965 and consider it a matter of urgency to bring in legislation such as he has mentioned?

I will make inquiries to see whether the situation to which the hon. Gentleman refers has happened to any extent since 1965.

Will the Minister look up what his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services said during the course of the Rent Bill, 1965, when he gave an assurance that it was the intention of the Government to bring about this integration as soon as possible?

I shall clearly have a lot of weekend reading of the speeches of my right hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he intends to publish the Bill to implement the White Paper, Old Houses into New Homes; and, in view of tenants' resistance to the installing of bathrooms and lavatories which will arise from the proposal to take 400,000 improved homes out of control, if he will undertake to drop proposals for such decontrol.

The Bill to give effect to the White Paper, Old Houses into New Homes, will be introduced during this Session; until it is published I cannot add to the statements of policy in the White Paper.

Have not Leigh, Salford and certain other cities improved tens of thousands of old houses under existing powers? Therefore, whilst welcoming the other proposals, may I ask why it is necessary to insist on this one which, by trebling rents, will bring improvements to a complete halt?

Because not enough has been done by way of improvements, nor have houses been improved to the high standard to which it will be possible to improve them under the terms of the White Paper. The important consideration is to strike a balance between giving adequate incentive to get the work done and avoiding undue hardship to tenants.

Is the Minister aware that in Norwood there have been many tragic deaths as a result of inadequate conversion to multiple occupation and that the Bill to deal with multiple occupation, as well as other matters, cannot come soon enough?

I agree with my hon. Friend. I hope that the proposals, when embodied in legislation, will at last bring multiple occupation under adequate control.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will introduce legislation to abolish ground rents and rent charges.

Existing legislation provides for the redemption of perpetual rent charges on freehold property on application to my right hon. Friend by the rent-payer. The Law Commission is examining the whole subject of rent charges and is in course of preparing a Working Paper, which will contain its provisional conclusions. These my right hon. Friend will study carefully. Existing legislation enables certain leaseholders to buy their freeholds. Householders can apply to my right hon. Friend for a separate apportionment of their share of a ground rent or rent charge to end the burden of collecting rents on neighbouring properties.

Is my hon. Friend aware that his answer is moderately encouraging, but will he remember that many of us feel that the whole system of ground rents is feudal, archaic, thoroughly unnecessary and particularly hard on the people who have to pay and collect them? Since the Opposition did nothing about it when they were in office, can we not abolish it?

The Minister and I share the same unfortunate legacy from the past and, as in all our reforms, we hope to undo it as quickly as we can.

Would my hon. Friend enfranchise leasehold flats as soon as possible, perhaps during the present Session?

We will be very much occupied this Session with other, very important matters.

asked the Prime Minister if he will take an opportunity of attending a meeting of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.

I have no plans to do so at present.

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain to members of N.A.T.O. whatever happened to his proposal for an Atlantic Nuclear Force? Will he also explain the continuing existence of the "so-called British, so-called nuclear so-called deterrent", which is now a major theme of the Government's recruiting advertisements?

The hon. Member will know that the proposals for a multilateral force, which were accepted, I think, substantially by his own Government, have been successfully torpedoed over the last year or two, but our proposals for dealing with the collectivisation of the deterrent are, of course, still the subject of disagreement in N.A.T.O.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that some of us on this side consider that the existence of both N.A.T.O. and the Warsaw Pact makes a permanent and peaceful solution of European problems much more difficult? Will he announce his willingness to enter into discussions with representatives of both Alliances to secure their progressive dismantlement and their replacement with a European security system in which countries from both Western and Eastern Europe can join?

Obviously, any sane and civilised man looks forwards to a world in which there are no military blocs of this kind, but the way to reach that situation is not by unilaterally abandoning the Western Alliance. On the question of relations between the two pacts, my hon. Friend will be aware of the fairly lengthy section of the communiqué which I signed with Mr. Kosygin in 1967, but will, I am afraid, agree that recent events do not contribute to an early solution of the problems which we then set out.

asked the Prime Minister if he will convene a conference of heads of European Governments, in accordance with the resolution passed at The Hague on 9th November, 1968, details of which have been sent to him, in order to further the cause of uniting Europe.

