asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the average increase in the price of houses since June 1970.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the average amount and proportion by which the price of a new house rose during 1972; and the average price of such a house at the latest available date.

The estimated average price of housing mortgaged with building societies in the second quarter of 1970 was £5,082 for new dwellings and £4,778 for second-hand dwellings. Corresponding figures for the fourth quarter of 1972 were £8,571 and £8,639 respectively. The increase in the average price of new dwellings between the fourth quarter of 1971 and the fourth quarter of 1972 was £2,520 or 42 per cent.

Is the Minister aware that the effect of this monstrous increase in housing prices is even further added to by the excessive interest rates charged by the building societies? Is he further aware that in this instance he will not be able to blame foreign factors, because this excessive increase in house prices is due to the Rent Act, to land speculation and to the inefficiency of private building firms?

I do not agree with all that the hon. Gentleman says. However, as my right hon. Friend explained to the House last week, the Government are naturally very concerned about the increase in house prices. I would refer the hon. Gentleman to what is said in the White Paper.

The increase in prices is due to many causes, including shortages. Has the Department any record of the part played in these increased costs by the increases in wages paid to building workers, in the price of concrete, in delivery charges, and so forth?

I do not have those detailed figures with me, but there have been very substantial wage increases, as my hon. Friend points out.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that those increases would be smaller than the profit made by land speculators in recent years? Does he not also agree that he and his party can no longer claim that ordinary people can still afford to buy a small new house, since the outgoings in respect of such a purchase would amount to at least £15 a week?

That is not so. If the hon. Gentleman will study the figures for mortgages taken out last year he will see, in respect of borrowers with incomes up to the average industrial wage, that the number of mortgages taken out increased from 114,000 to 147,000.

Is my hon. Friend aware that bricklayers' wages have increased, at a conservative estimate, by at least 26 per cent? Are not bricklayers now earning between £50 and £100 a week?

I agree that wages have risen considerably. The average earnings index rose by 36 per cent. between the second quarter of 1970 and November 1972.

Does not the hon. Gentleman admit that the price for old houses has risen by 40 per cent? Does he further admit that part of the staggering increase in the cost of houses is due to the fact that families are being forced to try to buy houses, because of the catastrophic fall in council house building programmes?

The hon. Gentleman has a further Question on this point later on. The only short answer to the question of house prices is to provide more houses. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] I am very glad to have the support of the Opposition. I shall no doubt receive congratulations from the Opposition for the fact that private sector starts are so sharply up.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied with the level of local authority building, particularly in the West Midlands; and what steps he is taking to encourage local authorities to carry out their statutory duties in this regard.

My Department has written to all the conurbation authorities in the West Midlands to ask them for their estimates of the future need for new council housing in their areas. No restriction is placed by the Government on the number of houses which a local authority may build.

Does the hon. Gentleman not appreciate that the restrictions are those of finance for raising money to build and the cost of building land? Does he know how many families are on the housing waiting lists? Does he know the housing programmes of the local authorities? If he does not, will he get this information, because whenever we have asked for it we have been refused it?

What I did, first, was to write to local authorities asking for their estimates of the future need for council housing. We have to discover the need for council housing in a particular area. Where there is a need, I hope that local authorities will pursue an energetic programme to fulfil the need. If the hon. Lady has a problem about Wolverhampton, I hope that she will get in touch with me. I know of no substantial difficulties in Wolverhampton.

Will my hon. Friend define a conurbation authority? I looked in the Oxford Dictionary for the word "conurbation" and could not find it. Will my hon. Friend explain it?

I apologise for the use of that extremely ugly term. I have written to all the conurbation—I beg pardon—to all county boroughs. "Conurbation" is, I think, a well-known technical term. I have written to all the authorities in those areas and to all county boroughs, except for Greater London, where a special action group is already working.

Does not the Minister know that many councils now controlled by the Labour Party—Leicester is an example—are making valiant efforts to increase the amount of municipal housing but are experiencing the greatest difficulty because of the Government's policy on finance? What will he do to help?

