asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what is the total capital value of buildings under the control of his Department.

This information is not readily available.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what steps he is taking to alleviate the problem of condensation in new houses.

A design guide on the prevention of condensation is to be published early next year and a handbook on remedial measures later. The Ministry is continuing to hold conferences to make the causes of condensation and methods of preventing it more widely known.

While acknowledging the good work of Mr. Dick and his colleagues in the Building Research Station, since this problem is causing considerable distress to many tenants, could not something be done in the way of publicity before the winter begins, as it becomes severe in January and February, when condensation is probably at its worst?

I appreciate what the hon. Gentleman says about the distress caused by condensation. We have given all the publicity we possibly can to not only the problem but its solution so far as we see it. I have said before, and say again, that whenever an hon. Member has a problem of this kind we are prepared to give him every possible assistance.

Will the Minister take into account the extreme danger caused by blocking up ventilation, which is necessary to avoid condensation, and can result in great tragedy when individuals are killed by fumes?

Two problems are involved. By and large, a good deal of condensation arises from the tendency in the past few years to think in terms of creature comforts, such as warmth from central heating and part-central heating and the elimination of natural ventilation. I appreciate that this affects the matter of condensation and that elimination of natural ventilation may well result in danger from fumes of one kind or another.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what will be the cost of the new crown building in Bishop Auckland; and what stage has been reached in its development.

The cost will be £391,000. Work on site started on the 5th August.

May I ask whether the contract has gone to a north-east company? Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the concern which exists in the northeast about the loss of north-east jobs to other builders? Will he ask his Department to look particularly into the claims of this regional development area, and if he finds that north-east builders need particular advice from his Department, will he see that they get it?

We arc always willing to give assistance to builders and contractors in areas with a high degree of unemployment. I am sorry that I have not the information in relation to whether the contract has been let to a north-east builder, but would draw attention to the fact that, whoever gets the contract, a great deal of local labour will inevitably be employed in carrying it out.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works when the final report on building maintenance will be published.

Although the committee does not expect to complete its next general report until early in 1971, we intend publishing papers on aspects of its work at intervals during the next year.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on the reports which have been issued so far. In view of the complications of the subject and the fact that the best maintenance often is not widely known, will he make a special effort to ensure that the reports and the information available have the maximum spread in the building industry?

Certainly we shall ensure that the greatest publicity is given. We shall disseminate as far as possible the research papers and reports from the various sub-committees. My hon. Friend was the original chairman of the Committee, and we recognise that it is only within the last few years that there has been any idea of the real costs of maintenance.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works if he will conduct a surveyt of the costs to the building and construction industry of the continuance of British Standard Time.

As part of a comprehensive programme of consultation with industry about the implications of British Standard Time and following the acceptance of my suggestin of N.C.C. on 17th September, 1969, a survey is being arranged under its auspices.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that all the evidence in the industry so far indicates a rise in costs and a fall in productivity? In view of the serious fall back in hte house building programme, ought not the British Standard Time experiment to be reviewed now?

I am aware of the evidence that was submitted earlier this year by the N.F.B.T.E. At the moment, I think that it is quite sufficient that the N.C.C. is itself considering the implications of British Standard Time. In due course, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will take all these matters into consideration and arrive at his conclusions.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works I what has been the cost so far to the nearest convenient date of the building in which is situated the Southern Regional Headquarters of the Land Commission at Reading;

The cost of the accommodation was about £125,000 up to 31st March last. Nearly 7,000 sq. ft. has been surrendered this year; this is a reduction of about 40 per cent.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for indicating that very healthy trend. Will he accept my gratitude for showing at regional level what a marked economy will arise when this Land Commission is abolished by the next Government? [interruption.] It is no laughing matter.

The hon. Gentleman must not misunderstand my laughter. It was caused by the double-barbed compliment that he paid me. I do not think I should get involved in an argument of this kind.

Is my hon. Friend aware that what we want is some encouragement to the Land Commission to get on with the job of acquiring as much land as possible?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what estimate he has made of the effect on building materials of the import deposits scheme; and whether he will make a statement.

