asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he intends taking to maintain local amenities when motorway service areas are sited in areas of outstanding natural beauty.

It is the practice of my Department to ensure that new motorway service areas meet exacting design standards and blend harmoniously with their surroundings: special attention is paid to landscaping. The development is undertaken in close consultation with the local planning authority.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the grave anxiety in the village of Detling and the neighbourhood of Maidstone about a large proposed service area in that village, on the new M20? Is he further aware that 60 acres appear to be taken up for this, whereas the largest existing service area is 20 acres? Is it not possible to give particular attention to this matter, as this will be one of the approaches to Great Britain when we are in the Common Market and when the Channel Tunnel is built?

Yes, Sir. I am indeed aware of the anxiety there, but it is unjustified. We are taking 65 acres of Honeyhills Wood for the very purpose of ensuring tree coverage of the motorway service area. At least half the site will remain wooded. The formal submission to the local planning authority undertook to ensure a belt of trees 50 yards thick round the site, restriction on the height of buildings and lighting columns, and no vehicular access from the local roads.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many serious accidents involving injury or death occurred on the Newmarket to Norwich portion of the A11 between January and July, 1972; and in what percentage of these cases overtaking was involved.

Seven fatal accidents, 44 involving serious injury and 37 involving slight injury. 16 per cent. of these accidents involved overtaking.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the emergence of the monstrous heavy lorry on British roads, particularly in East Anglia, has meant that we must concentrate our efforts on road improvement by dualling carriageways, of which we have very few, if any, in Norfolk? Do not these figures confirm that if overtaking could be made easier we could cut the casualty rate?

A small sector of this road near Norwich, where there is exceptionally dense traffic, is due for dual carriageway treatment. For the rest, I am afraid that I could not make any early promises.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure us that the heavy lorries to which his hon. Friend has referred will not become heavier still in consequence of our entry into the EEC?

Surprisingly enough, I am answering a Question on that matter later.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will authorise an early start on the Lindale bypass improvement to the A590, in view of the delay in announcing a decision on the Furness Link Road inquiry.

A new line for a bypass of Lindale is part of the proposals for the Barrow (Arnside) Link. It will, therefore, be dealt with in the decision which my right hon. Friend hopes to announce shortly.

Is my hon. Friend aware that hope to announce a decision shortly has been expressed since February, following a meeting with the Prime Minister in Manchester? Is it possible to set a firm date for the Lindale diversion, which I understand will follow the same line, whatever the link road decision, particularly as there has been a fatality on this stretch of road since the Question was tabled?

I am aware of the great delay. I sympathise with my hon. Friend and others in this respect. Unfortunately, because of the connection with the A590 at its eastern end, which will depend on my right hon. Friend's decision, it is not possible to advance it; but as soon as a decision is made we will try to get priority for this section of road.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what estimate he has made of the number of discretionary improvement grants allocated to development and property companies and those received by owner-occupiers.

During the first six months of this year about 57,000 grants were approved in England and Wales for owner-occupiers and about 30,000 for others, including landlords. Information is not collected about the numbers approved for development and property companies and no estimate can be made.

Is the Minister aware that this is turning into the biggest racket of the 1970s? There is a new phrase for it in the property world. It is called "prop and cop". Does he realise that tenants are being turned out by the thousand and that profits are being made by the million, freeze or no freeze? When will he do something about this matter?

It is important to remember that tenants cannot be deprived of their legal rights. During the debate on the Queen's Speech my predecessor emphasised that he was to send out a circular to local authorities—I will do the same—stressing the importance of ensuring that tenants understand their rights.

I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on his new appointment. Will he confirm that the whole purpose of improvement grants is to see that as far as possible and practicable buildings are renovated and not demolished, and that in any case local authorities can use their discretion to turn down applications for improvement grants if they feel that the system is being abused in their areas and there is therefore no need for national regulations?

I believe that if local authorities think there is abuse they should act accordingly. For the rest, it is right that they should continue to have a discretion. I think we are all agreed that improvement grants make a great contribution towards providing homes for people at fair rents in the best possible way.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that many of us on this side of the House have continually expressed the view that the abuse of this grant, in inner London in particular, has got to the point where some governmental action is needed? May I take the opportunity of welcoming the right hon. and learned Gentleman to his new job, and express the hope and—I should like to think—conviction, that as compared with his predecessor we shall have fewer Press releases and rather more action?

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his kind words about myself but he is being less than fair to my predecessor. I am aware of the anxiety that has been expressed on this matter, and I assure the right hon. Gentleman that I am studying the position very carefully.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend consider whether the machinery is adequate to ensure that grants given to owners of private dwellinghouses reach the builders?

