asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what further steps he intends to take in regard to those local authorities who are not building sufficient council dwellings.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what further steps he now proposes to take regarding those local authorities which are not building the required number of council dwellings.

My hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary and I are at present holding discussions with a number of priority housing authorities whose programmes have slowed down. We are considering action to overcome, the difficulties which visits, and other indications, have revealed but I have no statement to make at present. I hope that even now these authorities will reverse their decisions to cut back their programmes in view of the pressing need for more homes in their areas.

Can my right hon. Friend now say whether the Government intend to make any announcement about a house building agency along the lines recommended by a Select Committee, which we on this side of the House would welcome? Will he also say whether the London boroughs and the G.L.C. are being told that there can be no justification for any reduction in council house building?

Wherever necessary, we make the point which my hon. Friend make towards the end of his rather lengthy supplementary question. As for a house building agency, I appreciate his interest and it could well be a fruitful method of dealing with these matters. However, it would not produce any immediate result, nor would it make an immediate contribution to the present difficulties.

Does not my right hon. Friend already possess such powers to require building under the little-known Section 91 of the 1957 Housing Act? Will he use those powers?

As my hon. Friend suggests, I have those powers under Section 91. However, it is a lengthy procedure. It means, for example, a public inquiry. Again, I do not think that the adoption of this method would make an immediate contribution, although it is a useful weapon to have in reserve in one's locker.

Will the Minister look at the yardstick costing procedure within his Department to see whether this can be expedited?

We look at it constantly. We have had a number of discussions with local authorities. I am not aware of any immediate difficulties arising from it. I think that most difficulties have been ironed out. If the hon. Gentleman has any cases, I will look at them.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government upon what general criteria he decided to make grants of 40 per cent. to local authorities to assist in strengthening tall flats as a result of the accident at Ronan Point, Canning Town; and whether he will now reconsider his decision.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what further consideration he has now given to raising the percentage grant that he is providing towards the strengthening of tower blocks following the collapse of Ronan Point.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government why, on 21st October, 1969, he informed the hon. Member for West Ham, North that he would soon be able to make an announcement concerning discussions relative to the 40 per cent. grant towards the costs involved to local authorities in strengthening tower blocks resultant upon the Ronan Point disaster; why by 1st January, 1970, no such state- ment had been made; and when he now expects to make his statement.

I refer my hon. Friend and the hon. Members to the statement which I made on 19th January in reply to the Question by my right hon. Friend the Member for East Ham, North (Mr. Prentice). I was impressed by the cost evidence produced by the local authorities that a case could be made for a higher contribution towards the costs of measures taken on my recommendation, and I have announced an increase from 40 per cent. to 50 per cent. in the rate of grant.—[Vol. 794, c. 57–8.]

Does the Minister realise that, welcome though this increase is, the local housing authorities are having to spend millions of pounds on strengthening blocks, thus making it more difficult for them to provide the new homes which are so desperately needed? Will he look at the matter again as a national emergency, which it surely is?

We shall be having further discussions with the local authority associations on this subject, but I can hold out no hope of increasing the 50 per cent. That very much represents the division of responsibility which the tribunal said existed between central Government, local government, the professions and the industry.

Is not the Minister's obstinacy in not meeting the full cost in direct contradiction of what he was urging previously, namely, that the local authorities, particularly in the sorely pressed areas, should get on with a higher housing programme? The Minister is burdening them unnecessarily.

We are awaiting the results of some appraisals that local authorities are still undertaking.

Can the Minister tell us what facts and figures were available in January this year that were not readily available to him 20 months go? Is it right to saddle the poorer boroughs with a total debt of £12½ million? Will my right hon. Friend do something about it?

The new fact which emerged was that the generous subsidy that the Government are paying to local authorities for new house building has, over that period, gone up from about 40 to nearer 50 per cent. It therefore seemed fair to reallocate the grant for Ronan Point in the same ratio. My hon. Friend is wrong to assume that it is only poor local authorities that are affected in this way. A number of more prosperous boroughs are affected. We have discussed with local authorities how the grant shall be made available between them.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us, relative to work being carried out, when the grant will be paid? Will it be before, after or during the work?

The grant will be made available as expenses are incurred by local authorities on the provisional basis that they do not exceed the 50 per cent.

Does my right hon. Friend recognise that some local authorities have a far greater burden than other authorities? Therefore, will he apply a differential grant scheme to assist those authorities with the greatest burdens?