In my view, the scheme has been marginal in its effect on building materials.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman being too complacent over this? Does he not appreciate that quite a lot of timber is imported? According to a telephone call I had this morning, it will cost £500,000 more to do this and will add 3 per cent. to the cost of finished timber imports. Cannot he take the matter up with the Treasury with a view to getting the scheme rescinded, because that will help the housing programme and reduce costs?

The evidence before me is not wholly in accord with the hon. Gentleman's argument. I think that I should be in the position of encouraging home-produced materials and savings in the use of imports whenever possible.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that when the import surcharge went on in 1964 the price of houses went up by 2 per cent., but that when it came off in 1965 the price of houses came down by nothing? In effect, builders should have the money in the kitty amply to compensate for anything that the import deposits scheme is costing.

I would not go all the way with my hon. Friend on this. However, it is an extraordinary fact that when charges are made by the Government and later taken off it seems fairly universal that they tend not to come off again.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what studies he has instituted into the organisation of demand in the construction industry; and if he will make a statement.

An E.D.C. working party on which my Department was represented has recently reported, and its report is being studied by the Departments concerned.

Is the Minister not aware that this working party reported that there was no co-operation between the Ministry and local authorities on the co-ordinating of work started in certain areas? Surely this is a job about which his Department ought to have information. He has the staff to do it.

I do not think that the report has been published, but I understand that it is confined to the public sector and specifically to hospital building and water and sewage works.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works if he will make a statement on the rebuilding of Whitehall.

I intend to put on display in December in the precincts of the House the designs of the new Government offices to go on the northern part of the Bridge Street /Richmond Terrace site. I hope that full publicity will be given to all these developments as soon as possible, but I think the House should have a possibility of examining them first and would ask the hon. Member to wait a little longer.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman putting the cart before the horse? If we are to have public participation in planning, we ought to have the plan before we have the designs for the building.

I think that the hon. Gentleman should hold his fire until he has seen the display. After that, I would be very happy to discuss with him the implications of that display, but I think that it is better to see it first.

Is not this another case of stalling until it is too late to alter the plan? Is not the Minister aware that what he proposes and has already published is inhuman in scale and inhuman in purpose and that very many people, including the Royal Fine Art Commission, the G.L.C. and other amenity bodies, have spoken against it? if he proceeds with what he now intends without a proper public inquiry and debate, he will be condemned—[HoN. MEMBERS: "Too long."]—by all future ages for an act of barbarism on our environment.

Order. Long questions cut out other hon. Members' questions.

I approve of the hon. Gentleman's eloquence, disagree with his facts, and would point out that December is only a couple of weeks off.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works when he proposes to introduce legislation to set up a register of building employers for the purposes of regulating self-employment in the construction industry.

As announced in the Queen's Speech, proposals for controlling labour-only sub-contracting in the construction industry will be submitted to the House during the current Session, and the House will have an opportunity to debate the form these will take.

Is this to be a proper Bill? If so, can it be introduced before the Government raise S.E.T. again in the Budget and so make the problem of self-employment worse?

Perhaps I might deal with that portmanteau question in two parts. First, I quote the words of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, who said in the debate on the Gracious Speech that it was "a necessary Bill". As to S.E.T., I think that the hon. Gentleman knows that labour-only sub-contracting was a serious problem even before the tax was introduced.

Can my right hon. Friend say what discussions he is likely to have with the trade unions and the employers before the Bill is published? Incidentally, may I say that the proposed legislation is greatly welcomed by the building trade unions?

I hope to have discussions with all responsible sections of the building industry.

To underline the necessity for urgent action, can the right hon. Gentleman confirm the recent suggestion of the Public Accounts Committee that the Revenue has lost millions of £s through bogus self-employment? Second, notwithstanding what he said to my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Mr. Gresham Cooke), can he give an estimate of how much it is due to the imposition of the selective employment tax?