I have nothing to add to the Answers which I gave in reply to a Question from the hon. Member for Banbury (Mr. Marten) on 28th November.—[Vol. 774, c. 722–4.]

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the continual stagnation in our application to join the Community is both weakening and demoralising? Will he not agree that the excellent conference at The Hague gives him an opportunity to take the initiative in breaking the deadlock?

I certainly join my right hon. Friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary in his welcome for the success of the conference at The Hague, in which I believe the hon. Member himself played a significant part, and also for the proposal referred to in the Question. But I think that the hon. Gentleman will agree with the line taken by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State yesterday, when he said that progress must proceed by means of the next W.E.U. meeting.

Why did the Government, at the recent E.F.T.A. conference in Vienna, apparently turn down a proposal for freer trade between the E.E.C. and E.F.T.A., which seems to have been supported by all the other countries in those groups and which would surely have been a sensible step forward?

We did not turn down any proposal for freer trade between E.F.T.A. and the E.E.C.

While recognising that much can be done within the W.E.U., may I ask the Prime Minister to consider the possibility of making contact with those other Governments which have publicly expressed themselves in favour of convening such a meeting of heads of Government, with a view to seeing how this can be furthered?

There is no difference between any of us on objectives here so far as a meeting of this kind is concerned, but, as the Foreign Secretary said when this was first raised, it is very important that, if there were such a meeting, it should be properly prepared and that we should be satisfied that it would lead to progress, rather than just, perhaps, to a reassertion of previously prepared and stated positions. The answer certainly lies first of all in the next W.E.U. meeting, in the proposals made by M. Harmel and, failing that, in seeing whether any progress can be made to what the right hon. Gentleman has in mind.

As I understand the Resolution, it dealt with matters outside the Treaty of Rome. Is not the Prime Minister aware that there is quite a lot to be done in technology, which has already begun, and in the exchange of trade? Will he use his personal iniative in the matter?

The right hon. Gentleman will know the welcome we have given to the d'Estaing proposal, which involves the possibility of more co-operation in technology between members of the Six and countries which are not members of the E.E.C. We have put forward our own proposals in this field, on the basis not so much of intergovernmental but inter-industrial cooperation, and we are pressing these questions all the time. But, apart from the d'Estaing proposals, there has been a consistent attitude as a result of which co-operation between the Six and outside countries, including ourselves, has been frustrated.

asked the Prime Minister what new steps he is considering in conjunction with the other Commonwealth Prime Ministers to try to end the Nigerian civil war.

I have nothing at present to add to what my right hon. Friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary said in the House yesterday.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that very many of our constituents are so appalled by the suffering in the civil war that they would like to see a firm initiative by the major powers to secure a cease-fire? Will he try to secure agreement if possible with the other major powers, the United Nations, and the O.A.U., to get a Christmas ceasefire plus massive relief operations for the people so desperately in need?

My hon. Friend will be aware that one of the purposes of the visit of two members of Her Majesty's Government to Africa was to examine those very possibilities and to co-operate in an initiative to that end. My hon. Friend mentioned the O.A.U. He will know that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs visited Addis Ababa for discussions with the Emperor of Ethiopia, and he will be aware of the very deep disappointment felt by us all in the House, as well as my our constituents, that so far progress has not been made on the lines we were pressing for. They involved a cease-fire and mounting a massive relief operation during the cease-fire period. This has so far been prevented and frustrated.

In view of the certainty of an unprecedented human disaster if the war continues, does not my right hon. Friend agree that he and other Commonwealth Prime Ministers, when they meet in January would be justified in considering means to achieve a cease-fire which would ordinarily be ruled out of court?

My hon. Friend is quite right, and we know of the report which he brought back as a result of his visit to many of the areas affected, where, as he says, even greater dangers exist than we have so far faced. We certainly have very much in mind the question of how far progress could be made at the Commonwealth level, though an African solution is required, and we must not cut across the work of the O.A.U. too much. What we tried to do last week was welcomed by those who were trying to reach the same objectives in the O.A.U.