If I had any evidence to the contrary I should pursue the matter most energetically.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman able to give any indication of the number of local authorities which have complained to him about this racket?

No one has complained to me before this afternoon, but I have no doubt that representations have been made. I am looking into the whole question, because I am aware of the various anxieties that have been expressed about the way in which these improvement grants are being used. I think that, generally, it is a success story, but I am prepared to investigate any complaints of abuse that arise.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether, in view of the increasing evidence indicating widespread use of house improvement grants for speculative purposes, he will introduce legislation to eliminate such use of the grants.

No. If a local authority takes the view that the approval of a particular grant application will result in abuse and will not help to solve local housing problems, it has powers to refuse to make a grant, and should exercise them.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman take steps to ensure that the London boroughs in particular publish the figures for grants, as between private owner-occupiers and the land speculators, because quite clearly they are seen to exist in the Department? More important, will he do it because there may well be a senior Minister in the Government who is at this game?

It is true that in the inner London area there is a higher proportion of grants in respect of tenanted accommodation than in respect of owner-occupiers. The figures that I gave earlier covered the whole country. It is important not to make these wild allegations about speculation, and it is important that particular cases of abuse should be looked at. We ought to get this in the right perspective. Last year 199,000 improvement grants were given. That was 23 per cent. more than the year before and 83 per cent. more than the year before that. In the first nine months of this year local authorities have approved 226,000 improvement grants. This is an enormous contribution to providing better homes for more people. I will certainly consider very carefully any evidence of abuse, but the prime responsibility rests with the local authority. The figures that I have given prove what progress has been made.

Is it not true that if over the last 30 or 40 years a number of people—call them speculators if hon. Members wish—had not purchased old and under-used houses and turned them into flats there would now be tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, more homeless people?

That is so. We have also to ensure that in an area like London the tenants of larger landlords have the opportunity for improvements as well as owner-occupiers or the tenants of small landlords.

Is the Minister aware that his refusal to introduce legislation dealing with this matter make it imperative that we have an inquiry into the points that have been raised? Is he aware that it is no use talking about the number of grants? What we want to know about is the quality and the standard, and to whom and by whom these grants have been allocated.

This is primarily a matter for the discretion of the local authority.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will now consider prohibiting the manufacture of chopper style high handlebar bicycles for children, in view of recent statements on their safety record.

I have arranged for special studies of this matter to be made by my Department.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that answer will be widely welcomed? I accept that reputable manufacturers of these high rise children's bicycles have included some safety factors—such as handlebar height restrictions and warnings about double riding—but a recent article in the British Medical Journal suggests that there was an accident rate of about 69 per cent. for these bicycles though they form only 20 per cent. of the overall total. As children's lives are at risk, a departmental inquiry is probably the best way to get at the facts and see the whole national picture, so that the risk will not be intensified.

I very much appreciate the restraint with which the hon. Gentleman has approached the matter. I am sure that he is right in saying that an inquiry is necessary, and I can tell him that the largest manufacturer in this country was the first to suggest a visit by an official from my Department.

While accepting and agreeing with what my right hon. Friend has said, may I ask him to recognise that the survey to which the hon. Member for Derby, North (Mr. Whitehead) referred was a limited one, including only 11 cases? Will my right hon. Friend refer to a much more extensive American survey, which showed that there was no extra risk from this kind of bicycle?

My hon. Friend is right. The survey on which the article in the British Medical Journal was based was a limited one, and it is important that further inquiries are made before anybody reaches a conclusion.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that any form of transport can be dangerous if wrongly used or unscientifically modified, as has happened with a number of conventional bicycles which children have recently modified? Would he agree that the Raleigh chopper, as distinct from other types of high rise bicycles for which, unfortunately, the word "chopper" has become a generic term, is a safe bicycle, and that, as demonstrated by the hon. Member for Nottingham, South (Mr. Fowler), it has undergone extensive tests by independent bodies in this country and in America? If the right hon. Gentleman does not accept that, I hope that he will come to Nottingham and see the great care and attention that is devoted to safety factors in the design of the chopper bicycle.

I do not think that the hon. Gentleman need concern himself unduly. Nothing that has been said so far carries any reflection against the Raleigh Company. It was that company itself which responsibly suggested a visit by an official from my Department, and the visit will take place very soon.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will state the average level of increases in council rents in October.

Out of nearly 5 million council tenants in England and Wales approximately half had no increase in October. The average in rents met by council tenants over the whole of 1972–73 is, on the best estimate I can make, about 35p.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that council tenants are bitter about the vindictive increases in rents imposed by the Government, which have been followed by a wage freeze, equally imposed by the Government? Will the hon. Gentleman assure us that there will be no further increases in rents until incomes have increased substantially?

