asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will make a statement on the response to his proposals announced on 27th April for releasing more land for housebuilding.

The response so far has been encouraging. Planning permissions have been given for large additional acreages of land in both the South East and the West Midlands, and provisional approval has been given to borrowing by local authorities of some £21 million to buy land for sale to builders. In addition it is estimated that by April some 500 more acres will be released for private housing in South-East new towns.

I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for that answer. Will he reassure me and many others who care for what remains of the countryside around our great cities that this injunction to local authorities does not mean that they will have to encroach on the green belt?

There is a general presumption against development in the green belt. That remains the situation.

Does that consideration apply equally to rural land in the south and south-west of England, and are releases there taking place at a similar rate?

It is fairly general, and local authorities have been particularly asked to release land in pressure areas. A great deal depends on the nature of the local housing problem.

How much land has been released outside the Metropolitan area? That is where the need is greatest and where the green belt is operating as a restriction on housing development.

It has often been said that there is a general presumption against development in green belts. One can allow incursions into the green belt in exceptional circumstances and where it can be shown that some part of the green belt has no amenity, social or agricultural value. There is a great deal of land which can be released which is not in green belts and that is the basis on which generally we are proceeding.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will list the towns other than in the outer Metropolitan area where an approved or designated green belt is currently in existence.

There are approved or proposed green belts around or adjacent to Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Sunderland; York; most of the towns in the West Riding of Yorkshire; Chesterfield; Merseyside, Chester and Manchester; Stoke-on-Trent; Nottingham and Derby; Birmingham and Coventry; Norwich; Cambridge, Cheltenham and Gloucester; Oxford; Bristol and Bath; and the coastal towns of Hampshire.

That answer sounds most encouraging. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the country is sickened by the fact that we are becoming a profiteering plutocracy rather than a property-owning democracy and that we can cure this only if we release all the urban land before we start eroding the green belt areas, which are of value not only to countrymen but to urban or town dwellers?

As my hon. Friend will know, I recently announced the policy with regard to the confirmation of the approved green belt and made it clear that large areas were, as it were, sacrosanct and approved so that developers should concentrate on the other areas.

Many hon. Members will have sympathy with the right hon. Gentleman if he seeks properly to utilise all urban land, but how does he propose to deal with the scandalous case which has occurred in the last two or three days where the outer London borough of Barnet is refusing the hard-pressed inner London borough of Brent the possibility of using land in Barnet for desperately needed housing?

If the right hon. Gentleman tables a Question on that matter I may be able to answer it. Every case must be tested on its merits, and my right hon. and learned Friend is in a quasi-judicial position in planning matters.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many applications for loan sanction for new sewage works have been received by his Department since his statement of 27th April; and whether he will list them.

Fifty-two applications have been received in this period for new sewage treatment works and 92 for extensions to existing works costing over £100,000. I will, with permission, list these in the OFFICIAL REPORT. None of these was made in advance of need under the arrangements announced on 27th April 1972. Local authorities can, of course, carry out smaller schemes without reference to my right hon. and learned Friend.

I am obliged for that answer, but is my hon. Friend aware that many housing development schemes for which planning permission could be granted are held up for want of sewage treatment facilities? Will he give an assurance that the new Water Bill provisions announced today will not create a hiatus because of transfer of power from existing sewerage authorities to the new authority?

Yes, Sir. I have had meetings with those who will be concerned in the transitional period and I can assure my hon. Friend that we shall take all possible steps to see that there is no hiatus in this important matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what mileage of railway routes he has shut down in each of the 10 years 1963 to 1972 inclusive; and what is his planned amount of closure in 1973.

With permission I will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the figures. The Glasgow—Kirkcaldy service has already been withdrawn. There are no firm plans at present for other closures except for Alton—Winchester.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that since the inspired leak a few months ago, when it was suggested that the railway system would be brought down to 7,000 miles, there has been widespread speculation and as yet we have had no definitive Government statement about what will be the pattern and scope of railway services overall? Can my hon. Friend assume some of his responsibilities in this context?

While the leak was undoubted, I am afraid that the inspiration behind the leak was notable by its absence. I accept what my hon. Friend said about the need for clarification of this problem. I only remind him that no Government since the war have got the problem of our railways right. It is a very complicated problem which is being thoroughly looked at and I would not wish to delay bringing it to the House

When the Minister decided on the closure of Alston branch line, did he consider not only the £300,000 required for road improvements but also the amount of money the Northumberland County Council will have to pay to maintain a bus service at Alston?

Nobody knows better than the hon. Gentleman that all relevant considerations are taken into account.