We have discussed this with the local authorities, but their reaction has not been enthusiastic. However, I propose to discuss further with them the possibility of helping a number of very small local authorities—it would be wrong to identify them now—where the burden is disproportionately heavy.

asked the Minister of Housing and local Government what is the price of an average new house in Great Britain; and what is the average price in the south-east of England.

The average price of a new 3-bedroom semidetached house sold in England and Wales in 1968 was £3,960 and in the south-east region £5,110. Reliable figures for 1969 are not yet available.

Does the Minister appreciate that it is virtually impossible for young couples on average earnings or below to buy houses at these figures with the mortgage rate at its present level? What is the Government's policy to deal with the matter?

I take it that the hon. Gentleman is referring to the disparity between prices in other parts of the country and the South-East. This is nothing new. It has been going on for many years. The pressure of population in the South-East, being greater than elsewhere, produces a reaction on land and property prices.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the high price of construction in the South-East could be affected by the scandalously high cost per unit of accommodation of the Greater London Council's Thamesmead Development in my constituency where units of accommodation are reaching an average of £10,000 per unit? This is a scandal.

I should need notice on the detailed aspects of that question. In public sector housing there is a good deal of direct Government assistance when the properties are completed—much more than under previous Administrations. I take it that the original Question referred to owner-occupied dwellings on the market.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what recent representations he has received from the Federation of Registered House Builders regarding the difficulties of obtaining bank loans to finance housing construction; and what reply he has sent.

Members of the Federation of Registered House Builders have raised this question with my right hon. Friend and with Ministry officials on a number of occasions. He has explained that, within the overriding limits on lending, the banks have complete discretion over how they treat the construction industry, as it neither enjoys special priority nor is subject to special restriction.

Is the hon. Gentleman genuinely concerned to see more houses built in this country? Does he realise that until he gives priority credit facilities to builders he will not see this done?

My right hon. Friend is not responsible for decisions over priorities concerning credit facilities. The general question has been raised on a number of occasions in the past and it has been answered in terms of the general economic position.

Does my hon. Friend realise that the Treasury or the banks need a kick in the pants because some builders are finding real difficulty in getting advances? I do not blame the Government, but the banks do not seem to understand the urgency or their rights of priority in lending to builders.

If my hon. Friend will give me specific information it will be helpful in further consideration of the matter. However, it is only fair to point out that at the end of November, 1969, advances to builders stood at £372 million compared with the highest quarterly figure reached in 1968 of £373 million. It appears from those figures that, although there may be difficulties, they are being somewhat exaggerated.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what is the average subsidy on new council houses from the Government and from rates, respectively.

On a dwelling costing £4,100 and completed in 1969–70, the basic Exchequer subsidy is £148 for 60 years. Some dwellings also qualify for high flats subsidy of up to £26 a year and expensive site subsidy of as much as £40 a year or more. The average rate subsidy cannot be estimated because it varies so sharply and depends on how far rents are pooled.

I repeat the question that I asked the Minister of State for Housing in the debate on 16th November last at column 1194, namely, whether the figures published by the Housing Research Foundation are accurate, that the average subsidy for new council dwellings outside London is £200 per annum and within London £400 per annum? In view of those figures, does the Minister agree that those well able to afford a fair rent should be made to do so?

The hon. Gentleman is making the House suffer from undue repetition, because the answer was given then and it has been given again today. The figure stands at the level that I have already quoted: £148 for 60 years plus these exceptional subsidies to which I also referred on high buildings and on high site costs. The hon. Gentleman overlooks one important factor which I touched on at the end of my original reply, namely, the effect that rent pooling has on properties. It is a gross exaggeration when people constantly say that the majority of council house dwellers in this country are being subsidised. Vast numbers are in fact helping to subsidise their fellow tenants.

Order. Answers, too, are getting lengthy.

Does my hon. Friend agree that if the proposals of the Opposition for the withdrawal or reduction of housing subsidies were put into effect, it would means an immediate increase in rents to a very high level for council house dwellers throughout the country?

It is not just a question of whether the proposals would increase rents. I regret to say that in some parts of the country there are indications that people are being pressurised out of accepting alternative accommodation in slum clearance schemes because they can no longer, under new rent structures, afford the rents being proposed.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what evidence he has received from the Federation of Registered House Builders regarding the expected state of housebuilding activity in the private sector in 1970; and what action he proposes to take in the light of it.