On the first point, no, Sir. We can all make estimates, and I do not think that we would be very much at variance on the question.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will make a statement on the current level of orders for new construction.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will make a statement on the level of output in the construction industry during 1969.

So far this year new orders have been declining. I expect the decline in output in 1969 to be about 3 per cent. from the 1968 level.

Is not the Minister disappointed with the August figures, which showed a drop in new house building of 17 per cent.? Is not that due to the disgraceful performance of the Labour-controlled boroughs, which have dropped new housing starts by 42 percent.? [HON. MEMBERS "Rubbish!"]

It is always disappointing to see a drop in housing. But I feel encouraged, as I am sure the hon. Gentleman does, by the knowledge that the Labour Government have produced in four years as many houses as his right hon. and hon. Friends produced in their last five years in office.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, as there are more Conservative-controlled local authorities in this country, it is logical that a far greater number of Conservative-controlled local authorities have not gone ahead with the housing programme? Does he also agree that one factor in the drop in house building has been the breaking up of first-class direct labour departments that were controlled by Labour-controlled local authorities?

Hear, hear ! Good stuff !

I do not deny the importance of both these factors. But at the same time, looking to the future, I hope that house building will recover and will soon be in the record area that it has always been under this Government.

But in order, if nothing else, to engender a little optimism, is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to deny predictions that have been made that output in the construction industry will fall this year for the first time, except for one freak year, since 1951?

What is the reason for that?

It would not be wise to confirm or deny the question of house building, if that is what the hon. Gentleman is talking about. But if he means output generally, I think that it will be in the region of about 3 per cent. less than last year.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works (1) what representations he has received from builders about credit difficulties; and what reply he has sent;

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what representations he has received from the building industry about the present credit squeeze; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what representations he has received from the building industry about the difficulties of raising bank loans.

I received a copy of the letter dated 23rd July from the President of the N.F.B.T.E. to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The subject was mentioned when I met the president of the federation informally on 10th September.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many builders, some of them substantial, are facing bankruptcy or, at the very least, are cutting back their house building programmes because of credit restrictions? If Her Majesty's Government are not merely paying lip-service to housing as a major social need, why will they not help the industry, upon which they are so dependent to provide the houses so desperately needed?

I do not minimise the very real difficulties facing house builders. But to suggest that the Government are doing nothing about this seems to ignore entirely the statement of my right hon. Friend last week on mortgage finance.

But as the Prime Minister said that house building was to be the Government's first priority, is it wholly unreasonable to suggest that the Government might begin by putting house builders in the priority class for loans?

I understand the point and the arguments for it, but house builders, like every member of the community, are Britons first and members of their occupation second. The most important thing is to get the economy straight.

Does my right hon. Friend recognise that there is a very strong lobby on this question? Does he also appreciate that substantial profits are still being made in the building industry, not in the building of houses but in more lucrative spheres where the profits seem largest?

Are we to understand that the Minister has no word of cheer for the small builder who is under considerable pressure, first, because he cannot get steel from the British Steel Corporation and, second, because he cannot get credit from the bank due to the economic and financial policies of the Government?

I do not think the hon. Gentleman heard what I was saying. I said that I understood the difficulties of the small builder, but I also pointed out that this Government were doing something for him. I mentioned, for example, mortgage finance, which was referred to by my right hon. Friend recently. I should also mention the Housing Act, 1969, and the immense amount of work which will be offered under the scheme "Old Houses into New Homes".

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what proposals he has for a commodity identification system to enable builders' merchants to create a computer-based system for its members.

I have arranged for an examination to be made of proposals for a commodity identification system serving the needs of the whole construction industry, including builders' and plumbers' merchants, and expect to receive recommendations by the end of this year.

I congratulate the Minister on that reply, but I draw his attention to the fact that he said not long ago that this could save between 10 and 20 per cent. of designers' time? Will he say how his Department is to reduce the number of statistical inquiries which it sends out to the industry, which occupied 167 man-days in one firm last year?

