asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the present value of assets owned by the Transport Holding Company; whether he will publish a list in the OFFICIAL REPORT appropriately categorised; and, having divested itself of its holding in Skyways Limited, what further hiving-off operations he proposes to require it to make.

I refer my hon. Friend to the Transport Holding Company's Annual Report and Accounts for 1969 and to my reply to the hon. Member for Portsmouth, West (Mr. Judd) on 27th January.—[Vol. 810, c. 131–2.]

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on proceeding with the denationalisation of the assets of this undertaking, but will he confirm that his recent statement regarding Thomas Cook & Son represents a precursor in this respect and that it is his ultimate intention to divest himself of all the publicly owned assets in the undertaking named?

Yes, Sir. Any legislation dealing with Thomas Cook would comprise also a provision to wind up the Transport Holding Company.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that, apart from Thomas Cook and the 38 per cent. holding in the Penarth Dock Company, there is not much left to hive off, and will he say in which lots he proposes to offer Thomas Cook: will it be Thomas Cook, Lunn-Poly and the rest, or will he offer them separately?

My advice is that legislation is necessary in order to sell Thomas Cook because legislation was introduced originally to create the Transport Holding Company, the duty of which was to hold Thomas Cook. Since then, the Transport Holding Company was unwise enough to acquire Lunn-Poly, which, I am happy to say, can be disposed of without legislation.

What sort of private company does the right hon. Gentleman expect to purchase these normally profitable hived-off parts of nationalised industry? Will they be such shining examples of private enterprise efficiency as Rolls-Royce, Cammell Laird, Harland and Wolff or Mineral Securities?

I doubt that that question from the right hon. Gentleman deserves to be taken seriously.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he can now make a statement on his examination of rural transport services, in particular the licensing of private minibus services, with special reference to depletion of routes and services in South Worcestershire.

The rural pilot studies and the examination of the licensing system are making good progress. In the meantime, local authorities already have powers to assist rural services, and where existing operators withdraw there is much greater scope for mini-bus operators and others to apply successfully for licences.

But is not my hon. Friend aware that, because of the straitened state of their finances, many smaller local authorities are not in a position to devote funds to rescuing rural transport? Will he give an assurance that in areas like South Worcestershire, now almost denuded of bus services, he will, through the licensing authorities, encourage the employment of private enterprise mini-buses and any transport of a kind likely to prove mutually rewarding to both passengers and the undertaking?

I must tell my hon. Friend that the local authorities of Worcestershire, in financial difficulties though they may be, have agreed to support the rural services of Midland Red to the sum of £28,000. We are reviewing the licensing system to see whether more flexibility for mini-buses, among other things, can be achieved.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects the reports from his two study groups investigating the problems of rural transport in the South of England.

In the Spring, Sir.

Does the Minister think that when the study groups report, the results for what are esentially rural parts of the country will be applicable to the semi-urban areas of the North and industrial parts of the country, which have increasing transport problems?

No, Sir. We might learn something relevant. but the two inquiries are concerned with the rural aspect of the passenger transport problem. I accept that urban areas are by no means free of this exceedingly difficult and obstinate problem.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that when we have the reports we shall have had our third report on rural transport. The first was in 1935. Is not it time that action was taken on the matter and on the broadening of the licensing requirements?

I should like to wait for the two reports, which I think will be helpful, because circumstances have changed fast, and for the worst, over the past few years. I hope very much that the reports will throw light on the action which should be taken.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether the siting of new British airports will be taken into account in the formulaion of regional policy.

Yes, Sir.

Will my right hon. Friend accept that there is a fundamentally different attitude among people in the South-East towards airports from that taken by people in the rest of the country, mainly because the South-East already has access to international airports, and will he look seriously at the site on Severnside which has been discussed as it is the only environmentally suitable site which will be within one hour of Central London by the time that advanced passenger trains are operating in 1978?

We shall give full consideration to all alternatives, but I find that, when an actual airport is likely to come, the attitudes in different parts of the country are strikingly similar.

Is it not a fact that one of the reasons why people living around Heathrow are so hostile to aircraft noise is that the airport is unfortunately situated from the point of view of approach, so that aircraft approaching are compelled to fly over the populated areas of London? Will the right hon. Gentleman recognise the urgent need to reduce the amount of noise at and around Heathrow, and, whatever he proposes to do, will he make up his mind quickly, preferably in favour of an airport on the coast?

The House will have an opportunity to debate that issue, and thereafter the Government will come to their conclusion.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that many people living in the West Country have a substantially different attitude to the siting of a Severn-side airport from that of my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, North-East (Mr. Adley)?