I have studied the annual report for 1969 of the Federation of Registered House Builders which clearly indicates the difficulties faced by housebuilders at present but which also sounds a note of guarded optimism in the section entitled "Future Prospects".

But would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that the building trade is going through as severe a recession as it has ever faced since the 'thirties, and that it is being crippled by rising costs? Does he still endorse the remarks of his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in 1964 that—

Order. No quotations in a supplementary question.

I think that the hon. Member is taking rather too gloomy a view of the future. We had a long discussion on this last week; perhaps he would be kind enough to refer to the points which I made then.

Particularly in view of the country's improved financial position, will my right hon. Friend press the Chancellor to permit the banks to lend to building firms, not just in the neutral position but in the top priority, along with exports and agriculture?

I am happy to leave it to my right hon. Friend to decide when is the right time in the country's economic progress to take a decision of that kind.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many houses have been completed in the public and private sectors in the first nine months of each of the past five years.

I will, with permission, circulate the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is it not a fact that precisely four additional houses only were completed in the last year, as compared to 1964 in total?

I am not sure I understand—

Four additional houses in total in 1969 as compared with the same nine months in 1964.

The hon. Member had better study the figures which I am circulating. I hope that he will welcome the fact that the figures last year were higher than in all but the last of the Opposition years in office and that, in 1963, the figure was only 205,700, as against 266,900 in the first nine months of 1969.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will now state the Government's policy on the Report of the Working Party on Housing Revenue Accounts.

I have nothing to add to the answer to a question by the hon. Member for Northants, South (Mr. Arthur Jones) on 16th December.—[Vol. 793, c. 1124.]

Did not this Committee report nine or ten months ago? Is no policy coming from the Government as a result?

This Committee was looking into very detailed technical questions. Its object was to elucidate and to identify the technical problems of housing revenue accounts. It was circulated with the agreement of the local authority associations, without commitment on either side, which is what they wished to have, but the long-term review of housing finance which has been undertaken will take into account what the Committee told us.

Has the working party considered in detail the difficulty of unfit houses in those towns with a heavy backlog? If so, has my hon. Friend anything in mind so that those old towns could have some particular treatment in the near future?

That was not one of the terms of reference of the Committee, but certainly the question of the financial strain of slum clearance is part of the long-term review of housing finance which we are undertaking.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will make a statement about the availability of land for private housing in the outer Metropolitan area.

The Government wish to see enough land released in the outer metropolitan area to sustain a programme of 35,000 houses a year for seven years commencing 1968. To achieve this programme about 11,000 more acres are needed.

Does the hon. Member appreciate that the difference of 25 per cent. in the cost of houses in the London area as compared with the rest of the country is largely due to the shortage and high cost of land? Does he think that the new proposals will realise enough land to get the prices back to normal?

We very much hope that more land will be released. It would help if the hon. Gentleman could persuade his hon. Friends that any agency, particularly the Land Commission, which is designed to create more land, should have support and not be abused as it is at present.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what progress he has made with his studies of proposals made to him regarding the introduction of legislation to allow local authorities to pay legal expenses to council tenants wishing to move into home ownership in the private sector.

If a council tenant moves out into a house of his own the local authority have power to repay his removal expenses, but not his legal costs. After consultation with local authority and other interests, I am still not convinced it is desirable to amend the law in this respect.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that is a disappointing reply? Would it not be wise to do everything possible to encourage the better-off council tenant to move on to home ownership and so make his house available to those in greater need?

The answer to the main part of the question is that it is desirable to encourage anyone who can do so to purchase his own house; I think that this Government have taken a number of steps in that direction. On the main burden of the question, the point at this stage is to try to persuade local authorities to use what powers they already have. We have been in discussion with the local authority associations, which have undertaken to remind their member authorities of their existing powers, which are not fully used.

Is it not the case that the loss to the Treasury per house-owner is £47 10s. on average, whereas the loss per council house, on the subsidy, is about £30, and that, therefore, if council house tenants transferred in any great and sudden degree to house purchase, the loss to the Inland Revenue would be disastrous?

I take my hon. Friend's point, but it is as well to remember that, as more house building proceeds, the average subsidy per council house tenant from the Exchequer on his property will rise greatly to come into line with the present degree of subsidy to owner-occupiers.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will introduce legislation to enable him to assist local authorities to avoid some part of the increases in rents on municipal houses made necessary by increased interest rates.