I cannot understand the hon. Gentleman's question. What policy on finance? Unlike the position under our predecessors, there is no restriction on local authorities wishing to build. They now receive substantial help under the rising cost subsidy, and no financial restrictions are put in their way. In fact, the Housing Finance Act helps rather than hinders local authorities with these problems.

That is an incredible answer. We all know that many local authorities would like to build much more than they are building today. Will the hon. Gentleman answer the simple question: what is stopping them?

As they are virtually all controlled by the right hon. Gentleman's own party, perhaps he can give us the answer.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many local authorities now have programmes which include the building of houses for sale, giving for London and the rest of the country the number of completions and starts during the past three years, and his estimates for the current year.

Information is not available in the precise form requested. In recent months 18 local authorities have had building-for-sale schemes approved. About 1,300 houses are involved. Last year about 800 houses built specifically for sale were sold by local authorities in England and Wales.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Is he sympathetic to the scheme of council house building for sale? If that is the case, what encouragement is he prepared to give local authorities?

Where for any reason there is special need for houses for sale—especially for those in the lower income brackets—which is not being met, my right hon. and learned Friend is prepared to consider authorising local authorities to employ contractors to build for sale.

Will the hon. Gentleman tell us how a labourer in the gas industry receiving £19·10 gross pay per week will ever be in a position to buy any type of house, particularly in view of the staggering increase in house prices since 1970?

The hon. Gentleman must have heard my previous answers on this matter.

Answer this one; never mind the previous ones.

What chance is there of local authorities replacing their housing stocks at a reasonable price for rent if they are encouraged to sell their existing low-priced houses? Will not the hon. Gentleman begin to understand that the local authority housing stock is of primary importance if we are to rehouse people who are not earning fabulous sums of money?

The Question on the Order Paper relates to the building of houses for sale and not to the sale of existing council houses. As I have ex- plained many times on the question of the sale of existing council houses, I believe that there is an overwhelming duty on local authorities to allow those of their tenants who wish to have the right and opportunity to purchase to be able to do so.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will agree to support an immediate survey of the passenger car and public transport requirements of the city of Sheffield, and the need to improve accessibility of customers and freight to all shops, department stores, and places of trade.

My Department is already supporting the land use transportation study, which includes extensive surveys of the movement of people and freight.

The Secretary of State for the Environment has had letters on this subject. Is there not a need for cities and towns to publish their proposals, and is there not the additional difficulty that shopkeepers tend to distrust proposals put forward by Socialist councils? Bearing in mind, first, the recommendation of the Select Committee that the central Government should take more interest in these matters, second, the fact that the Minister has intervened in regard to the Moss-borough expressway in Sheffield, and third, the need to put forward more ring road and through-bus route proposals, will not my right hon. Friend do something more active to support all cities—including Sheffield—which have to deal with these problems?

I do not think that further action is called for from my Department, beyond support for the study. In general, I wish to encourage sensible experiments and consultation. I remind the House that when one takes measures such as I believe have to be taken to curtail the movement of the motor car they will always provoke protests—very often from traders whose anxieties are subsequently seen to be not too well founded.

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept it from me that his answer will give a great deal of satisfaction in Sheffield? Does he agree that these matters must be settled by the local authority, in consultation with all the local interests concerned? Further, does he accept that there is a great deal of public support for what the Sheffield council is doing in this respect?

Within limits, I would accept almost anything from the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if, in view of the significant reduction in injuries in those countries where the wearing of seat belts is compulsory, he will now introduce similar legislation.

As I stated in reply to a Question by my hon. Friend on 18th October, I prefer to see what can be done by persuasion. Seat belt wearing, therefore, forms a major element of this year's road safety publicity.—[Vol. 843, c. 84.]

Does my right hon. Friend realise that persuasion is not enough? In answer to an earlier Question he admitted that his advertising campaign, costing £750,000, is achieving only a 30 per cent. response. Can he continue to justify about 300 fatal and serious accidents a week? Ought he not now to introduce legislation?