May I take it from my right hon. Friend's reply that the reprieve extends to the West Croydon—Wimbledon line? If so, may I ask that when these closure matters are considered representations made by transport users' consultative committees will be given more weight and consideration than seems to have been the case in the past? There is a feeling that this is something of a window-dressing exercise. Does my right hon. Friend agree that such an impression should not be allowed to get about?

I can assure my hon. Friend that representations made by those committees are taken very seriously indeed. I would prefer to write to my hon. Friend about the line he has mentioned.

The Minister has referred on a number of occasions to the leak and subsequent publication of an unauthorised document. In view of the growing concern in the country about the future of the railways and the need for further investment in them, will be give a date when we may have the authorised version of the Government's policy?

I should prefer not to do that for the moment. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will understand that these matters are very complicated. We have had long discussions with the railways, which have been very instructive. I assure the right hon Gentleman that both from my own point of view as well as from his I do not wish to impose unnecessary delay.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will now state the extent by which the Scottish railway system is to be reduced over the next three years.

I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member for Derby, South (Mr. Walter Johnson) on 8th November 1972.—[Vol. 845, c. 999.]

Is the Minister aware that the map produced by the Sunday Times on 8th October indicated that there would be no passenger lines either north or west of Inverness? Will he give an assurance today that this will not happen? Since he has stated that there were at least four alternatives before him, would it not be better for the Government to produce a Green Paper to enable the public to be aware of the alternatives? Would not this be a gesture towards implementation of the doctrine of open government on which the present Government were elected?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his helpful suggestion, which had occurred to me. The Government intend in due course to present to Parliament some alternative proposals, but I am anxious that these should not be half-baked, as so many other proposals governing railways have been in the past.

In considering future plans will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that discoveries of oil off Scotland have transformed the whole scene in the North, having regard to the fact that existing roads between Perth, Inverness and the north of Scotland are deplorable and congested? Will he have firmly in mind the importance of keeping these rail links open since they can provide a service to industry in the North?

My hon. Friend has raised a most intelligent point which I have very much in mind.

Will the Minister give an assurance that he will postpone closure of the Kyle line and certainly not allow closure to proceed until the fullest and most thorough examination has been carried out of all new factors, including that raised by the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Edward Taylor)?

This matter has been considered on a number of occasions and I know that the hon. Gentleman is concerned about it. If there are any new factors—and I must say that none has yet appeared—which could make a case for the extension of the line, they will be considered.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that he is not planning any reduction in the grants that the Labour Government introduced for socially necessary railway lines?

Certainly at the moment I am not planning any reduction in overall Government support. The shape and form in which it comes is a matter that any Government would wish to consider.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if, as part of his review of the future railway network, he will now give an estimate of railway mileage in Wales in 1973, 1974 and 1975.

I have nothing to add to my answer to the hon. Member for Carmarthen (Mr. Gwynoro Jones) on 15th November 1972.—[Vol. 846, c. 131.]

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that the campaign now mounted in Wales will oppose any pruning of the railway network in the Principality? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that, in view of the gross unemployment situation in Wales, it is necessary to retain the existing passenger services as well as refraining from diminishing the existing level of freight services from which we are suffering in Swansea? Surely it is the right hon. Gentleman's right to give these assurances to Wales which has suffered so much under his Government.

The hon. Gentleman has told me what I know already. There is, of course, concern in Wales about the future of the railways; I acknowledge that. The future of freight lines is entirely for British Rail. So far as passenger services are concerned, before any changes are made all relevant considerations will be carefully borne in mind.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is also considerable discontent in the West Midlands about the state of public transport, both rail and road? In particular, can he give an assurance that the Birmingham-Stourbridge railway to the West will be kept open?

I think that hardly arises on this Question, but I think I am right in saying that they are in no immediate jeopardy.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the decision to renew the grant for all the railways in Wales for one year has been welcomed, but will he say why he does not use his powers under Section 39 of the Act to extend the grant for a period of three years as this annual anxiety does nobody any good?

As the right hon. Gentleman will be aware, we are in the course of a general examination of the whole railway system, and I thought it wise to prolong the grant for one year rather than any further.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has for rail closures during 1973; and if he will name any such routes and give further details.

The Glasgow-Kirkcaldy service has already been withdrawn. There are no firm plans at present for other closures except for Alton-Winchester.

I am glad to hear that, since the right hon. Gentleman was somewhat coy earlier today about his forward plans. While he is about it, will he now take the opportunity to disown the master plan of the mad axeman who appears to be loose in his Department, which came to us by courtesy of the Railway Gazette, and, at the same time, will he disown the plan, leaked to the Press this morning, which was an asinine attempt to show that the railways can be converted to high-speed motorways?