I thought that that might be a possibility.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he is now able to make a further statement about grants to Southern Region railways services not extensively used by London commuters, as a result of his general review.

I have nothing to add to the answer I gave to my hon Friend the Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. J. H. Osborn) and to what I told the hon. Member on 14th January.—[Vol. 809, c. 111–7.]

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a great deal of uncertainty about some of the other peripheral Southern Region services, because so far he has referred only to the services which are considered to be London commuter services? When will he be in a position to tell the House something more definite about the rest of the Southern Region?

As soon as I have completed the review, which is quite a long and complicated question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will make a statement on British Rail's application to him relating to the construction of an hotel over Gatwick station.

This application would have involved an extension of the public sector. It was therefore unacceptable. It would also have meant further borrowing from the Exchequer.

I am sure that the whole House is very grateful for that even more novel illustration of the new Government's policy, or lack of it. Is not he aware that the British Railways Board is also under an obligation to make the maximum use of its existing economic resources? Is not it therefore detrimental to the finances of British Rail and the interests of the taxpayers as a whole that in this instance it is to be prevented from exercising the full use of its existing resources, and that a private firm will be deliberately allowed to go ahead instead?

I have no objection to a private firm taking risks with its own money. I have every objection to British Rail doing so if it is compelled for the purpose to borrow from the Exchequer.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in early January conditions at Gatwick Airport were so chaotic that there were queues for lavatories and food, that men and women were lying on the floor—

That has nothing to do with the Question.

because there were queues for chairs, and that the manager was absent? In those circumstances, will my right hon. Friend view with suspicion any further applications for facilities for nationalised industries?

Greatly as I regret the terrible circumstances related by my hon. Friend, they have nothing to do with me.

Is the Minister's reply to the Question a preliminary to an announcement that he intends to hive off British Transport Hotels Ltd.?

I have not said so.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the names of the three counties in England which have designated the most conservation areas and the three counties which have designated the least, or none.

The counties in England which have designated most conservation areas are Kent (84), Hertfordshire (78), and Warwickshire and Essex (each 75). Two counties (North Riding of Yorkshire and Rutland) have designated one each and Norfolk none. The number of areas so far designated does not necessarily represent the overall intentions of the authority, as many have further proposals for designation well advanced.

While not making too much of those figures at an early stage in the scheme, may I ask my right hon. Friend to keep the matter continually under review and perhaps to encourage certain authorities to get on with their work a little quicker?

Certainly. I am very anxious that authorities designate as many conservation areas as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what proposals he has for improvement of the environment in the county of Durham; and if he will make a statement.

I have made it clear that Durham will receive every encouragement from me with regard to the clearance of derelict land. The county of Durham already has an ambitious list of schemes for area improvement, the redevelopment of town centres, and the clearance of derelict land which I welcome.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that local authorities in Durham are very anxious to build on the substantial improvement in the environment that has been achieved in the past five or six years, and that despite the pledges which he has made, loan sanction is now being denied in my area for very worthwhile schemes? Will he give the House an assurance that the percentage improvement in the expenditure on the infrastructure achieved in the past five years will be maintained over the next five years?

I think that the hon. Gentleman will find that I shall be proud of the substantial increase in the clearance of derelict land in Durham in the coming year as compared with previous years.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the new financial arrangements contained in the Circular 2/70 concerning the clearance of derelict land is a recipe for delay in that respect, and will he revert to the better system of the previous Government of making direct grants for this purpose? We in County Durham have too much derelict land.

I have made it clear in the House that we shall look into any adverse effects of the general formula of Circular 2/70 with regard to derelict land. We are in consultation with Durham County Council, and I do not think that it will be disappointed.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether, having regard to the need to protect the amenities of the Thamesside area in the matter of the Ashlone Road development, he will call in all applications for planning permission relating to this site.

No, Sir.

Will the Minister look again at that answer? Is it not the case that the Thames area has been ruined by over-development and wrong development, by commercial and industrial development? Is it not necessary that if the Thames is to be preserved as an area of amenity, the Government should take some concern about the matter and should not allow doctrinaire belief in private enterprise to override their public duty?

Of course the Government are concerned with the development of Thamesside as a very important matter of environment of the London scene. But it does not follow that I must call in and deal with all planning applications affecting Thamesside. This is a job for the responsible local planning authority.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to announce his proposals regarding the reform of the law regarding compensation for planning blight.