The Housing Subsidies Act, 1967, already does this.

Is this the Minister's reward to the City of Birmingham for building 30,000 houses in the last four years, that it has to suffer these unprecedentedly high interest rates? Does he expect the general ratepayer to pay the bill, or should the municipal tenants have a rise in rent?

The first part of that question is a ludicrous proposition, since interest charges affect both the efficient and inefficient local authorities. The question of what goes into the housing management account, and should therefore be properly borne by municipal tenants as distinct from ratepayers, is a matter for local council procedure and local electoral considerations.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will set up a departmental committee to examine the contribution which factory-built prefabricated homes can make to reducing the housing shortage; and if he will consult other Ministers concerned, with a view to the provision of grants for further research aimed at developing high-class prefabricated homes suitable for factory mass production.

The contribution factory-built prefabricated homes can make to meeting housing need is well known and my right hon. Friend has recently urged local authorities to consider the advantages which can flow from their use. Moreover a number of industrialised systems are now well established. Research by the Department is therefore being concentrated on components rather than on new systems, in view of the advantages offered by greater standardisation of these components.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that this sector is still the Cinderella of the housebuilding programme, that the level of research is still far too low, and that, as a result, the nature of the prefabricated houses produced is often abysmal? Would he not accept that, if we are to solve the housing problem in the foreseeable future, prefabricated housing must make a major contribution and that to achieve this there must be more centralisation of research?

There is a good deal of continuing research in this field, and we have no intention of running down this level. I and my right hon. Friend accept that there is so far insufficient use of system building in this country and that there is great scope here for enlarging the housing drive. I do not accept that, in this field, one finds particularly worse designs and construction than in others. On the contrary, in this field there has been and continues to be a great improvement.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that one can have an expansion in industrialised building only where there is an expanding housebuilding programme, and that that condition does not exist at present?

The prospects of enlarging the housebuilding drive are closely tied to using better methods and introducing greater productivity techniques into the industry which produces the houses. I should have thought that that was obvious.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how much public expenditure was incurred on local authority housebuilding in England in 1969; how this figure compares with 1964; and how much of this extra expenditure was due to 1969 standards being superior to those of 1964.

The figures requested for 1969 are not yet available.

Although the figures are not available, would they not be likely to show that although 1969 was a disappointing year, the total national housing achievement under Labour has been infinitely superior to that of any year under the Tories?

I believe that my hon. Friend has made a very fair factual point—[Interruption.]—which is not sufficiently brought out in housing debates. Under the Tories there was a high target, by their standards of achievement—the target was 300,000 or more—but that was at the expense of standards, as anybody who was in local government at that time will recall. Under Labour, on the other hand, the increase in the production of houses has been married with increasing quality.

As the Minister knows, most people will not accept that statement. Can he say how much of this increase in price has been due to S.E.T., the increase in S.E.T., the extra charges which the Government have put on the industry by import surcharges and by the higher cost of money?

I should need notice of those questions to give a precise answer. Broadly speaking, however, the answer is "About 3½ per cent.". I would not accept the hon. Gentleman's rejection of the fact which I put. I happened to be concerned with housing in local government at the time of the famous 300,000 target—

So was I.

and I recall the strong pressure that was put on local authorities to reduce their standards.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many derelict sites were planted or reclaimed in the Bishop Auckland constituency during 1968 and 1969; and at what cost.

A site was reclaimed with grant aid in 1968 and another in 1969, costing £4,023 and £8,441 respectively. Approvals allowing work to start have been given for three other sites at a total estimated cost of £20,000. Two further schemes have received outline approval.

While that answer is satisfactory as far as it goes, may I press my hon. Friend to do everything possible in his Department to accelerate this process, especially in villages, where derelict land has a very bad effect on the general house improvement programme?

I assure my hon. Friend that we are anxious to help. He will be pleased to know that more money than ever before has been allocated for this purpose in nearly all the areas of the North-East, where the grant is 85 per cent. About 50 more acres have been cleared, without grant. My Department will be glad to help in any way it can.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he expects to receive the Report of the Cohen Committee on Housing Associations and Societies.

I hope during the course of this year.

Will the right hon. Gentleman do everything possible to speed up the publication of this report, which is eagerly awaited by the whole of the voluntary housing movement?