As for the mad axeman, I assure the hon. Gentleman that there are no ghosts from the previous Administration left in my Department.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his estimate of the acreage of derelict land in England and Wales on 1st January 1973; how this figure compares with 1st January 1971 and 1st January 1972; and how many acres of derelict land were utilised or developed in 1971 and 1972 respectively.

Land in England justifying treatment at the end of 1970 and 1971 amounted to 63,035 acres and 64,253 acres respectively. A total of 4,792 acres was reclaimed during 1971. Reclamation figures for 1972, which must affect any estimate of the extent of derelict land at the end of 1972, are not yet available. Figures for Wales are matters for my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Wales.

In view of the critical importance of utilising derelict land and of reclaiming land wherever possible for urban use, will my right hon. Friend consider the possibility of strengthening the administration of the section of his Department which deals with derelict land so that it may give technical advice to local authorities as well as merely collate and collect information concerning the acreage of such land?

My Department is always ready and willing to give such advice as local authorities request, but local authorities are getting on with the job pretty well. We issued only a fortnight ago circular No. 7/73 which is a new survey of derelict land. We realise that the information we were getting was insufficient, and my hon. Friend will find in that document details of derelict land which needs to be reclaimed at an early date.

Will that survey attempt a redefinition of the term "derelict land", because in the past many people have felt that a great deal of such land was not included in official records?

The form on which the survey has been made goes into some detail. I shall read the five headings: spoil heaps; excavation of pits; military and other services' dereliction; abandoned British Railways land; and other forms of dereliction. The survey is a thorough one.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that much land which in the past rightly attracted refusal of planning permission because of under- ground workings should now be reconsidered in view of the new techniques which make it possible, with concrete ramps and other devices, to build on land which was not considered safe when original approval was refused?

I assure my hon. Friend that when the matter comes before me, that is the sort of consideration I give to it. A good deal of derelict land in which there is underground working can be turned to good recreational use and other land elsewhere turned to industrial use.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what recent meeting he has had with representatives of the Professional Footballers Association.

I refer the hon. Member to my reply yesterday to the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, West (Mr. James Johnson)—[Vol. 849, c 101–2].

In view of the escalation of transfer fees and the financial state of many clubs with players who are bought on the never-never, will the Minister convene a meeting at the PFA's request between that body, the Football League and himself to discuss the restriction of players which has led to a situation where many clubs pay thousands of pounds in transfer fees out of money which frankly they do not possess?

In the first instance this is a matter for the football clubs themselves. It would be wrong for the Government to seek to intervene in their private affairs. If the football authorities as a whole—the players, the association and the league—were to ask me to join in a meeting which included them all, I should consider it.

Although there are these problems, does my hon. Friend agree that it is still possible for a comparatively small city such as Norwich to field a very good side capable of beating the best?

Yes, Sir, and I congratulate Norwich City on its splendid appearance in the First Division. As an East Anglian myself I know that having both Norwich and Ipswich back in the First Division has added to the interests in football throughout the Eastern Counties.

is the hon. Gentleman aware of the Chester Report which my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Small Heath (Mr. Denis Howell) persuaded the House to commission back in 1968? Does the hon. Gentleman never intend to implement the recommendations in that report?

Of course I am aware of it. However, the vast majority of the recommendations in the Chester Report were for football itself. I look to football to take the necessary action about it.

Are the transfer fees of any individual player caught under the Counter-Inflation Bill?

In the first instance this is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to whose attention I shall draw my hon. Friend's question.

Although the hon. Gentleman seems to think that most of these matters are for the football authorities, he will be aware that he himself set a good precedent by intervening concerning discipline on the field. That can hardly be said to be a matter for the Government. Will the hon. Gentleman consider presenting the House with a White Paper on the Chester and Lang Reports so that four years after the first one we can have facts about the amount of progress that has been made and reach a more mature judgment than is possible at the moment?

I will consider any suggestion that the hon. Gentleman has to make. He has great knowledge of these matters and considerable experience. However, I believe that in the first instance these are matters for the football authorities themselves. They are not the business of the Government or of this House.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he has given consideration to the question of constructing an exit on the northbound carriageway of the M1 at Stanmore so that ambulances on that carriageway south of the exit will be able to reach the hospital nearby.

Yes, Sir. I refer the hon. Member to my letter of 18th January.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that letter. Is he aware that if an accident happened on the northbound carriageway near Stanmore, as there is no exit, an ambulance would have to go all the way to Watford, round the roundabout and then back to Stanmore where there is an exit on the southbound carriageway? That would mean a journey of 10 or 11 miles, whereas if there were a turn-off on the northbound carriageway the distance would be only about three and a half miles. Will the hon. Gentleman get cracking on this, because it could result in the saving of lives?