This is an important matter. I have never taken it lightly. I have always wanted to see what could be done by persuasion, though I have said that one must be free to consider compulsion if necessary, since, in the light of the Australian experience, it is almost certain that a considerable number of lives and serious casualties could be saved by a high rate of seat belt wearing.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that all advertising campaigns, including the present Jimmy Savile's "Clunk, click" and scarred faces campaign, are doomed to failure because people will always go back to not wearing their safety belts afterwards? As it is likely that about 15,000 serious injuries and deaths every year could be saved if people wore their safety belts, does the Minister not think that the time has come to force people to wear them?

I note with interest the hon. Gentleman's concern. One of the factors which would influence my thinking and that of the Government would be opinion in Parliament on this matter, because no one would wish lightly to resort to compulsion.

I appreciate the Minister's difficulties in relation to a law which might be difficult to enforce, but in his publicity will he take fully into account the recent court decision which meant that a person's damages were reduced because seat belts were not worn? Will the right hon. Gentleman, in conjunction with the insurance companies, see that this is brought fully to the attention of all motorists?

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for making that point. When the courts press the public in the direction of common sense and prudence —as they have done in that case—I greatly appreciate it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will announce the amount of the allowance which is to be paid to members of the new local government bodies.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on 31st January 1973 to a similar Question from the hon. Member for Newport (Mr. Roy Hughes).—[Vol. 849. c. 394–5.]

Will the right hon. Gentleman take it that this matter, while not a deciding factor in candidates' minds, is none the less of great importance, and that it would be extremely helpful to them if he could remove the uncertainty about the future, and, in addition, set the level of the allowance sufficiently high to ensure that people do not lose money by becoming members of local authorities?

As regards the timing of the announcement, this does not come into operation until 1st April 1974, but the deadline for first nominations for the elections this year is 20th March, I think, and I hope that we shall be able to make the announcement in good time before that, so that people may decide whether to stand. On the amount, I must ask the hon. Gentleman to wait. We have said throughout the Local Government Reorganisation Bill that it would be generous.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has for an early start on the reconstruction of the A418 ring road railway bridge at Linslade, Bedfordshire; and if he will make a statement.

Bedfordshire County Council, the local highway authority, has not yet put forward proposals for the reconstruction of this bridge. Until it does, we cannot suggest when the scheme might be carried out.

Until this bridge is reconstructed, heavy goods vehicles have to pass through residential areas on roads not built for that purpose. In view of the progress of the Heavy Commercial Vehicles Bill through the House, may I urge my hon. Friend to push Bedfordshire County Council to make an early start on the project?

The decision is for the county council. I understand that it is trying to agree details with British Rail. It is up to the county council to put the scheme forward to my Department.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what discussions he has had with local authorities regarding the siting of oil refineries.

I have not entered into discussions with local authorities on the siting of refineries but I have recently sent them a note guidance on the factors which commonly need to be taken into account. This should help authorities in giving advice to companies inquiring about potential sites for refineries which could be to national and local advantage.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman accept that his guidance does not go far enough? There is a serious deficiency, in that it does not require companies to undertake an impact survey of the results of refineries on the environment? Will he have consultations with the Secretary of State for Scotland and, with him, offer such advice to local authorities and companies which might be contemplating the siting of new refineries?

I keep in touch with all my right hon. Friends in other Departments who are concerned about this matter. In dealing with a particular case the question of the environment is of manifest importance.

In this connection, is my right hon. and learned Friend aware of the determined opposition of local authorities in South-East Essex to proposals for additional oil refineries alongside residential populations? Will he note that this is a classical example of the matter raised by the hon. Member for East Stirlingshire (Mr. Douglas), namely, the need to consider the total impact of planning decisions on the environment of people who are already under savage assault?