Certainly. This is, however, an extremely complex problem and the Committee is having to review the whole structure and financing of the voluntary housing movement. I share the hon. Gentleman's anxiety and I know that Sir Karl Cohen shares it, too.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what estimate he has now made of the probable number of housing completions in 1970.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will make a statement on the housebuilding programme for 1970.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will estimate the number of starts and completions, respectively of new homes in 1970; and if he will take steps to improve the economic prospects of small-and medium-sized building firms.

As recent results have shown, the private sector in particular is very responsive to changes in economic conditions. Performance in 1970 will be affected by the speed with which housebuilding responds to the stimulus of an improving economy and the measures which the Government have taken. But small and medium size firms should benefit from improving conditions and from the growth in the work on improvement of older property which our new grant scheme will encourage.

Can the right hon. Gentleman now give an estimate?

I said in the House last week that I expect the outcome to be very much the same as 1969. It is much too early to be firm because of the imponderables, to which the private house builders have properly drawn my attention.

What effect has the right hon. Gentleman assessed the massive increase in building workers' wages—part of which came into effect at the beginning of this month and which will total 26 per cent. in a year—will have on his estimate?

That will not affect the total number of houses produced this year, which is largely dependent on the number in the pipeline and under construction at the end of last year. This was almost exactly the same as the number at the end of 1964, which hon. Gentlemen opposite have always held out as a sign of the healthy situation of the housing position under the Conservatives.

What emergency measures does my right hon. Friend intend to take? For example, will he restore the full £195 million per annum loans to local authorities to lend to people who cannot get building society mortgages?

I welcome my hon. Friend's interest in this problem. One of the difficulties about home loans this year has, of course, been the fact that a number of local authorities have not been able to get sufficient takers of loans to enable them to advance the full quota available to them. I suggest that we had better leave the figure at £100 million for the next financial year and see how things develop during the year. We have improved the Option Mortgage Scheme and the Government's Save-as-you-Earn Scheme has been welcomed by building societies and is making a substantial contribution.

How many prefabricated houses are likely to be erected by local authorities in 1970?

If the hon. Gentleman tables a Question, I will gladly give him the answer.

Would the estimate for 1970 be higher if the hon. Member for Worcester (Mr. Peter Walker) did not go round the country advising Conservative-controlled councils to build fewer houses? Would my right hon. Friend undertake, if Conservative-controlled councils in the Greater London area continue, for reasons of party political spite, to be deaf to the cries of the homeless and badly housed, not to rule out the possibility of establishing a regional housing corporation to go into the boroughs and house the homeless?

I would not rule out anything that my hon. Friend suggests. I very much hope that, in their increasing propaganda, hon. Gentlemen opposite will draw attention to the rather bizarre views on housing of the hon. Member for Worcester (Mr. Peter Walker) and the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Powell).

asked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning what action he is taking to promote the economic development of Sunderland.

asked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning what steps he is taking to stimulate further the economic development of Wearside.

My hon. Friend will be aware of the substantial encouragement to industrial development in Sunderland which is already provided by the Government's measures of economic and financial assistance to the development areas and of the development of road communications and other environmental improvements in recent years on Wearside.

While I assure my hon. Friend that we recognise that the North-East Coast has received more by way of development aid under Labour than under the Tories, may I ask him to recognise that the problem at present is to direct aid specifically to areas of particular difficulty, such as Sunderland? In considering this, will he consider the provision of employment through public enterprise in factories which are publicly financed?

I assure my right hon. Friend that I share his concern at the present situation in Sunderland. My hon. Friend the Minister of State at the Ministry of Technology is doing everything possible to draw to the attention of suitable firms the advantage of developing on Wearside. We are keeping close watch on the position and we have the prospects of the area very much in mind.

Is my hon. Friend aware that one of the most serious problems confronting Sunderland is the number of males unemployed? Is he, therefore, aware of the type of industry that we need in the region to solve this problem? Is he further aware that many school leavers are unable to find employment for a very long time?

I assure my hon. Friend that I am aware of all these factors, and that the procuring Ministry, the Ministry of Technology, is doing everything possible to ensure that the preponderance of jobs coming into the region is in respect of male employment.

I am sure the right hon. Gentleman is aware that Sunderland gives everybody in the North-East great cause for anxiety, but in answering the Question the Minister of State has gone backwards. What the questioner wanted answered is what is to be done in the very near future, because Sunderland has a higher rate of unemployment than many other parts of the country. [HON. MEMBERS: "Too long. Sit down."]