These matters are to be discussed shortly between my Department and the appropriate authorities.

While the catchment area for accidents on the motorway south of this turn-off is limited, will my hon. Friend consider that there is the possibility of a considerable increase in the number of accidents in the future and therefore that this turn-off would be extremely valuable if it were planned now in view of the future use which unfortunately will be needed?

My hon. Friend and his constituents have made these representations to me. As I have told him in a letter, these are matters that we shall be looking at in the near future.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the current annual subsidy for the Worksop-Retford railway line.

The only available figures relate to the Sheffield-Lincoln and Sheffield-Cleethorpes passenger services, both of which use the Worksop-Retford line. The respective grants for these services are estimated at £331,000 and £233,000 in 1973.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that my constituents consider that this is money very well spent if it keeps heavy lorries and juggernauts out of this rural area? Can the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that this line will not be curtailed or closed in the next 10 years?

I cannot give any such undertaking for 10 years, nor could any Minister in respect of any line. However, there are no current closure proposals.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment why he will not take steps to require the carrying of reflector plates by foreign lorries.

It would be unreasonable to impose national marking requirements on foreign vehicles temporarily imported into the country.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in many cases such reflectors as are carried by foreign lorries in accordance with their own national regulations are derisory in size compared with the excellent and conspicuous reflector plates carried by British lorries? If it is unacceptable for people to crash into the backs of British lorries, it must be equally unacceptable for people to crash into the backs of foreign lorries. Will my right hon. Friend think again?

There can be no disagreement about the last part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question. We are bound by two international conventions setting out rules which allow foreign vehicles to cross international borders as long as they fit in with minimum requirements. They do so without complying with national requirements. We try to set a high standard. It is my intention to influence others to follow it in due course. In the meantime, if a vehicle is positively dangerous it is open to the police to take action.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some home-based vehicles are continually being stopped in countries like Italy because they do not conform to local regulations? When Italian, French and German lorries come to this country, is it not time that we stopped some of them as well?

I am not sure to which offences the hon. Gentleman is referring. If he lets me have details I shall look at them. We stop many foreign vehicles because of overloading, weight and dimensions.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is now able to say how he proposes to reorganise water and sewage authorities on 1st April 1974.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Water Bill, which has been published today.

In view of the proposed timetable for water reorganisation, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman consider amending the Bill published today to make statutory provision for machinery of consultation between existing water and sewerage authorities and the new ones?

I do not think that any statutory provision will be necessary. One appreciates that over the whole range of local government reorganisation there is a tight timetable to which local authorities have to work. I do not envisage any difficulty about consultation under the present auspices.

Is this Bill really necessary, or is it one of those which have been extracted from a departmental pigeon-hole when there is not much else to put into the programme? [Interruption.] I am referring to the programme of the Department. Will my right hon. and learned Friend recognise that some of us are extremely sceptical about the claim that large authorities lead to greater efficiency? Time and time again we have seen the opposite occur.

I regard the Bill as necessary. The general principles of it are widely accepted. There have been discussions about the composition of the regional water authorities and here we have gone a long way to meet the objections of local authorities by providing for an absolute majority of local authority members on each regional authority.

Although the Opposition have serious misgiving about much of the Bill, especially about the taking away of local authority services and about the failure to nationalise all water, may I ask whether the right hon. and learned Gentleman is aware that it would be wrong not to pay tribute to the Government for bending to public opinion about the maintenance of the canal system and keeping the British Waterways Authority in existence? To that extent we offer some welcome to the Government's proposals.

I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's general agreement with the principle of the Bill—

I did not say that.

I appreciate that when we come to the Committee stage, as always, a number of points will be raised by right hon. and hon. Members on both sides.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend ensure that a major rôle is assigned to the Greater London Council to deal with water and sewage in greater London?

The GLC will have a major rôle to play. It will have a large representation on the regional water authority. It will also retain its land drainage powers.

The right hon. and learned Gentleman appears to have misunderstood my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Small Heath (Mr. Denis Howell). My hon. Friend was referring to the concessions which the Government had made to the pressure brought to bear by the British Waterways Authority.

I thought that the hon. Member for Small Heath sounded reasonably encouraging.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will now give further details of the progress in preparing regional planning strategies in each region of the country.

As the answer is long I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

My right hon. Friend has given me no ammunition to fire back at him——

Order. I must remind hon. Members that supplementary questions are not compulsory.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many slum and sub-standard houses have been demolished in each of the last two years; and how many such houses remain.