The hon. Gentleman will not expect me to agree with his opening remarks. The Housing Finance Act was debated somewhat lengthily during its passage through the House, and the House knows the difference of opinion between the two sides. I could not accept what the hon. Gentleman says.

Will my hon. Friend take positive steps to introduce legislation to sell council house tenants—[Laughter.]—to sell council houses to tenants? Will he put them in a position to protect themselves from increases in rents by allowing them to purchase the houses in which they live?

My predecessor and I have both been extremely anxious to encourage the sale of council houses, and a circular strongly recommending this course of action was sent out recently.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in my constituency there are a number of council tenants who resent having to pay increased rents when they read that Ministers who have had their salaries doubled have tax-free, rent-free flats and houses worth thousands of pounds? They suggest that the Ministers concerned should pay the economic rents for those properties especially as, in addition to their use, they get free coal, heating, lighting, cleaning and everything that goes with them.

That is another question.

Can my right hon. Friend say how many rent reductions there were in October, as against rent increases? If he cannot answer that now, when will he be in a position to let us know?

If my hon. Friend would like full details, perhaps he would put down a Question.

Is it not the case that the Minister was mixing two mathematical processes in his first reply? Is it not correct that the average would be higher if it were worked out on the basis of where the rent increases took place in October, and that he has overlooked the fact that many of the tenants who did not pay an increase in October did not do so because, due to pressure by the Government under the Housing Finance Act, increases were imposed in the previous April?

Yes, Sir. That is precisely why I gave the figure for the average increase paid by council tenants for the whole of 1972–73.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will seek powers to reimburse local authorities for additional administrative expenses caused by delays by his Department in replying to applications made under Section 62(4) of the Housing Finance Act, 1972.

No, Sir. I cannot accept there has been any unreasonable delay by my Department. For 1972–73, councils' housing management costs are admissible in full for the purpose of rising costs subsidy.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the London Borough of Havering made application for a lower rent increase on the day the Act received the Royal Assent, but, having received no reply by 1st September, it was legally obliged to send out notification of a £1 a week rent increase from 1st October, whereas on 11th October it was informed by telephone that the increase should be only 90p? As it will now cost the ratepayers of Havering £1,100 to send out revised notices to its 14,000 tenants, will the hon. Gentleman accept the Government's full moral obligation to defray the expense of so doing? What does he propose to do about it?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I was not in the Department at the time. However, I am told that the Department had to ask for additional information from the London Borough of Havering, but the authority said that it was too busy to provide it, so in the event the application had to be decided without this further information. Those are the facts which I have been given and, if that is the position, I must say that the hon. Gentleman's case has been somewhat over-stated.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the deliberate delays by the Labour-controlled London Borough of Havering in implementing the Housing Finance Act have in the end cost the tenants extra now than they would otherwise have had to pay?

I note what my hon. Friend says, and I am glad that the London Borough of Havering has now implemented the Act.

Is the hon. Gentleman telling the House that he and his Department take decisions on proposed rent increases or reductions on the basis of absent information?

No. The decision was taken but it would have been easier to have decided this matter earlier if the London Borough of Havering had been prepared to provide the information rather than to say that it was too busy.

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

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment approximately how many tenants' rents he estimates will be increased by an average of a further 50p in April, 1973, under the Housing Finance Act; how many additional tenants' rents will be increased by a similar sum in October, 1973; and if, in view of the rise in the cost of living involved, he will now withdraw the requirement to impose these and the current rent increases.

Because some rents are likely to be approaching very near to the fair rent level, it is impossible to make an accurate estimate in the terms of the hon. Member's Question. The answer to the second part of the Question is, "No, Sir."

Will the Minister answer two questions? First, is he prepared to meet a national deputation representing the trade unions, the Labour Party, the councillors and the tenants' association? Second, will he admit that those tenants whose rent was increased by less than £1 by the Government last October will still have to suffer additional serious increases through the Government- appointed Rent Scrutiny Board, against whose decision there is no appeal?

The hon. Member knows as well as anyone else the terms of the Housing Finance Act. Rents are to be raised, in stages, to the fair rent level. Some rents are already approaching that level and those tenants who cannot afford to pay a fair rent will be protected for the first time by a national rebate scheme. This is a substantial advance.

Will the hon. Gentleman now admit that the Housing Finance Act was introduced in those days of glorious rapture when the Government were not taking inflation seriously? Looking back it can be seen that we had a rise in housing costs almost unparalleled in our history. Will the hon. Gentleman now follow the example of a great number of his ministerial colleagues and accept that the Government's housing policy over the last two years has been disastrously inflationary, and that if there is to be any successful attempt to bring inflation under control there must be a major reversal of policy?