No, I will stand up.

While I understand the concern of the hon. Lady, I suggest that it is a great pity that her hon. and right hon. Friends, some of whom have made public and frank admissions of failure to understand and act on the problems of the North-East, including Sunderland, did not take action. Then the situation would have been far better than it is at present. It is a pity that they did not take action in the late 'fifties and early 'sixties.

asked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning whether he will make a statement on the discussions between the Northern Economic Planning Council and the Sunderland Borough Council about the provision of opportunities for employment in Sunderland.

The planning council is currently awaiting the views of the county borough council on the suggestion made in the planning council's letter of 10th December, 1969, for joint action to encourage an increase in the supply of skilled labour in Sunderland as an additional attraction to new industry.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Will he encourage those taking part in these discussions to expand them to a working party by including industrialists, employers and trade unionists?

I regard that as a valuable suggestion, but at the moment the planning council is awaiting a reply from the county borough council from the standpoint of the proposition of sponsoring a special exhibition in Sunderland to stimulate interest in training within industry itself and at Government training centres. I take the point made by my right hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning when he now expects to announce a date for the coming into force of the proposed reform of local government.

asked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning when he expects to publish his White Paper on the Reorganisation of Local Government; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning when he now proposes to publish the White Paper on the implementation of the Redcliffe-Maud Report.

asked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning what is his present estimate of the time-table for the implementation of local government reform.

I shall present the White Paper tomorrow, and with the permission of the House, will make a statement. The White Paper will include the Government's estimate of the timetable likely to be required for local government reform.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that it is becoming increasingly clear to many citizens that the present structure of local authorities is simply incapable of performing many of the functions assigned to local government? Is he aware, for example, that in North-East Lancashire the position is quite unsatisfactory? Will he make sure that reform of local government comes into force absolutely as soon as possible?

I am aware that there is a large volume of opinion supporting the points my hon. Friend has made. Certainly all of us on this side of the House and, I hope, hon. Members opposite, want to see reform carried through as soon as practicable.

asked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning if he will make a statement about the deputation he received from representatives of the Victorian Society, the Georgian Group, the hon. Members for Southend, West, and Barking and others about the Government's proposed redevelopment of Whitehall; and if it is now proposed to hold a public inquiry into the scheme which involves the demolition of Richmond Terrace and Scotland Yard.

I am considering the views expressed by the deputation, and a statement will be made shortly.

Would the Secretary of State agree that there has been a great deal of public concern about this? Is it not time that the Government came forward with a statement, which is awaited with considerable anxiety?

I am certainly aware that there has been public concern. I hope that the hon. Member, who was kind enough to attend with the deputation, will agree that it had a very sympathetic reception from the Government. Suppose that we were to decide on an inquiry, there would still be quite complex matters to be decided as to its form, its timing and its scope.

In thanking my right hon. Friend for the sympathetic reception he gave to the deputation, may I ask if he is fully aware of the need both for speed in going ahead with the parliamentary extension, but also for great care in the planning of the Government precinct as a whole? For the latter purpose, is not a full-scale planning commission the best thing?

I am aware of the points my hon. Friend has put, but the notion of a planning inquiry commission, which has been put to me by the amenity bodies, raises in practice a number of very considerable difficulties.

If there is to be an inquiry, could it please be broad enough to consider whether the State should any longer be exempted from its own general planning legislation and whether the office work of Government needs to be done in central London at all?

The second part of the question was of course considered exhaustively in the original Martin Buchanan Plan. On the other part, it is not correct, although it is frequently stated, that the Government are exempt from normal planning requirements. In this case the Government received planning permission from Westminster City Council.

asked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning what research is being undertaken or sponsored by his Department into the effect of air pollution on the weather, both over the British Isles and the world as a whole; and if he will make a statement.

A great deal of research is being done in this and other countries, to help us to understand the effects of air pollution on weather and climate. In this country, the Meteorological Office takes the lead, and has in hand a considerable programme of research with which I am in close touch.

Is the Minister aware that research in the United States seems to indicate that over the world as a whole nearly 1,000 million tons of man-made pollutants are discharged into the air every year and this is having marked effects on the climate, one of which is to produce more rain? As we have enough rain in this country already, should he not give some priority to this research?

I should have thought the winter sunshine pouring through the windows of this Chamber this afternoon was a remarkable tribute to the efforts of this Government.