We are carrying out a comprehensive review of the compensation code, but it is too early to say what changes in the law may be needed. As I told my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge (Mr. Lane) on 16th December, I shall make a statement when we have completed our review.—[Vol. 808, c. 1314.]

While I recognise that the problems are very complex, is my right hon. Friend bearing in mind that every week more people are suffering anxiety and inconvenience, particularly in connection with road-building projects, owing to the unsatisfactory state of the law?

I am very well aware of this situation. Indeed, few constituencies are suffering more from it than my own.

If the right hon. Gentleman cannot deal with the whole question of planning blight now, why is there so much delay in dealing with the problem of injurious affection, given that the Government inherited clear proposals from the last Government eight months ago in a draft Bill?

I do not consider that the proposals left to us were in any way clear. They did not deal comprehensively with the total problem. If we are to deal with the matter we must apply the same principles over the whole sphere.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what application he has received from Manchester City Council for planning approvals in connection with the provision of a site for a speaker's forum in the centre of Manchester.

I have not been so approached.

Does the Minister accept that the provision of a site for open-air speakers in the centres of cities is an essential feature of life in many British cities? Will he do what he can to encourage Manchester City Council in this direction, against a background of 49 people having already been arrested in the city for fighting for this basic human right?

So far as planning permission is required, it is a matter for the local planning authority, and one with which my right hon. Friend would not wish to interfere.

Since the Government have decided in the Industrial Relations Bill to restrict the rights of journalists and others to express their opinions about industrial matters, would it not be a good gesture by the Government at least to let local authorities know that there should be speakers' corners in every part of the country?

Of course the Government support freedom of speech, but setting aside a particular area is a matter for the local planning authority.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the median rent of council dwellings; and what is the average fair rent determined by rent assessment committees for Greater London, and also for England and Wales as a whole.

At 31st March, 1969, the average unrebated weekly rent of council dwellings was £2·75 (£2 15s. 0d.) in Greater London and £2·04 (£2 0s. 9d.) in England and Wales as a whole. The average fair rent determined by rent assessment committees in 1970 was £5·90 (£5 18s. 0d.) a week in Greater London and £4·95 (£4 19s. 0d.) in England and wales.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that, in order to prevent scaremongering by certain people who have particular political axes to grind, it would be prudent if he brought forward as soon as possible the outline of the proposals for rent subsidies for tenants in need?

As my hon. Friend knows, my right hon. Friend is engaged in discussions with the local authority associations. I would point out to him that this comparison gives no useful guidance on how it will apply to the local authority system.

The House must get this straight. Will the hon. Gentleman confirm my understanding of his reply, that the difference between the present unrebated average rent level and the likely unrebated fair rent level will be well over 100 per cent. for most council house tenants?

The right hon. Gentleman obviously did not listen to my last answer. I said that the comparison gave no useful guidance to rent increases in the public sector because of the large differences in location, type and condition between the two groups of rents.

Has my hon. Friend seen the details of the G.L.C. rent rebate scheme, which is one of the most generous in the country and allows 17,000 tenants to have generous rent rebates, with the likelihood of that number being increased to over 23,000 in the next two years?

I know the details. We are to have rent rebates in both the private and the public sectors on a scale never proposed before.

Will the hon. Gentleman give an immediate assurance, in view of his statement, that no proposal will be brought to the House to extend the fair rents scheme until a full study has been made of its likely effect on council house rents?

It would be ridiculous to bring forward a scheme without such a study, and of course it will require legislation.

In view of the concern which will arise from my hon. Friend's reply, will he give the figure for a typical flat corresponding to the typical council house, which would give us a better indication of what the proportional rise might be?

The difficulty in this system so far is that fair rents in dwellings so far assessed are of a different kind from those which exist largely for council house dwellings throughout the country. I note what my hon. Friend said, but I cannot give him an answer now.

To say that there is "concern" is the understatement of the year. The hon. Gentleman cannot quote figures and then say that they are meaningless. His Department must have some idea of what the average rise in rents is likely to be as a result of fair rents in the council house sector. The hon. Gentleman's reply appeared to suggest it might easily be up to —3 a week. Is this broadly the case or not?

For the second time, the right hon. Gentleman has not listened to my replies. I gave my original reply in response to the form of the Question on the Order Paper. But I am entitled to point out that the comparisons are not valid for the public sector. I answered the Question which I was asked to answer. What the House must also face, as my right hon. Friend pointed out repeatedly on 3rd November and subsequently, is that any increase for the public sector rents will be phased over a period of years.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will now state the expected total increases in rent likely to be paid by council house tenants as a result of the policy outlined in New Policy for Public Spending.