The right hon. Gentleman will not expect me to accept what he says. The policy of indiscriminate subsidy followed by the previous Administration was far more inflationary than the present policy. A policy of fair rents with rebates for those who cannot afford them, in the public and private sector, is one of the greatest advances in housing which this country has had.

Will the hon. Gentleman state how many of the 750,000 council tenants estimated to have become entitled to rent rebates last month are actually in receipt of this means-tested benefit?

If the hon. Gentleman wants the exact figures I will try to find them, if he will put down a Question.

On a point of order. I am sure that the Minister has overlooked my question about receiving a deputation.

If the hon. Member wishes to bring a deputation to see me perhaps he will be kind enough to write to me, and I will consider the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the number of psychiatrists and psychologists currently employed in his Department and the number he expects to appoint during the next two years.

Four, Sir. I do not expect to make any further appointments during the next two years.

Is not that rather odd, in view of the Community's proposals that there shall be stringent harmonisation of driving licences throughout the Community very soon, which will involve medical and psychiatric examination? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman consult a psychiatrist to ascertain whether this expensive proposal is at all realistic?

Unfortunately, we do not employ any psychiatrists. I am aware of the draft Community directive, but it is only in draft, and there is no indication yet of what the proposed tests or standards will be. Therefore, that situation can be allowed to develop.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman reconsider the number of psychiatrists that he proposes to appoint and attach a psychiatrist to the county planning authorities, so that we can begin to understand some of the schizophrenic attitudes to planning applications?

I would do almost anything to help the hon. Gentleman to understand, but I do not think that it can be done at public expense.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when progress on the design and surveying of a major road link between Sheffield and Manchester will be sufficiently advanced for a route to be published, and for those concerned to be consulted.

The scheme for a new Manchester-Sheffield route is in the Trunk Road Preparation Pool. Detailed investigation of possible lines is about to begin with the aim of publishing proposals in about two years' time. The usual consultations will be undertaken as soon as the preliminary proposals are sufficiently advanced.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many local authorities, chambers of commerce and industrial associations welcome not only this decision but the fact that there is an extension of the Manchester motorway link? Is there not a case for greater publicity for what is happening over the intervening two years, so that not only those who support these proposals but those who oppose them may be better aware of what is likely to be announced in two years' time?

The discussions that will be taking place over the next two years will include discussions with one of the statutory authorities concerned—the Peak Park Planning Board—which has already indicated its opposition to, or its doubts about, this road scheme. Certainly, after the confidential discussions of a technical nature have taken place, my aim is that we should publish the draft proposals as soon as possible, so that full public participation can take place.

I welcome the fact that action is being taken on this point, but is it really necessary to wait two years before the public inquiry and discussion can proceed, so that we can have a firm decision about the motorway, which is an essential part of the industrial and economic planning of the development of the Yorkshire region?

As the right hon. Gentleman will know, this is, in an environmental sense, a very sensitive route. It involves a large number of technical issues which have to be gone into to see how we can meet the environmental objections. If we can speed up the process so that it takes less than two years I shall be very happy; but it would be wrong to mislead the House, and it may well be two years before we can publish.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a further statement on his discussions with the European Economic Community regarding the limits on the size of heavy lorries permitted in the United Kingdom.

At the Ministerial consultations in Brussels last week I again made clear the United Kingdom's opposion to the overall weights and particularly to the axle loads proposed by the Six. No decisions were taken, but the issue will be considered again at another meeting of the Council of Ministers before Christmas.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us are delighted at the splendid battle which he has been putting up to save Britain from the road congestion and massive road expenditure which would be involved in any such proposal? Is he hopeful of a satisfactory outcome? What happens if no agreement is possible?

I am obliged to my hon. Friend for what he has been good enough to say. As to the satisfactory outcome, naturally, I cannot make any certain forecast before the consultations at the end of the month. If I were called upon to express an opinion, I would say that I cannot believe that the Council of Ministers would wish to come to a decision on what seems to me an unsatisfactory compromise just a few days before our full membership.

Could not the right hon. Gentleman easily satisfy opinion in this House by saying quite simply now that he will in no circumstances accept these EEC proposals for still heavier lorries?

I would hate to satisfy opinion now, only to disappoint people later. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] I will not follow the example of right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite. I will do my best to sustain a case which I believe to be right. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman would be the first to realise that it is a little difficult at the moment for the three acceding countries, who do not have a vote until 1st January.