When the report is available we shall all be much wiser and more understanding.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will now make a statement on his decision regarding the future of the Construction Industry Research and Information Association.

After consulting representatives of the industry I decided that my Ministry's special information grant to C.I.R.I.A. should end on 30th June, 1970. The association, however, will continue to receive a grant from the Ministry of Technology.

While the right hon. Gentleman's decision is probably right, may I ask whether he is satisfied that the B.R.S. is sufficiently well staffed to deal with telephone inquiries?

I hope that its staff will be increased, and it may well be, by the addition of some of the C.I.R.I.A. staff. I should like the hon. Gentleman to understand that this is by way of being an experimental service and we must see how it operates.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works when he expects to receive the report of the Forbes Committee on the Registration of Builders.

I hope that the report will be available early in 1971.

When the report is ready, will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that he will judge its conclusions without the admitted bias towards registration that has already been shown by his predecessor?

The great thing about my predecessor was that he never showed bias at all. I think we had better await the report.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what evidence his Department has presented to the Bolton Committee on Small Firms; and whether he will publish it.

This evidence is still in preparation and no decision has been taken about publishing it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I am disappointed with that reply? I did not think that he would have been inhibited by the fact that the Press are present today. In view of the eminent support for and interest in this subject by someone who is also a close company which is in difficulties, will the right hon. Gentleman recognise that the building trade is composed as to about 80 per cent. of small companies? The credit squeeze is bearing down very hardly on them, and the right hon. Gentleman will not get production increased unless he makes representations to help them.

I have an idea that we have rather dealt with the second part of that question already. As to the first part, I know that Mr. Bolton has undertaken to publish a selection of evidence received, and I shall be ready to consider any request that he may make about the evidence of my Department.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will now announce his proposals for a State Building Corporation.

I have nothing to add to my replies to the hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Peyton) on 15th July, 10969.—[Vol. 787, col. 381.]

Surely the shocking experience of direct labour departments, and most recently what has happened in Leicester, should convince the right hon. Gentleman that this ought to be buried, and that he ought not to pursue this matter at all?

I do not draw quite the same conclusions as the hon. Gentleman does, and I perhaps do not share the same facts as he does.

Is it nto clear to my right hon. Friend that there is a greater urgency for a p7blic building corporation now than ever before, first, to increase the house building programme, and, second, to ensure that there is a real standard in the building industry which all employers in the building industry can keep up to?

I think, and I have said this before, that any proposals, whatever they may be, which can assist in the efficiency of the building industry and in the production of more houses are of great advantage.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that a fact is a fact whether he has a share in it or not? Second, will he take credit for his reticence this afternoon in not wishing to add to a totally unsatisfactory answer which he gave me in July? I was surprised that the right hon. Gentleman had the insolence to remind the House of it this afternoon.

My reply to the second part of the hon. Gentleman's question is, "Yes, I do take great satisfaction from it". With regard to the first part, I was trying to be very kind. What are facts to me are guesses to hon. Gentlemen opposite.

Will my right hon. Friend disregard the bias and prejudice of hon. Gentlemen opposite in connection with direct labour schemes? Is he aware that Durham County Council's direct labour scheme has just completed a road project months ahead of schedule and saved £1- million on the contract?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we on this side of the House will be content if he disregards all bias towards direct labour schemes and simply judges them on the facts?

I thought that that was what I was trying to do.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will publicise his Department's evidence to the Reddaway Inquiry on Selective Employment Tax.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what assistance he has given to the Reddaway inquiry into selective employment tax.

Professor Reddaway has sought information on statistical matters from my Department which will readily be given. I have no plans to submit formal evidence.

In view of the obvious crippling effect of S.E.T. on the building industry, why does not the right hon. Gentleman come into the open and put this proper evidence before the Reddaway Committee?

I shall be happy to give such evidence as Professor Reddaway requires of me. I thought that I had made that clear.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how many of the buildings under his Department which are open to the public on a paying basis make a profit; and whether he will list the costs and revenues in each case.