Under the reform of housing finance the rents paid by council tenants will depend on the fair rent fixed for their dwellings. But these rents will be reduced by rebates for those tenants who cannot afford the fair rent.

Does not the hon. Gentleman recall that in New Policy for Public Spending it was stated that the reduction in public expenditure would be between £100 and £200 million a year by comparison with projections on the basis of the existing system? If that sum is not to come from council tenants, from where is it to come?

There will be a saving to the Exchequer by a reduction of subsidy, though much of this will be offset by additional expenditure on rebates and slum clearance.

Will not two things occur—first, an increase in rents due to saving in subsidies and, secondly, an increase in rents due to going over to the principle of fair rents in the council house sector? Will the Government give some idea of what the average, unrebated fair rent is likely to be?

I hope to make a statement to the House when my discussions with the local authority associations are completed.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will introduce legislation to prohibit local authorities from instructing estate agents to effect sales of local authority houses.

No, Sir. Some local authorities find estate agents useful in selling their houses and I see no reason for depriving them of this assistance.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that no local authorities, within the Inner London area at least, where there is obviously great housing need, will embark on a policy of this kind? Is it not sheer lunacy for such authorities to embark on the sale of council houses, having regard to housing needs? It is not adding insult to injury to expect ratepayers to bear the very high commissions which estate agents would demand for the sale of council houses?

No, Sir. The use of estate agents very often is more economic than the use of a council's own resources. The burden is not entirely borne by the council or the purchaser. It is usually shared.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that there is no decrease in the housing stock whether the occupant owns a house or rents it?

My hon. and gallant Friend is absolutely right. Anyone who purchases a house, particularly if it is outside council property, very often makes a council house available for someone else.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will now place in the firm programme the Preston northerly by-pass.

Preparatory work has not yet reached the stage at which a firm programming decision can be taken.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the economic rate of return on this road would be the highest so far of any major road project in Lancashire and that the reduction in the number of accidents would be very great? Is he therefore treating the project with the urgency that it deserves?

I shall press ahead with this road because I believe that it will result in a considerable reduction in the accident rate. The basic features are now being considered. The proposals for the route will be published in the spring. When the work actually starts depends on programming, about which I hope that a decision will be taken about the end of this year.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if, in view of the technical lead established by the Atomic Energy Authority and Simon Carves Limited in desalination by a freezing process, he will encourage the establishment of a large-scale experimental desalination plant in the United Kingdom.

I am considering a recommendation from the Water Resources Board for expenditure by the Board of over £1 million for the construction of an experimental plant to test a freeze desalination process. The plant would be commissioned and operated jointly with the Atomic Energy Authority and Simon Engineering Ltd. I expect to give my decision on the Board's recommendation very shortly.

I take some enocuragement from that reply. In deciding how far to back this experiment, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, if successful, it could help to call a halt to the progressive inundation of our countryside by reservoirs, could help to avert the water crisis threatened for the South-East in the 1980s, and could make a contribution to the dry coastal areas of the developing countries?

Yes, Sir. We face considerable problems in relation to future water resources and the Government will examine every possibility of overcoming them.

What is the economic basis of this proposal from the Water Resources Board in terms of the cost per thousand gallons? No reference was made to this on Second Reading of the Water Resources Bill.

This is a complicated matter. It depends on the total use made, and so on. I will write to the hon. Gentleman with further information.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that, on existing information, the costs of any desalination programme will render it wildly uneconomic? Will he bring the matter into perspective and say that there is no prospect in the near future of this process resolving our water resources problems?

The costs are high, and it would be wrong to give the impression that the process could solve the problems. Nevertheless it is right to go carefully into the question of future research into possible solutions.

In view of the considerable success of the co-operation between the Atomic Energy Authority and Weir Westgarth on flash distillation, can the right hon. Gentleman say anything about the reasons for the present redundancies at Weir Westgarth and give an assurance that, although the costs may be too high for domestic use, the use of these plants abroad makes research in the field still justifiable?

Export potential is obviously a consideration. I should like further notice of the specific point raised by the hon. Gentleman.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that, if this experiment turns out to be viable and successful, it will not be completely handed over to private enterprise but that the Atomic Energy Authority will be allowed to retain an interest?

I think that the idea, if highly successful, will be handed over to Ipswich Council.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received in support of the Roskill Commission's recommendation of an inland site for a new national airport.

In addition to the Early Day Motion in the name of the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford (Mr. Wellbeloved) and others, I have received 11 representations in favour of the Commission's recommendation.

Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that in South Kensington and other parts of central London we find the noise nuisance from aircraft travelling overhead to Heathrow well nigh intolerable? Would he take note of the fact that a substantial body of opinion is determined that the new national airport shall not be sited at Cublington?

I take note of my hon. Friend's views on the intolerable noise of South Kensington.

Is the right hon. Gentleman quite certain that a third London airport is necessary at all? Has he studied the well-informed article in a recent issue of the Economist, by its aviation correspondent, suggesting that it may not be necessary at this time?

I have studied many articles, all supposedly well-informed and most conflicting on this topic. It is a matter which will be debated in the House and thereafter the Government will reach their decision.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what study he has given to the choice of an estuary site for a new national airport.

This possibility will be taken into account in the Government's study of the Roskill Commission's Report.

Would my right hon. Friend give most serious and open-minded consideration to the possibility of siting the new national airport on Severnside?

We shall give the most careful consideration to all the possibilities.

Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that it would be perfectly possible to put runways at Foulness considerably further away from Kent, thus obviating one of the main objections to Foulness, which is the disturbance to Kent?

I note my hon. Friend's comments.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give new directions to local authorities advising them to disregard the recommendations regarding the keeping of five-year lists of properties which may be compulsorily purchased, contained in Circular 54/55 relating to Part III of the Housing Act, 1957.

No, Sir. The advice contained in that circular sought to ensure that intending house purchasers were aware of any proposed slum clearance action of the council likely to affect the property they were interested in. I think that information of this nature is just as necessary in 1971 as in 1955.

Is my hon. Friend aware that such lists have resulted in considerable hardship to owners, far outweighing any consideration of the protection of prospective purchase, and that very often the first time that owners know that their property is on such a list is when its sale is being negotiated? Will he direct local authorities to curtail these lists as far as possible?

As my hon. Friend knows, on a number of occasions local authorities have been urged to give sympathetic consideration to buying in advance from owner-occupiers who have good reason for selling and who would suffer hardship from inability to do so. I should like to consider what she said, but I am advised that her suggestion would cause more hardship than it relieved.

will the hon. Gentleman ask his right hon. Friend to link the review of compulsory purchase law with a review of planning blight, as there are many constituents of mine in the Chorlton-on-Medlock area of Manchester who are suffering grave inconvenience, not only from necessary building operations which are taking place next door to where they live, but also because they fear that because of planning blight they will not be able to sell their homes for satisfactory sums and will have to accept a knock-down price from the council on compulsory purchase?

I note what the hon. Gentleman says. It is not necessary to draw my right hon. Friend's attention to that suggestion, for the review for which the hon. Gentleman asks is already taking place.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many major road signs there are, between London and Gloucester on the A40 which name the city of Gloucester; and how many of these signs are placed at a distance of more than 38 miles from the city of Gloucester.

Gloucester appears on 21 modern signs of which three are more than 38 miles from Gloucester.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that this is totally inadequate signposting for a capital city of a county? Is he aware that on the same stretch of the A40 between London and Gloucester there are no fewer than 68 signs indicating the city of Cheltenham, which has a smaller population than Gloucester? Would he therefore take immediate steps to end this conspiracy of secrecy as to the whereabouts of Gloucester?

While I am sure that my right hon. Friend would wish to expedite traffic going to any city which was so fortunate as to be represented by my hon. Friend, the fact is that Cheltenham is the first city of traffic importance beyond Oxford and therefore inevitably pre-empts some signs. But that is geography and not some secret malice on the part of my Department.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what action he proposes to take to improve the position of tenants of furnished accommodation, following his consideration of the report of the Francis Committee.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he now expects to receive the recommendations of the Francis Committee in respect of furnished tenancies.

The Francis Committee's report on the working of the Rent Act has been received and will be published as soon as possible. I am now considering what action needs to be taken but I have nothing to say at this stage.

Would not the Secretary of State agree that there are two improvements which tenants of furnished property desperately need; first, that there should be some security of tenure comparable with that of unfurnished tenancies, except, perhaps, where there is the landlord in the same house; secondly, that they should have the benefits of the rent rebate scheme which the Govern- ment are proposing? Do the right hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friend realise that in the big cities there are many people whose permanent home is a furnished or partly furnished flat and that they need something doing for them?

I appreciate the problems, and when the report is published, hon. Members on both sides of the House will find that it has many constructive suggestions for tackling the problems. It is a complicated report and I ask hon. Members to await its publication and to see what action we take.

In the light of his answer, will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House whether the very detailed account of the report recently appearing in a London evening newspaper, by Mr. Des Wilson, was untrue and gave a misleading picture of the report; and, if it were not untrue, how can he tell the House that we have to wait until the report is published when it is clearly available to the Press?