I welcome the right hon. Gentleman's assurance that he will do his best to sustain our interests in this matter, but does he not appreciate that he will be judged at the end of the process by what he achieves rather than by what he says, and that the whole country, having a great concern in this matter, will judge in the wider context the present Government's ability to look after our national interests in the enlarged Community? Will he not agree to anything until we are full members? It would not be unreasonable for this decision, which has come about after the negotiations, to be deferred until after 1st January.

I shall certainly be inspired by the right hon. Gentleman's kind words. I accept that I shall be judged by what happens and not by what 1 now say. This is why I seek, in an atmosphere of negotiation, to be somewhat restrained.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will take steps to prohibit heavy lorries from minor roads and villages situated on them.

Local authorities have powers for this purpose. Their use is governed by the availability of alternative routes and the need to provide access to premises.

Does the Minister realise that many people already feel that the quality of their lives has been threatened by the heavy lorries already on our roads? Is he further aware of the feeling in the country that, when he is finally bullied by French commercial interests into accepting 40-ton lorries, these lorries must be restricted to motorways and major trunk routes?

This has not much to do with French commercial interests. As to the quality of people's lives, the hon. Member and others really must reflect that the heavy commercial vehicle plays a large part in the economy of this country and therefore in ordinary people's lives. It has enormous advantages as well as disadvantages.

Thinking of the very narrow roads, particularly in the West Country, will my right hon. Friend see that in future the maps given to lorry drivers in EEC countries are marked accordingly? If they come at night, they often do not know that they cannot use these very small roads.

I assure my hon. Friend that careful thought is now being given to advisory routes, and particularly to giving advice to foreign drivers.

Can the Minister tell us where he gets the miraculous figure of £200 million additional damage from heavier lorries? Is he aware that most people who have tried to ascertain the basis for these calculations have found none at all?

I have every sympathy with the hon. Member in his failure. All that I can do is use the resources available to me to make the best estimate of the consequences if the axle loads went up by the amount now suggested.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the procedure for notifying river authorities of any pollution hazard that may arise from a road accident involving tanker vehicles.

I am sending my hon. Friend copies of my Department's circular about procedure on oil spills and of Home Office guidance to fire brigades about other dangerous substances. I understand that the Chemical Industries Association's TREMCARDS advise drivers of road tankers carrying dangerous chemicals to notify the police of any spillages and that they in turn inform river authorities.

I thank my hon. Friend, but I have already seen his circular. In cases of this kind should there not be a statutory obligation to notify river authorities of a spillage, comparable to the obligation, under the Pipelines Act. 1962, on operators of pipelines?

I do not think that it is always necessary to have statutory obligations. What matters is whether the job is done, and I am satisfied that in the vast majority of instances it is done conscientiously.

Are there any readily available figures for the number of times the police have not been notified?

No; we do not keep figures of the number of times that things do not happen.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what changes he is considering in his policy for the preservation of the green belt.

None at present. A general statement on green belts, following a review of the procedures for dealing with them, was made on 27th September, copies of which are available in the Library.

How does that answer square with the fact that, planning permission having been given for a prison in the village of Bovingdon, shortly afterwards my right hon. and learned Friend's predecessor gave planning permission for 200 houses for commuters outside the village, in green belt land? Is this not an intolerable attack both on the village of Bovingdon and on the green belt policy of the county of Hertfordshire? Will my right hon. and learned Friend come and see for himself the damage which has been done?

That is a particular case, which does not seem to arise immediately out of the Question. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and Development has, I believe, written to my hon. Friend about the matter. As far as I can judge, the decision is not out of line with the general policy statement, though each case must be considered on its merits. As for the general question which my hon. Friend has raised, I take the opportunity of saying that I have read the recent booklet which he and some of my other hon. Friends have published, called "Need House Prices Rise? "—[Interruption.]—for which I have much sympathy, not least with what they have to say about the green belt.

Will the Secretary of State accept that we all applaud the policy of preserving the green belt, but that the danger is of nibbling at it? I do not know of the case to which the hon. Member for Hemel Hempstead (Mr. Allason) referred, but a dozen such nibbles can totally destroy the green belt. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman wishes to learn something about keeping down house prices he should adopt the policy put forward by the Labour Party and introduce public ownership of land, and repeal the Housing Finance Act.

In the attempt to keep house prices down, or to keep them stable, I shall certainly not follow the line adopted by the Labour Government, who put them up. As for general green belt policy, I believe that nibbling at the green belt is wrong. The approach of my hon. Friend in his pamphlet is correct. He said:

"We could perhaps recommend a regular review with a principal objective of ensuring a genuine green belt round each of the conurbations and most significant towns at an early opportunity, and an open mind about releasing the grey areas for development."