There have been reports today that the Federal Government have refused any sort of truce or cease-fire over Christmas. Can the Prime Minister tell us whether there is any substance in the reports? Will he clear up a point about Colonel Ojukwu which was not clear from the debate? I make no complaint about that. Has he refused to have daylight flights, or has he just not answered the invitation?

On the first part of the question, I should like to study the situation more and perhaps have a chance to give the right hon. Gentleman the answer later in the week. As he knows, my noble Friend Lord Shepherd is due to land in an hour or two and will be reporting to my right hon. Friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary. We shall then know the most up-to-date position of the Federal Government who, to my knowledge, have been extremely co-operative in what we have been trying to achieve. We are studying the latest reports, but my information is that Colonel Ojukwu has not agreed to the daylight flights, still less to the use of the land corridor, which is the only thing now that can solve the problem of the massive shortage of carbohydrates, which presents the main danger.

asked the Prime Minister if he will appoint a Minister with overall responsibility for the sponsor- ship of both the development and production of synthetic and substitute foodstuffs processed from natural, organic, and other sources; and what is now the Government's programme for bringing about import saving by this means.

These are matters which come within the field of responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. The Government recognise the potential importance of these forms of production, but they are still in the research and development stage, and it is too early to assess the possibilities of import saving.

Is there not a need for mission-orientated research and development, and for interest such as has been shown by the United States?

The hon. Gentleman, of whose interest in the matter I am well aware, understates what is going on in this country. Many commercial enterprises, such as the oil companies, are very active in working on the production of protein from natural oil and natural gas. Work has been going on for many years under the Agricultural Research Council at Rothamsted Experimental Station on the extraction of protein from plant materials. Related work is in progress at other A.R.C. Institutes, such as the Rowett Research Institute and the Hannah Dairy Research Institute. In addition, the Ministry's marine laboratories are studying the potentialities of the sea, and the Tropical Products Institute is also researching in this field. All this work is co-ordinated, but it is too early to say whether it will be of commercial value, and what help it can give not only to our import-saving problems but the relief of poverty and hunger throughout the world.

asked the Prime Minister if he will submit proposals to the Commonwealth Prime Minister's Conference for a Commonwealth Defence Pact with Zambia and Tanzania.

No, Sir.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the intransigence of the Smith and other racialist régimes in the area leads to increased emphasis on freedom fighting, which exposes Zambia and Tanzania? Is not such a pact therefore essential?

As my hon. Friend is aware, and as I told him on 23rd July, these matters were discussed very fully with the President of Zambia when he was here, and we have already offered to arrange for a joint study of Zambia's defence requirements if the Zambian Goverment wish. We made it clear to President Kaunda that we would hope to be able to help him to obtain in Britain all the defence equipment Zambia requires, but I also made it clear to him, and he agreed, that it must be for Zambia to evaluate the danger as he sees it to the independence and integrity of his country, and to decide what priority he would wish to give to strengthening his defence position. We are prepared to help.

Will the Prime Minister take the opportunity of the Conference to make representations privately to Zambia and Tanzania that to harbour terrorists and allow them to cross the borders into Rhodesia does not contribute to the cause of peace in Africa?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman has perhaps missed some of the statements made on behalf of the Zambian Government, for example. I can speak only about them, because I have not recently met the President of Tanzania, though I hope shortly to do so. Those statements made it clear in the United Nations that Zambia was prepared to have the whole situation opened up to international inspection so that some of the charges made against the Zambian Government could be probed.

asked the Prime Minister if he will discuss the calling of a World Monetary Conference, similar to that at Bretton Woods, with the President-Elect of the United States of America.

I look forward to early discussions with Mr. Nixon on a wide range of topics, but a world monetary conference without really adequate preparation through existing channels would not be appropriate or helpful at present.

Is not there an advantage in having a conference at which the central banker and finance Ministers of primary-producing and developing countries are present?