Mr. Des Wilson was primarily concerned with only one aspect, and mainly with the view of the minority part of the report. The details of the report have not been published in the Press to my knowledge. There is a great deal in it which hon. Members should await.

Will my right hon. Friend abolish furnished rent tribunals and transfer the duty of assessing the rent for furnished property to the existing fair rents system?

I note my hon. Friend's comment, but I ask him to await full publication of the report, which is complicated and detailed. The Government will then issue a full statement of their views.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many officials of his Department attended trials of the Dragon Kerb Road Safety Barrier; and when the Road Research Laboratory was consulted regarding an assessment of this barrier.

One member of my Department has attended trials on two occasions. The Road Research Laboratory has been consulted.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this device was featured in the B.B.C. programme, "Tomorrow's World", that it has not yet failed in tests up to a speed of 55 m.p.h. and that if one hits the barrier at 55 m.p.h., one comes away unscathed, which is more than can be said for most barriers along British motorways?

I have a great regard for what my hon. Friend says, of course, but I do not believe that this device has yet been subjected to a sufficiently complete range of tests. Before I thought that I was justified in adopting a new device for such a purpose, such tests would certainly be necessary. I must tell my hon. Friend that I know about the film. My Department suggested to the company concerned that it should make it available but did not receive a very helpful response.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what special action he proposes to take to assist the county borough of Birmingham to maintain its construction of council houses.

Birmingham City Council knows that my right hon. Friend will willingly consider any proposals which it puts to him.

Specifically, I have in mind that the present cut-back in council house building in Birmingham is due mainly to the shortage of building land. Would the hon. Gentleman therefore expedite his consideration and confirmation of the North Worcestershire compulsory purchase order? More generally, would he bear in mind when he announces his rents policy that if it contains a general reduction in or abolition of the general subsidies for council houses, it will inevitably result in a drastic further reduction of council house building in Birmingham and elsewhere?

My right hon. Friend hopes to be able to reach a decision on the compulsory purchase order application very soon. I refer the hon. Gentleman to an earlier answer about housing finance. Negotiations are taking place.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will make a further statement of his plans to increase the availability of mortgages for houses for owner-occupation built before 1919.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he is taking for the further encouragement of home ownership.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he intends to initiate proposals for the extension of the opportunities for house ownership, especially for newly married young people; and what will be the estimated cost to public funds.

I am not yet in a position to make a statement.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in the City of Bradford some 50,000 houses out of the total housing stock of 102,000 were built before the first world war and that much of the impetus of the House Improvement Scheme will be lost if young couples cannot obtain that sort of property?

I will have my hon. Friend's point very much in mind in the discussions.

Is there any truth in all the rumours in the Press about the right hon. Gentleman's ideas for helping young married couples? Can he say how soon he will be making a statement, and whether it will include a reduction in interest charges, which is a large part of the problem?

I hope to make a statement before very long, but I would rather not expatiate at this stage on the different proposals I have been discussing with the building societies and local authorities.

Is there not a fast way in which the Government could take action in this respect? Most mortgages for old property are derived from local authority sources. Would the Minister consider reviewing the annual allocation from which local authorities can lend money for this purpose and increase it as soon as possible?

I very much hope that in this respect we shall be able to do a great deal better than did the previous Administration.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether, in view of the fact that the building 'and construction industry and the timber trade are characterised by a large number of small units, he will consider the use of sampling techniques to replace the collection of statistics on a universal basis, thereby removing some of the administrative burdens imposed on individual firms.

Sampling techniques are already widely used in the collection of statistics from the construction industry. The Standing Consultative Committee for Statistics of the National Consultative Council for the Building and Civil Engineering Industries is examining generally the collection of statistics on construction.

Is the Minister aware that in the context both of the national economy and of regional economies, such as that of the South-West, these industries play a major role, and that any further assistance in reducing the financial overheads arising from the time spent in form-filling will be most welcome and also will provide a stimulus to a more efficient use of resources?

I entirely agree that there is nothing more ridiculous than filling in forms which are a waste of time. I hope that the report will be speeedily available and will be generally helpful.

Would my hon. Friend say what statistical professional resources his Department has and does he consider them adequate to cope with the introduction of sampling techniques for many of the records kept by his Department?

I think they are adequate, but if my hon. Friend has a detailed point perhaps he would put down a Question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will arrange for words of warning or other similar devices to be placed on the road surfaces of trunk roads on the approaches to roundabouts.