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the Lea Valley runs through Hertfordshire. Although technically it is green belt, it is far from green. The horticultural industry would welcome the planting of houses. Will my right hon. and learned Friend review his green belt policy not only in the Lea Valley but in all areas of derelict glasshouses?

I am willing to look at that. It is another point which is taken up by my hon. Friend in his booklet.

In view of the approach of the reorganisation of local government, will the Secretary of State ask the Minister for Local Government and Development to look carefully at the structure plans of the new counties to see that within the existing green belts they do not make excessively generous allocations of land for residential purposes, which would make it difficult for those who are trying to rebuild the cities to do so successfully?

I am sure that those are considerations which should be borne in mind, and that my right hon. Friend will take note of the hon. Member's point.

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

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement about the present level of local authority house construction.

No limitations are placed by my Department on local authorities who wish to produce building schemes. I am particularly anxious that in areas of housing need there should be a high level of building of all kinds.

Is the Minister aware that in the first half of 1972 compared with the first half of 1970 there has been a fall of 29,000 in the number of public sector houses under construction? The number of starts has gone down by 6,500 and the number of completions has dropped by more than 13,000. The Minister's immediate predecessor was an abysmal failure.

The figures for London show that public sector starts, private sector starts and local authority tenders approved for the first nine months of the year are substantially up.

Will the Minister treat this matter with a little more urgency and not evade the question by giving figures for only one part of the country? Is he aware that the situation is a great deal worse than my hon. Friend suggested and that the level of public sector starts in the third quarter of this year—the last quarter for which we have figures—was the lowest for ten years? In many places—Birmingham, for example—the matter is now becoming desperate, and there is no sign of an upturn. Will the Minister stop giving evasive answers? We know that he is capable of better than that, because we have seen him in action on the Housing Finance Bill. Will he announce a policy for reversing the disastrous trend?

No limitations are placed by the Department upon local authorities who wish to produce building schemes. If local authorities, including Birmingham, wish to do so, my Department will be glad to consider them.

Is it not best to consider housing starts in all sectors rather than try to separate them into council, private and other dwellings? Will my hon. Friend confirm that housing starts in the last year have been far superior to anything achieved within the last 6 years?

I certainly agree that we need to look at the figures as a whole. I also believe that rather than adopting the blanket approach followed by the Opposition we should seek to achieve a higher level of building of all kinds in areas of stress.

I must press the Minister on this point. Is he not aware— since he says that all local authorities are free—that the present cost yardstick is now a serious deterrent to contractors in parts of the country? In spite of what the hon. Member for Southampton, Test (Mr. James Hill), said total starts in the private and public sectors are nowhere near the level reached in four out of the six years of the Labour Government.

Total starts are fairly substantially up on last year. As he knows, my right hon. Friend, the former Secretary of State for the Environment, announced proposals during the Queen's Speech concerning the yardstick, and if local authorities are in difficulties I hope that they will study my right hon. Friend's words very carefully.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will seek to obtain from the building societies the number of first-time borrowers in the Greater London Council area earning under £35 a week who got mortgages in the first quarter of 1972, and the percentage of all mortgages given in the Greater London Council area this represents.

I regret the information is not available in the form requested. But in the first quarter of 1972, it is estimated that 8,000 mortgages, or 59 per cent. of all mortgages granted by building societies in the Greater London area, went to first-time purchasers.

I, too, regret that the information is not available along the lines sought. Does the Minister agree that it becomes a wicked mockery for a Conservative Government to keep nagging people such as those who live in my constituency and in the rest of London about taking out mortgages to buy property when their incomes make it impossible because of the astronomical level of property prices in the London area. All hon. Members will be familiar with the number of people who bring this problem along to their surgeries week after week. They cannot be considered properly for a house on the council list and they cannot be successfully considered for the private property market. When will the Minister do something about it?

Greater London presents special difficulties to first-time purchasers because of the price of property there. The Nationwide Building Society information is most relevant to the question, in that it shows that 22 per cent. of the society's mortgages in London and the South-East went to borrowers with incomes of up to £35 a week.

Is it not time the Minister got tough with the building societies and insisted, particularly for young couples of 18 and 19 who are now able under the law to take out a mortgage, that 100 per cent. mortgages for 30 or 40 years should be granted? Why does the Minister leave it to the building societies instead of taking action himself?

First, the building societies have been extremely helpful through the mortgage option schemes, where there is a considerable increase in the numbers of 100 per cent. loans given to the very categories of people about whom the hon. Member is concerned. Furthermore, the figures that I quoted excluded local authority mortgages, and at least 30 per cent. of those are 100 per cent. loans.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment he has made in planning future transport policy of the likely world oil shortage within the next 10 years.