I am glad to reassure my hon. Friend about that. There is no talk or possibility of oil refineries in connection with the Maplin airport development. I explained in the debate last week that approval in principle had been given by the Government to the concept of a port and oil terminal, but the Port of London Authority has to make proposals, which have to be considered under the Harbours Act. My predecessor made clear that there would not be primary industry development in connection with Maplin—and that includes oil refineries.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give a general direction to the National Bus Company to extend half-fares for schoolchildren to cover those aged up to 16 years.

No, Sir.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recall that the principle was introduced to enable young persons to travel at concessionary fares until they reached the compulsory school leaving age of 14? Now that the school leaving age is 16, should not they continue to travel at those concessionary rates? Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the cost of fares to schoolchildren has more than trebled, and that this is especially hard on young people who receive no financial assistance from the local education authority? Why does not the right hon. Gentleman, as Minister responsible for transport undertakings, give a direction to enable such young people to enjoy half fares until they reach the compulsory school leaving age?

I believe that the original concession was made by the undertakings on commercial grounds. I regard the habit of Ministers giving directions to nationalised industries as very bad, but I do not doubt that the Chairman of the National Bus Company will take careful note of what the hon. Gentleman has said.

If my hon. Friend will do nothing, will he consult my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science to see whether she will help in the matter? It is one of great concern to those who wish to extend their children's education as far as possible.

I have no doubt that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science will note what my hon. Friend has said.

The Minister should not be so reticent about giving directives. He should take a lesson from his right hon. Friend—

Order. The hon. Gentleman should ask a question.

Will the Minister take a lesson from his right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State, who only this week has given what is more or less a directive to the Tyneside Passenger Transport Authority that it should not introduce free fares for old people in the Tyneside area?

I hardly think that that arises out of this Question. [Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman who is so busy shouting from a sitting position is confusing passenger transport authorities with nationalised industries. I am asked to give a general directive to a nationalised industry. I have said that, on the whole, giving such directives is, in my opinion, a bad habit.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will call for an interim report of the London Action Group concerning land in outer London boroughs which could be used for local authority housing developments by inner London boroughs; and if he will make a statement.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to a similar Question from him by my hon. Friend on 24th January.—[Vol. 849, c. 151–2.]

Is not it an absolute scandal, which could be reflected in a further interim report, that the Tory local authorities of Barnet and Bromley should have directly sabotaged the efforts of inner London local authorities to acquire land in those areas? When will the Minister take powers to ensure that those recalcitrant, anti-social and snobbish Tory local authorities take action to relieve some of the distress in inner London areas?

I cannot accept that from the hon. Gentleman. A great deal of progress has been made in London housing. I was very pleased that in spite of the immense impact of the building strike last year the London figures stood up as well as they did. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary is taking the chair of the Action Group, and will report in due course.

Is the Minister aware that the problem of homelessness in London is now so serious that it may be difficult to preserve law and order for much longer? The situation is worse than it has ever been and something effective must be done, because people will just not put up with living for months and years in conditions of misery and squalor.

I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman about the serious and tragic nature of homelessness in London. Together with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services I have already had meetings with the Greater London Council and representatives of the London boroughs—including representatives from the hon. Gentleman's borough—to see what can be done to ameliorate the situation. I shall remain in touch with them.

Will the hon. Gentleman tell us the basic suggestions put to him by the London boroughs' representatives at the meeting to which he referred? In view of the great progress he has said is being made in London local authority housing, will he say what acreage has been made available to local authorities as a result of the work of the Action Group? What action has been taken, apart from the provision of information about land availability?

The discussion with the London boroughs and the GLC was of a private nature, and I should not reveal what took place without their permission —though I should have no objection to revealing anything which took place. We shall shortly have a report from the Action Group, and no doubt the hon. Gentleman will continue to ask questions about that.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied that sufficient building land is available in the county of Norfolk; and what response he has had to his recent circular on this subject.