In each of the years ended September 1970 and September 1971, 69,100 houses were demolished or closed under slum clearance powers. The National House Condition Survey conducted in September 1971 indicated that there were some 1·2 million unfit dwellings in England and Wales of which 700,000 were in existing or potential clearance areas.

In view particularly of the low rate of public sector building, is it not now clear that the Government's pledge to clear all slums by 1980 cannot be achieved? Will the Minister therefore retract that promise which was so frequently made, and inform the House when we can expect total clearance to be achieved?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is ignoring the stimulus to slum clearance and house building in case of need which will come as a result of the Housing Finance Act 1972. An important relevant point is the rate of improvement grants, and the rate of approvals for such grants is still rising.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the critical point is not only to clear the slum housing but to prevent normal dwellings becoming slums or becoming sub-standard? As well as other measures, will he more forcibly encourage the addition of general improvement areas and, perhaps more importantly, the implementation of the scheme of general improvement areas?

Yes, my hon. Friend is quite right in attributing great importance to this matter, first with regard to the general improvement of houses—our improvement grant programme has been highly successful in this respect—and secondly in emphasising the special areas of general improvement areas. Local authorities are beginning to co-operate extremely well in this work and we are giving them every possible encouragement.

Does the Minister accept that the introduction of improvement grants is directed mainly to properties which are not classifiable as slums'? Will he tell the House what annual rate of slum clearance the Government expect to achieve in the coming eight years, and how that will clear approximately 1,200,000 slums which, as the Government accept, exist in England and Wales alone?

The Question refers to "slum and sub-standard houses". As the hon. Gentleman will know, that includes two categories, and the only way of trying to answer the Question accurately and informatively was to deal with slum clearance. As I have said, there is every hope that with the extra impetus given to slum clearance by way of the extra subsidies under the Housing Finance Act, very good progress will continue to be made. But slum clearance is not the only answer. The rate of improvements in unfit houses is relevant, and that is rising.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that some of our larger cities have carried out a fair amount of slum clearance but are now finding it increasingly difficult to obtain the necessary finance, despite the improvements that have been made, to get ahead with building the houses required to face the widespread slum clearance? Will the hon. Gentleman give an assurance that the Prime Minister—perhaps the hon. Gentleman will have a word with him—will meet a deputation from the leading cities to discuss the whole question of future finance for these cities?

The hon. Gentleman will forgive me if I do not answer on behalf of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister about deputations. To deal especially with the problem of housing in Liverpool, I should like to congratulate the city on the development of general improvement areas, which are of great social importance, and on making a good contribution in those areas where we are trying to improve the environment and conditions of housing.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he can now say when the report of the Layfield panel of inquiry into the Greater London Development Plan will be published.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has yet received the report of the Layfield inquiry into the Greater London Development Plan; and if he will make a statement.

I received the report of the panel of inquiry into the Greater London Development Plan on 18th December 1972 and have sent it to the printers.

Does the Secretary of State agree that it is highly desirable from the point of view of democracy in London that the GLC election campaign should be as fully informed as possible, which it will be if the report is published? Does he also agree that there is no legal impediment to his publishing it before he takes any decisions on it?

That is quite correct. I sent it to the printers with a view to early publication. As soon as it is printed it will be published.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman indicate to the House what plans he has for discussions with the London boroughs, the London Boroughs Association and the Greater London Council on the basis of the report?

It would be wise to await publication of the report. I would hope then to make some preliminary observations about it. But it is a very long and complex document, raising vast issues. I am sure that there will be, and will need to be, considerable public discussion and that when the report is published the House and the public will realise what an important contribution the Layfield panel has made.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what are the latest figures for council house-building for the year 1972; and if he will give comparable figures for the years 1971, 1970, 1969, 1968 and 1967.

As the answer contains a number of figures I will, with permission, circulate the information in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

On the basis of the first 11 months' figures, it is fairly obvious that they are the worst for the last 10 years and the prospects seem to me to be even worse for the coming years. What advice will the Minister give to local authorities embarking on a capital expenditure building programme of thousands of houses in order to repair the damage done over the last few years, when the Government spy tells the local authorities to curtail their building programmes in order to satisfy phase 2? What advice will the Minister give to local authorities in that situation?

If the hon. Member will let me have the details of the cases, I shall look into them. As my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary has just mentioned, there is no curtailment of finance to local authorities which wish to press ahead with house-building schemes in areas of need. Indeed, on my instructions, letters have been sent to the authorities in the conurbations to ask them what their plans are for the future.