Road markings and traffic signs are already provided.

Is the Minister aware that in foggy weather some roundabouts are turned quite regularly into battlefields and that this is often caused by the fact that the driver's attention is directed to the road surface rather than to the signs at the side of the road? Will he carry out experiments in those cases where there have been bad accidents in fog to see whether warning signs written on road surfaces would provide a means of reducing the large number of accidents which occur in this way?

My hon. Friend is on an important point in regard to foggy weather conditions. I am advised that before most roundabouts the signs on roads which motorists observe change from small white lines to longer ones, thus identifying that a roundabout is nearly ahead. If my hon. Friend has a particular roundabout in mind, I shall be glad to look at the details.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to announce his decision upon the Birmingham County Borough's South Aston Redevelopment Order.

The statutory processes will not be completed before March. If there are no further objections, I may be able to announce a decision by Easter.

I hope the Minister will expedite his consideration because the people in this area are living in intolerable circumstances in the interim period awaiting redevelopment, with some houses which are boarded up and others which are lived in but with vandalism rife. Will the Minister do whatever he can to expedite consideration of this matter?

Yes, indeed. This is a very important development area, and I am anxious that we should proceed with it as quickly as possible. In November Birmingham asked for a major modification of the development plan, which was advertised a few days ago, and objectors will have 21 days in which to make representations. We shall proceed as quickly as possible according to the statutory procedures.

Bearing in mind the tremendous demand and enthusiasm for private housing in this part of Birmingham, would my hon. Friend see that at least 50 per cent. of the houses built will be for owner-occupation?

This is a matter for the local planning authority to decide, but it is a principle which we should certainly support.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what estimate he has made of the percentage increase in rates for 1971–72, on the basis of the initial batch of local authority estimates.

None, Sir. A great many rating authorities have still to make their decisions.

Is the Minister aware that there has already been a record number of highest-ever rate increases announced, significantly in the same year as that in which the Government have halved the domestic element of the rate support grant? Will the hon. Gentleman compliment his Tory colleagues in Tory county councils on their sympathetic action in breaking election pledges?

Local authorities are faced with substantial increases in wages and other costs, part of which will inevitably fall on the ratepayer, but central Government grants will cover 57½ per cent. of the increase and the domestic ratepayer will be further protected by a 2·8d. increase in domestic rate relief.

In view of the Government's change of policy on the domestic rate element and rate support grant, would he not accept the estimate made by the Financial Times that the average increase in domestic rates would be between 12· per cent. and 15 per cent. in 1971–72? Would he not regard that as the deepest and most disastrous form of inflation?

This is a purely tentative forecast and there is insufficient information as yet to support it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will seek powers to allow expenditure by local authorities on concessionary bus fares for retirement pensioners under the 1968 Transport Act to be eligible for rate support grant.

No, Sir.

Does the Minister realise that this will cause considerable concern among many smaller authorities? Does he realise that the smaller authorities are not able to introduce concessionary fares because geographically they are away from the centres of communication and therefore the bus fare subsidy has to be greater than in a truly urban area; and that, in addition, for many of the smaller authorities a penny rate will raise only £1,000?

This is a matter for local authorities to decide for themselves. They are spending their own money, and they can make the best judgment of the local needs of their own people.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, following the setting up of the transport authorities, and particularly the proposals for the reorganisation of local government, there is widespread concern that many pensioners who now enjoy concessionary fares might be relieved of the opportunity of using them? In his talks on the future of local government, will the hon. Gentleman ensure that people who now enjoy free or cheap travel—old-age pensioners—retain that privilege?

I repeat that it is for local authorities to decide what best to do with their own money for their own people.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that countless thousands of old-age pensioners are being deprived of concessionary fares, to which they are entitled, by the parsimonious attitude of Tory councils throughout the country? Does he not think that it is high time that Whitehall Tories started to talk to town hall Tories to encourage them to give this facility to old-age pensioners?

The difference between the hon. Gentleman and myself is that we on this side of the House believe that local authorities should make their own judgment about the expenditure of their own money.

While warmly supporting what my hon. Friend has just said, may I ask whether he does not feel that concessionary fares create unfairness between pensioners who can use, or wish to use, public transport and those who do not wish to use, or are unable to use, it? Is not the right course to have proper pensions?

I am sure that my hon. Friend's last point will be noted by my right hon. Friend who bears responsibility for pensions. I agree with him that one of the objections to the fare concession is that it is totally indiscriminate.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the deficit incurred by the South-East Lancashire North-East Cheshire Passenger Transport Authority during its first year of operations; what deficit was originally forecast for its first year of operations; what are the reasons for the discrepancy; and what deficit has been forecast for the current year of operations.