As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry indicated on 13th November, prospects for oil and for other sources of energy are kept under continuing review.

Is it not unwise to have a transport policy which makes us all too dependent on cars and road haulage if the growing demand for oil plus restrictions on supplies applied by some of the oil exporting countries will put a question mark over the continuing availability of imported oil at prices which the country and consumers can afford?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the factors to which he refers are kept very much in mind.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that this is becoming a Community problem? If he does, will he consult M. Spaak, director-general of Euratom, in view of his contention that our oil resources in the North Sea should be treated as a Community asset and there should be freedom of establishment under the Treaty of Rome?

That is a question for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that an oil crisis is building up, and will he in his Department give consideration to the better use and greater use of electric traction? Does he agree that perhaps the greatest mistake ever made in many of our towns was the removal of the trolleybus, and will he press ahead with research into electric traction with that in mind?

As to the likelihood of an oil crisis, it is possible to exaggerate such matters, I must again say that this is a matter for my right hon. Friend. As regards the trolleybus, I am not at all sure that the day will not come when we re-invent the tram, and, if that happens, it will be a singularly bright feature in our march through the technological revolution.

What progress is my right hon. Friend's Department making with rapid personal transit systems, such as cab-track, with small electric vehicles to overcome the difficulty?

That arises on another Question, but I assure my hon. Friend that rapid transit systems are being carefully examined.

Although the question regarding oil may not be his direct concern, will the right hon. Gentleman bear the point very much in mind in considering the future of British Railways and the need for support to keep the present system viable for both freight and passengers, as well as projects to bring back the tram, to which he rightly referred, or some equivalent form of efficient public transport?

No one knows better than the right hon. Gentleman the massive support which we have given to British Railways.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many local authorities now permit the sale to tenants of local authority council houses.

In the third quarter of 1972, 441 local authorities in England and Wales sold council houses.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer, but is he aware that, since the circular went out, some large local authorities have reversed the policy, preventing tenants from buying houses, and does he accept that this spiteful political move is bad for all council house tenants who wish to become home owners?

It is certainly in the interests of tenants who wish to do so to be able to buy their houses. There are growing demands from them to be allowed the right to do so, and I have every sympathy with that wish.

One recognises the ideological differences between the two sides of the House on this issue, but will the Minister reconsider his ideological blanket advice to local authorities to make houses available for sale to tenants? Will he, for example, consider what was said in a recent letter to The Times from a correspondent who pointed to the problem in country areas where virtually all houses coming up for sale are snapped up by town dwellers and commuters at prices beyond the means of farm labourers, for example? As the only source of housing available at a low price is the rented council house, will the hon. Gentleman acknowledge that, if such houses are to be sold, there will be no prospect of housing the people in such areas in future?

I shall study the letter, which I have not yet seen, but the point we are making is that these are sales to sitting tenants. If sitting tenants wish to buy their houses, they ought to have the right to do so.

Will the hon. Gentleman accept that there is at least as grave a shortage—if not a greater shortage—of reasonably rented accommodation in a market which is contracting as there is of properties for owner-occupation? If he accepts that, as most people informed in these matters do, why do the Government persist in pursuing an indiscriminate policy of trying to get council houses sold off in this way? Where local authorities wish to build for sale as distinct from selling rented properties, why does he not allow them to do so instead of stopping them?

There is a difference between the two sides of the House on this matter. I have always failed to understand why the Labour Opposition would forbid council tenants to purchase where they wish to do so. The Opposition would deny tenants that chance, and this is a fundamental difference between us. I shall do everything in my power to encourage local authorities to sell and to encourage local authority tenants to buy.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will report on progress to restore the 9,000 acres in the Yorkshire and Humberside region deemed by local authorities to require treatment for dereliction.

Local authorities in this region have made a good start since the introduction of the present Government grants in 1970, and if the hon. Member would like to have the details of what has been done I should be pleased to send them to him. This work is continuing, and I see no reason why local authorities in the Yorkshire and Humberside region should not achieve our objective of clearing the hard core dereliction by the end of this decade.

I thank the Minister for that reply, but will he consider greater involvement on the part of the community industry experimental scheme in the dere- liction problem? Is he aware that the currently successful Community Industry Experiment in the Hemsworth and Mexborough area is embarking on useful clearance work and reconstruction tasks, and it has been well received by the public locally and supported by the local authority? Is not this approach capable of wide application throughout the region, to support the good work which is now going ahead?