Will my hon. Friend make it clear that there is no disability whatever on local authorities on building to the extent they need? Will he make it intelligible to the House that if local authorities do not want to build it is entirely their responsibility and not the responsibility of the present Government?

It is perfectly true that local authorities which wish to proceed with building schemes face no financial obstacles, and I very much hope that they will put forward proposals.

We all know that there has been a scandalous decline in council house building, and I have two questions for the Minister. First, is the decline a consequence of deliberate Government policy, in line with the famous statement of the predecessor of the present Secretary of State that the ratio of council housing in this country is much too high? Secondly, if the Minister says that this is not so and repeats his constant statement that local authorities are free to build as much as they need, may I ask whether he is aware that it is known to every local authority, including many labour councils which long to increase their building programmes, that they cannot do so partly because of a shortage of skilled workers in the construction industry and partly because the cost yardsticks do not allow them to do so?

My right hon. and learned Friend's predecessor, on 2nd November, announced changes in the yardsticks, and I think that these will be of benefit to local authorities. There are no financial restrictions on local authorities which wish to press ahead with housing schemes.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how much has so far been paid out in rent rebates under the Housing Finance Act; and what is the aggregate amount of increased rent so far paid following the rent rises last April and last October.

This information could be obtained only by asking all housing authorities to make a special return. This is not justified, since most of them will be giving this information after the end of the financial year to the Institute of Municipal Treasurers and Accountants, which will then publish it.

Can the hon. Gentleman confirm that the Prime Minister's estimate that rebated rents will rise next year by only 7½ per cent. was based on a 90 per cent. rebate take-up level, which on present trends is grossly overoptimistic? Will he also confirm the evidence of local authority survey material which I have received—even if he has not—which indicates that even with a 75 per cent. rebate take-up level it is unlikely that rebated rents will still rise this year by 11 per cent.—in the year of a so-called prices freeze?

I am satisfied from preliminary reports that the take-up of rent rebates appears to be high. May I give some examples of the proportion of tenants getting a rebate: Brent London Borough, 36 per cent.; Richmond London Borough, 38 per cent.; Dudley County Borough, 40 per cent.; and Stroud Rural District Council, 37 per cent.

Is my hon. Friend aware that even under these conditions there is considerable delay in local authorities dealing with applications for rent rebates? Is he aware that I am informed that in Birmingham in particular, although applications were made in November, some people in poor circumstances have yet to hear the result of their applications?

I am sure that my hon. Friend has raised a matter which will be of considerable concern to tenants who are entitled to rebates. We shall do everything possible to assist local authorities. However, we know that throughout the country they are certainly doing their best to develop administrative systems to respond to these needs.

Why are the Government trying to hide behind the answer that they cannot get the information? Why do they consistently refuse to give any detailed figures about the relationship between rent increases and rent rebates under the Housing Finance Act?

The hon. Gentleman will understand that all this information is in the possession of the local authorities. They are dealing with this administrative responsibility of making available the rebates, and they will be accounting in detail at the end of the financial year, which is only two months away. May I add that our estimate of a total of about £100 million in rebates for this financial year certainly appears to be accurate.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if, in view of the delays in processing applications for rent rebates under the Housing Finance Act 1972, he will institute an inquiry into the working of the Act with a view to seeking power, inter alia, to ensure that no further rent increases are imposed on 1st April 1973 until the backlog of rebate applications has been cleared.

No, Sir. I am extremely anxious that all tenants who are entitled to a rebate should receive one at the earliest date but I do not think there is a need for an inquiry.

Since I tabled this Question, it has been given the more point by the announcement that the needs allowance will be increased by £.3·50, which will greatly increase the number of tenants eligible for rebate. In view of this, cannot the hon. Gentleman say that any further rent increases will be delayed until he can give an unqualified assurance that there will be no undue delay in dealing with applications?

I hope that there is no undue delay in dealing with applications. Local authorities will have until the end of April to deal with the question of the needs allowance, which will be very welcome to many local authority tenants. I have no evidence leading me to assume that local authorities will find this unduly burdensome.

Will my hon. Friend tell the Labour Party that many tenants who are most in need, particularly pensioners, have been pleasantly surprised at the amounts of rebate, which have been much more generous than they were led to believe by the scaremongering propaganda put about by the party opposite?

I always said that Labour's propaganda would fail, and I think that it has. The needs allowance has been increased by a large amount since that time, and I believe that the people to whom my hon. Friend refers will be even more pleased.

But will the Minister accept at least that where local authority housing revenue accounts are in balance or are already showing a surplus at the end of this financial year, there can be no possible justification for further rent increases, especially during the period of price restraint? Will he therefore use his powers under Section 105 of the Housing Finance Act to suspend any rent increases at least in such cases?