None, Sir.

That is a surprising answer. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the private sector there are many profitable activities in this connection? Is he satisfied that where the Ministry is involved the venture is as profitable as those in the private sector?

Yes, Sir, I think so, but at the same time I conceive it to be the duty of my Department also to render a service which perhaps private individuals do not need to give; namely, to preserve the great and glorious heritage of our ancient monuments.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are many people who do not like wild life parks with lions, and zoos, and would far rather have ancient and beautiful buildings?

This is all a matter of taste.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what discussions he is having with the building industry about the problems facing small builders.

No representations have been made to me, but I am always willing to consider any.

Has the right hon. Gentleman not heard from the construction industry that it feels that it is facing the worst setback in its programme in the last 20 years? Does he not feel that something must be done for the small builder, otherwise there is a grave danger that very soon householders will not be able to get their repairs done?

I do not think the building industry takes the matter quite as dramatically as the hon. Gentleman does, but I understand the problems, and I should like to help. I tried to say earlier that many of the actions of the Government during the past four years have been of considerable assistance in this regard.

I am not particularly enamoured with private enterprise, but will my right hon. Friend nevertheless recognise the immediate situation in the building industry and make it quite clear to his right hon. Friends that there must be some assistance in relation to credit facilities not only to help the small builder but to help the building operative to get over a very difficult period?

I said that the first question is the question of the economy itself. There are ways and means by which the small builder might be helped by practical action. For example, accounts should be paid promptly, and I know that my Department—and I am pleased about this—has given a very firm lead in seeing that accounts are quickly and promptly paid.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will make a statement about the future of the National Consultative Council of which he is chairman.

In addition to its standing interest in the general situation of the industry, the council has before it a heavy programme including metrication, data co-ordination, consultative arrangements for building services and the effects of British Standard Time.

Would it not be proper for the council to meet rather urgently to consider the fact that the level of house building in 1969 is going to be far lower than in 1964? Alternatively, would it not be better to cancel the whole thing and let the building industry get on with the job itself?

As to the second point, I think that the building industry, in the hon. Gentleman's words, would be horrified if the N.C.C. were cancelled. As to the first part, I think that the hon. Gentleman had better wait and see.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he proposes to take on the Hunter Report.

I am not yet able to add to the answer given on 16th July 1969 to my hon. Friend the Member for West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell).—[Vol. 787, c. 609.]

That reply was very negative. Why have the Government no proposals for this Session of Parliament, not even a White Paper, when this report has been in their hands for about four years, and when action could be taken on some of the recommendations which would greatly assist the Scottish tourist industry?

I explained to the hon. Gentleman 28 days ago that there were a number of problems still to be resolved. There are many conflicts of opinion about the implementation of the Hunter Report. It is not possible to treat different parts of the report without legislation, and, therefore, we would like to do it all together.

Is my hon. Friend aware that inshore fleets and fishermen in my division are very annoyed at the fact that no decisions have been made about this report? They have spent large sums of money on nets for salmon fishing. A ban is supposed to exist while the report is being considered. Is it not about time some decisions were made?

I sympathise with my right hon. Friend, but I assure him that these are complex matters and that we are getting as close as we can to a decision.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that when the right hon. Member for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Willis) answered questions during a debate at least three years ago he said that this was a matter of great urgency? I confirm everything that the right hon. Gentleman said today about the feelings of the Scottish drift-net fishermen.

I accept that, but, to be fair, my right hon. Friend ought to remember that the report was published in August 1965. My right hon. Friend knows the complexity of these matters. I assure hon. Gentlemen that they are not easy to resolve.

There may be conflicts of opinion, and I admit that these are complex matters, but does not the suggestion in Question No. 54 commend itself to my hon. Friend? Would not this let him off the hook by putting forward an agreed solution?

I am not on the hook, despite the Hunter Report. I put it to my hon. Friend that the Question that he asked on 16th July of this year is probably the right line of questioning, and that he should look at it again and see the implications of his supplementary question.