These are matters for the S.E.L.N.E.C. Passenger Transport Authority and Executive to whom my hon. Friend should direct his inquiries.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he is satisfied with the relationship between the housing cost yardstick and the Parker Morris Standards; and if he will make a statement.

The cost yardstick reflects minimum standards based on the Parker Morris Report. The level and structure of the yardstick are under examination in the light of views expressed by the local authority associations.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that these two standards pull against and are directly opposed to each other? Often no tender is acceptable and consequently the local authorities must go out to tender again, which could be a reason for the delay in the council housing programme.

I agree with my hon. Friend that there is a danger that mounting costs can lead to the yardstick hitting standards, as it were, between Parker and Morris. That is why we are looking into the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the number of housing starts, both actual and seasonally adjusted for the three months October to December, 1970, inclusive; and what were the comparable figures for the previous three months.

Starts in Great Britain in the fourth quarter of 1970 were 77,600 compared with 88,100 in the third quarter. The seasonally adjusted figures were 83,300 and 85,100 respectively.

I thank my right hon. Friend for giving me those figures. His reply highlights the importance which we must give to this problem, and I hope that the Francis Report will go at least some way towards solving it.

I share my hon. Friend's hope.

Does the right hon. Gentleman admit that, quite apart from the Government's ideological dislike for council housing, there is bound to be a further reduction in the number of council houses started when, as has already been announced, he reduces the subsidy?

"The present system has led to the existence of a cosseted and privileged class in our society—the council house tenant. These people are jealous of their privileged position—because a council house is a prize hard to come by. … Charge the rich man £1,000 a year rent—that'll sort the problem out".

Squalid.

I am quoting the view of the right hon. Member for Coventry, East (Mr. Crossman).

On a point of order. Is it not entirely out of order to make quotations at Question Time?

I have not yet heard anything which is out of order from the Minister.

The right hon. Gentleman's remarks were made in an interview given to the People on 6th February, 1966. Of course I would not dream of going so far myself. I entirely disagree with what the right hon. Gentleman said, but perhaps it helps to answer the point of the hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun).

Is it not the case that the reduction in housing starts has occurred largely in the local authority sector? On Monday the Minister went to my constituency. Will he also go to boroughs like Croydon where a woman has to live in a car because of the cutback in council housing and make sure—[Laughter.] This is not funny: some people live in cars. Will the Minister go to Croydon and other boroughs like it, including Bexley, which is as badly run as the Government, and ensure that local authorities get back to a reasonable level of council house starts to solve the problem? Will he make sure that his fellow Tories in the local authorities get on with the job which they were elected to do?

I am well aware of the situation which the hon. Gentleman has described. It is part of the ghastly heritage we have received from the Labour Government. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I have asked the London boroughs to build more council houses. I have asked them to release more land to build houses for sale. I am also asking them to set up more housing advisory centres to help sort out people's problems.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will give an estimate of the amount which the direct labour departments of local authorities engaged in new construction will have to pay in respect of the selective employment tax during the financial year 1970–1971, on the basis of the present rates of the tax; what is the equivalent figure in respect of maintenance workers, prior to the tax being refunded to local authorities; and what are the equivalent figures for private contractors.

I estimate that the figures for the directly employed labour of local authorities are £5 million and £17 million. The corresponding estimates for private contractors are £90 million and £40 million.

Do I understand my hon. Friend to say that there is a disparity between the treatment of private enterprise and that of public enterprise in this matter? If so, is he satisfied that it is fair?

Of course I am not satisfied that it is fair. It is part of the ridiculous operation of this ludicrous tax.

Is the hon. Gentleman doing anything about helping the backward areas and gingering them up to carry out their housing responsibilities?

I am not sure what that has to do with the Question. The Question is about selective employment tax, which we on this side of the House are pledged to abolish.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the Government policy with regard to the central Lancashire new town.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will now make a statement with regard to the proposal for a new town in Lancashire.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he is yet in a position to make a statement about the central Lancashire new town.

I would refer the right hon. Member and hon. Members to the statement which I made to the House on 3rd February.

I remember that statement well and was able to ask the right hon. Gentleman a question on it. However, would he bear in mind that one of the fears which North-East Lancashire has, and had under the previous Government's plans, was that young people would drift away from the area and fall for the allurement of a new town? Therefore, will he favourably consider passing on to his right hon. Friend my plea that at some stage North-East Lancashire should be given full development area status to ensure that new industry goes to it?