The Question deals with rent rebates and has nothing to do with the wider question which the hon. Gentleman raises. We are introducing a system of fair rents which is widely welcomed, with exceedingly generous rebates and allowances for tenants in the private as well as the public sector, and this will give a far fairer housing policy than the country has ever seen before.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will consider a programme of financial assistance to aid in the clearing and replanting of land containing dead or diseased elm trees.

No, Sir. But assistance towards replanting costs including reasonable expenditure on necessary land clearance associated with the scheme, is obtainable in certain circumstances. I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of the Department's circular which summarises the forms of Exchequer assistance available.

However that may be. I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for what he has said. Is he aware of the widespread concern at the growing scars on the countryside? Will he accept that his right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State has a responsibility in his role as a protector of the environment?

Indeed, I recognise only too well the damage done in the county of Hampshire in which my hon. Friend's constituency is situated. The figures are rather dramatic. One tree in every 10 acres in the county is being lost per year through the Dutch elm disease. I am sure my hon. Friend will look at the appendix to the circular in which eight different ways are set out for getting Exchequer assistance for the replanting of trees, and I am sure that with a little ingenuity his local authorities will be able to clear these eyesores.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what measures he intends to take to reduce smoke and noise emissions from vehicles other than new ones.

I am considering ways of strengthening the law on emission of excessive smoke and the introduction of instrumented test procedures. I intend to introduce a new method of testing for noise, suitable for use in the annual test of heavy goods vehicles and at selected roadside sites. I am also examining means of setting minimum standards for silencers.

While I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask him whether he has seen a recent estimate that at least 10,500,000 cars are creating excessive noise to the disturbance of people? May I also ask whether he is aware that far too many diesel lorries continue to puff out their black smoke to the annoyance of people?

Yes. As regards the last part of that supplementary question, all new diesel engine vehicles will have to conform to the British Standard. The smoke that they emit will have to be virtually invisible. As to the noise created by motor cars, I accept entirely what my hon. Friend has said, that this is a very great nuisance. At the same time experience teaches me that the nuisance is always caused by someone else's car.

While welcoming the Minister's intention to strengthen the regulations, may I ask him whether he agrees that while extra regulations may be helpful, what is really needed is an effective means of enforcing those already in existence and that it is not sufficient merely to publish more White Papers? We really must look at the whole business of enforcing existing traffic law.

I am sorry to be accused of publishing too many White Papers. I thought that the charge against me today was that I was not publishing enough. If the right hon. Gentleman will look again at my answer he will find that I have referred particularly to the question of enforcement. In addition, we have recently obtained another 50 enforcement officers. I have said frequently in the House that we shall have to go a long way before I am really satisfied with the enforcement standards.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the only really effective statutes available in the world today for the control of fume emission from motor vehicles are to be found in the city ordinances of the United States, which have reached a very advanced stage? Will my right hon. Friend have very careful regard to their experience in the last 10 years, which has been highly illuminating, before he reaches any decisions himself?

I assure my hon. Friend that careful attention is paid to experience in other countries, and particularly in the United States, which have a more grievous problem than our own.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what action he will take to deal with the problem of heavy lorries in Tring High Street, A41.

Construction of the Watford-Tring bypass will ease the problem; meanwhile, other measures suggested by Tring Urban District Council are being considered.

The announcement of the Tring bypass is most welcome, but will my right hon. Friend recognise that Tring cannot last out until it is built? There is only a 17-ft. carriageway and very narrow pavements, and lorries passing in both directions are an intense danger both to the fabric of the town and to pedestrians. Will my right hon. Friend therefore consider looking at the present one-way system, which is in operation only while new kerbs are being laid but which is successful in producing one-way traffic through the town?

I shall gladly look at any suggestion put by my hon. Friend or by the local authority. I acknowledge that in these narrow streets there is a real problem.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what action he is taking to deal with the problem of heavy lorries in greater London.

This is a matter for the Greater London Council. I understand that the council is developing a range of measures for dealing with the problem.

How soon does my right hon. Friend expect to see in operation a comprehensive scheme for controlling the movement of heavy lorries throughout the major part of the greater London area?

I have to remind my hon. Friend with regret though with some relief that I am not the traffic authority for greater London.

Will the Minister suggest to the Prime Minister that he should come into the London borough of Newham and "blow his top" there, because the GLC might then do something about the problem as it now intends to act in the central area? Why is it that Westminster and the other salubrious neighbourhoods can be cleared of lorries but that in the working-class industrial areas no one seems to take any notice?