Yes, Sir; we are anxious to encourage that sort of assistance in this work. What I do not wish to encourage too much is a disregard of the real clearance of derelict land in favour of the Operation Eyesore efforts although these are very good and achieving great success. We want the clearance of the derelict land as well as the Eyesore operations.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if his Department will study the contribution which could be made by the tram in solving urban transport problems.

My Department has a programme of studies on new or improved systems of urban transport, including vehicles on segregated track.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that encouraging reply, showing that his Department has not closed its eyes to the value of the electric transport systems to which reference was made a few moments ago, and I refer him to a book, by a near neighbour of his called "British Electric Tramways ". Will he do all he can to ensure that his officials look carefully at urban transport systems, particularly tramways, which have been developed in many Continental cities which have had the chance to modernise their urban transport methods?

I take due note of the advice which my hon. Friend has given, and I cannot wait to read the book which he has recommended to me.

The House will be grateful for some of the Minister's replies on this subject today. Will he give an assurance that he is treating-with the utmost urgency the application by the Tyneside Passenger Transport Executive for a rapid transit system?

Yes, Sir, I am dealing with the matter urgently, and I have prmised the Executive a decision by the end of the year.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the future development of Humberside and the conclusions reached by the Government on the Humberside feasibility report and any additional advice and information available to them since the publication of that report.

I hope to be able to make a statement shortly.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware of the great concern caused on Humberside by the statement in Leeds of the Minister of Local Government and Development recently that the Government were considering not going forward with the whole of the plan outlined in the Humberside feasibility report? Is he aware that we have been waiting for the end of 1972 to receive a detailed statement of Government policy and that this is all the more urgent now because the chief planning officer in Hull has said that although there are possibly signs of an upturn, once again the past year has been a story of continued economic decline on Humberside?

I am aware of the interest in this report. The report suggested that decisions were needed before 1972 at the earliest. This was of course a consultative document. We have also to bear in mind the considerable change that has taken place in the estimates of growth of population since the report was commissioned. That is certainly a new factor.

Does the Minister agree that despite his Government's efforts—to give the devil his due—there is still an imbalance in Humberside? Does he accept that in the main this is due to a lack of investment and confidence among business men on Humberside? Now that EEC entry is imminent, will he agree that the biggest thing the Government can do is to speed up work on the M62?

That is perhaps another question. There are many factors to be considered, and 1 will certainly bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman has said.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will introduce amending legislation to remove the present exemption from control of discharges of sewage from all vessels, including naval vessels, in controlled waters.

My right hon. Friend the previous Secretary of State and I discussed the Third Report of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution with the commission in considerable detail. The report includes recommendations on the subjects to which the hon. Gentleman refers, and my right hon. and learned Friend hopes to make a statement shortly.

Why is the Navy to be left out of this?

The hon. Gentleman must await the statement which the Secretary of State intends to make shortly.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will seek to arrange discussions with the Scottish Football Association, the English Football Association, the Welsh Football Association and the Professional Football Players Associations of Scotland, England and Wales with a view to drawing up a code of conduct to regulate the conditions of players' transfers.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give consideration to introducing legislation based on the Chester Report recommendations in regard to football transfer arrangements.

I see no reason for the Government to become involved in the matter of football players' transfers.

But is not the hon. Gentleman aware that the unsavoury methods used by some clubs in recent transfers are bringing the game into disrepute and can only lead to a deterioration in relations between the players and their clubs? Is he not also aware that any intervention on his part as a third party can only help to bring sanity to the situation? Will he reconsider his position and take the initiative?

I think that it is common ground on both sides of the House that it is better left to the governing body of football to make its own decisions. I believe that the Football Association and the Football League are responsible bodies. I do not think that it is right that the Government should seek to interfere in the management of their own business.

As the Minister has been dubbed the Minister for Sport he cannot dodge his responsibilities in this matter. The recommendations of the Chester Committee could be brought out of cold storage. The cattle market in the selling and buying of football players should stop. The Chester Report made some good recommendations in this matter.

Yes—but the Chester Committee's recommendations were made to the football authorities and not to the Government. The hon. Gentleman must look to the football authorities to put their own house in order.

Will the hon. Gentleman help the football authorities by agreeing that value added tax should not be imposed on football? Is he aware of the serious concern about the question of the future financing of football and, in particular, about the effect which VAT will have in putting many small clubs out of existence? I bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman has properly said, but the Chester Committee Report shows that there is great concern about the future financing of this important sport.

Matters of taxation are for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Question deals solely with the matter of transfer fees. All I can say in reply to the hon. Gentleman is that I do not think that he would command a very high transfer fee anywhere.