Work has been going on continuously through the appropriate United Nations machinery and the International Monetary Fund for this, since the days in office of the right hon. Member for Barnet (Mr. Maudling). Some progress has been made, but most of us are rather disappointed at the limited extent of the progress and the long delay. I have taken a big interest in these matters in the past, so I appreciate the point my hon. Friend raises. But it has not been possible so far to work out a scheme for increased world liquidity which gives a special premium to the requirements of the developing countries without putting them or the countries supplying what they need into balance of payments difficulties.

Does not the Prime Minister agree that the instability of the world monetary system is such that the crisis of last month could easily recur early in the New Year? Although Bretton Woods may have been appropriate at the time, should not the Government make one of their highest priorities devising new methods to sustain a world currency on a permanent basis?

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer referred to the Bretton Woods agreement in the debate on 25th November, when he said that it had served the world reasonably well over the past generation but that the further we got from it the greater the need for change. Since this will require the agreement of other countries, and since we have not only through the I.M.F. but the Group of 10, the Committee of Three of the O.E.C.D. and in other ways, the means of adequate consultation, I am not certain that to rush straight into a conference bearing slogans saying, "Bretton Woods must go" would be the most constructive way of dealing with the problem, which not just Britain but the whole world faces.

Since unanimity may be very difficult to achieve at present, would not a more limited means of co-operation perhaps be the answer, particularly such co-operation with the United States, like-minded continental countries and others? Does my right hon. Friend consider that such a conference might be useful in obtaining the kind of order in international finance that is required?

I am not sure that the last few words of what my hon. Friend said follow from what he said at the beginning, with which I agree. The unanimity provision was one of the reasons for the frustration of our hopes and those of many other countries, including the United States. But the Stockholm meeting of the Group of 10 last spring and further progress made not only in the I.M.F. but in, for example, the Basle Agreement and other developments since that time suggest that it has been possible, at a cost and with a delay, to meet even the attempt on the part of one or two countries to veto progress.

Does the Prime Minister's first reply mean that he will seek an early opportunity to discuss with the Presidentelect the problems of world finance and world trade?

Yes, Sir, exactly as I have done with the present President of the United States. Obviously, at this stage I cannot say exactly what the coverage will be, but I think it inconceivable that it would be possible for two Heads of Government to meet without looking at the question raised by the right hon. Gentleman.

In view of what was clearly a disastrous conference at Bonn recently, does my right hon. Friend agree that there is a need to do something fairly soon? Will he, perhaps, consider the possibility of having less rigidity in the whole procedure regarding exchange rates, and would he care to give the House, briefly perhaps, his views on the crawling peg?

Again, I find some difficulty in following the implied logic of the question. My hon. Friend must bear responsibility for calling the Bonn conference disastrous. I am not sure that it follows, if a conference of 10 was in his view disastrous, that a conference of 100 would necessarily present an easier opportunity to make substantial and rapid progress. We must work through the Group of 10 and in other ways to solve the problems facing the world. A great deal arises from an international problem of confidence, not a national problem. It arises also from the fact that over a period of time world liquidity has not increased pari passu with the increase in the volume in world trade. This is one reason why we have had these repeated upsets and flurries in the world currency market.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the existing channels to which he referred earlier have had at least 25 years' warning of constant crises, and is it not time that they injected a much stronger and higher sense of urgency into their deliberations?

Yes, Sir That was attempted by the right hon. Member for Barnet (Mr. Maudling), it was attempted by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, and by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. But for this sense of urgency, which both sides of the House have never failed to proclaim, to become productive there is required a similar sense of urgency and some agreement as to method among a large number of other countries. We have improved the facilities for international co-operation. For example, the speed with which the Washington conference was mounted last March at the time of the serious upset in the world gold market, the Basle Agreement and even the Bonn conference show a possibility of rapid action. I agree that more fundamental measures may be required, though I do not consider that they will be attained simply by injecting a sense of urgency. The whole world knows the urgency.

rose —

Order. We must move on.