Again with great regret I must remind the hon. Member that I am not the traffic authority for greater London. I have no doubt that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has hearing good enough to hear what the hon. Member has just suggested.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what action he is taking to reduce traffic hazards in the villages of Asenby and Topcliffe now that double carriageways are completed on the A168 outside these two villages.

In addition to the double white lines which have been provided to restrict overtaking between the Methodist Chapel in Topcliffe and the bridge over the River Swale, draft proposals for a 40 mph speed limit on the A168 through Topcliffe have recently been published. The real solution to the problem is the construction of the Topcliffe and Asenby bypass, which will be commenced as soon as the statutory and administrative processes are completed.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this stretch of road has a number of dangerous corners which cannot be safely negotiated at speeds higher than 30 mph? Will he either hold a public local inquiry into this matter or allow me to bring a deputation of my constituents to see him about it?

I thank my right hon. Friend for his suggestion. I understand that already a meeting has taken place between Topcliffe Parish Council and other local authorities and everyone concerned. As regards the speed limit, I am advised that 40 mph is the realistic and enforceable limit. I shall consider my right hon. Friend's suggestion, however, and get in touch with him.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied with the machinery for tracing the ownership of derelict coal spoilheaps.

I am not aware of any special difficulties in tracing ownership.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that there are difficulties because, in many cases, when a coal spoil-heap becomes derelict at the end of its useful life the ownership often reverts to the previous owner, the consequence being, certainly in parts of Lancashire, that half the time in planning for the removal or reclamation of a spoilheap is spent in trying to trace who actually owns the land?

It is true that the records handed over to the National Coal Board do not always contain sufficient detail of the parties concerned. As regards delay in completing negotiations, this matter was considered by the Central Group for Derelict Land Reclamation, which found that the delays were due mainly to a reluctance to release land which had valuable materials in it. It was considered that negotiation between the parties was the best solution. Where negotiations fail, compulsory powers are available to the local authority to acquire derelict land by compulsion.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he has considered the report of the joint working party on lorry parks in the Southampton area; and if he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. I have studied this most useful report and accept its recommendations in principle.

That is an encouraging reply, and the right hon. Gentleman can take it that the report will be generally welcomed in the area, but, as it will take some time to implement, what interim advice can he give to the local authorities to stop large and heavy lorries being parked night after night outside people's houses?

If any local authority feels that I or my Department can help, I hope that it will ask for it. We shall naturally try to give such advice as we can.

Will my right hon. Friend take it that, if he does not do something about motorways to the Midlands, Southampton will become a bottleneck for container lorries which will increase the parking problem? Cannot he expedite the date for the new motorway to the Midlands from Southampton?

Much as I should like to satisfy my hon. Friend, I do not think that I ought to try to do so on this Question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has studied the annual report of the Council for Small Industries in Rural Areas, and the suggestion contained therein that planning authorities in rural areas are obstructing its work; what action he proposes to take; and if he will make a statement.

The council's corn-plaint is that some planning authorities adopt too negative an attitude to proposals for industrial development in villages and small towns. I appreciate that there may sometimes be a conflict of interest between the council's concern to promote employment in rural areas and the local planning authority's more comprehensive responsibility for the planning of its area. But I believe that, in general, individual issues are capable of solution without interference from me, and where there is deadlock there is the normal planning process of an appeal to my right hon. and learned Friend against any adverse decision.

Is there not a danger in the growing habit of planning authorities to make arbitrary lists of villages which are then condemned to stagnation because no development of any kind is allowed, and do they not in that way forget the interests of the people living in such villages? Does not the report pinpoint that matter, and ought not my right hon. Friend to take further action in support of the views put forward in it?

I appreciate that there is a danger in that respect, but I am sure that county local planning authorities will realise that, if they refuse the sort of small rural industry with which COSIRA deals, they may be depriving a village of jobs, including jobs for school leavers and for wives. I am sure they pay attention to that. Perhaps I may add that in my hon. Friend's county the small industries committee works in good co-operation with the county planning authorities and sets an example to the country of the way it can be done.

Has the right hon. Gentleman read a report which has particular relevance to this whole question, namely, the Bolton Report on small firms? Will he pay particular attention to the recommendation made therein that as regards small industries, particularly in rural areas, the Government should use their position as a massive purchaser of goods and services? Will the right hon. Gentleman take it that this has particular relevance to rural Wales, where the Government have not designated a single advance factory during their term of office, and will he act in a radical way in response to that suggestion?

The hon. Gentleman is about six months behind the times. I recall that in Welsh Office circular No. 126/72 we commended to local authorities that statement in the Bolton Report. We shall continue to commend it to them.