Discussions so far with the Norfolk County Council and building industry representatives suggest that in general the supply is adequate. Further information from the county is being studied by the industry in preparation for another meeting. No formal return under Circular 102/72 has been asked for from Norfolk.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the resentment that will be felt in Norfolk at the complacency of that answer? There are 259 villages in the county, and 59 of them are in my constituency. It is possible to get planning permission only in exceptional circumstances. There is a feeling that very little is being done by my hon. Friend's Department to alter the situation.

I have read what my hon. Friend had to say in his recent speech on this matter. I refute what he says about complacency. There have been discussions not only with the Norfolk County Council but with the building industry. No one can say that the Depart- ment is complacent. If my hon. Friend likes to pursue this matter further in relation to particular areas of Norfolk I shall be delighted to go into it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if, as one way of stopping the further decrease in council house building, he will now increase the cost yardstick allowance, not only where local market conditions make this necessary, but generally, in view of the national rise in building costs and if he will make a statement.

The yardstick arrangements are now more flexible and are not holding up the approval of reasonable tenders. Our readiness to grant allowances to meet local market conditions is, in my view, the most effective way of dealing with the present tendering situation.

But is not the Minister aware that councils are anxious for a general increase? They do not aim to profiteer out of house building. Would not it be safe to allow them to have a general increase, as they have no motive for abusing it?

What has been done is more flexible and more satisfactory than just a general increase. I accept the rigid nature of the yardstick controls, which were introduced not by me but by the hon. Gentleman's right hon. Friends. I know of hardly any case in the country where schemes are being held up by the yardstick. I know of none in Salford. [Interruption.] Hon. Members make generalised assertions. If they will send me details of schemes being held up in this way I shall gladly look into them.

As the hon. Gentleman has so rightly said that the way to bring down house prices is to provide more houses, will he at least give an assurance that his Department will not agree to the destruction of existing houses to build roads?

That is another question.

There seems to be the most extraordinary conflict of evidence here. The Minister asked for evidence of councils that were prevented from building all they wanted to build. Is he aware that the case of Leicester has already been referred to this afternoon? Does he recall that in the debate on housing on Tuesday of last week I quoted the words of two housing committee chairmen—one in Norwich and one in Hammersmith? Will he at least give an answer on those three specific cases?

It is much better if I can have a specific question, or a letter about a specific case. I genuinely believe that very few schemes are being held up because of yardstick difficulties. I ask hon. Members on both sides who think that I am wrong to give me evidence, and then I shall see whether they are right or I am right.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the average length of time which applicants for driving tests have to wait for their tests.

Nine weeks at 26th January 1973.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that one of my constituents is having to wait for no less than 20 weeks? I agree that the illness of the examiner added to that delay, but does not the fact that the illness of one examiner can so prolong the waiting time for a driving test suggest the need for a better deployment of resources, in order to avoid long delays of that kind?

Illness distorts even the best arrangements. If the hon. Gentleman will give me details of the case he mentioned I shall be glad to look into it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied with the progress of special environmental assistance schemes.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will extend the period during which grants are payable under the scheme known as Operation Eyesore.

I am satisfied that this scheme has had a major impact on the quality of the environment in the assisted areas. By the end of January over 11,000 projects valued at about £28 million had been approved for grant in England. I am reviewing the working of this scheme but have not yet decided whether it can be extended beyond 30th June this year.

The Government are to be congratulated on a measure that can create a better image for the North. But is it not a fact that the schemes took a long time to set up and that there will have been only one year and one tree-planting season to carry them out? If Operation Eyesore is ended in June, will not the impetus to improvement and employment be lost?

It has certainly been a successful scheme. The whole purpose was to give a short, sharp boost to the assisted areas, and to urge speed. It is encouraging that in Teesside, for example, 271 schemes have been approved at a cost of £670,000, which shows that Operation Eyesore has been very effective.

Does the Minister appreciate that, although the scheme has been beneficial to the regions, all the work that is vitally necessary cannot possibly be carried out before the end of June? What is more, in the Northern Region the unemployment figure is still running at 6 per cent. On those grounds alone there is a very good case for an extension.

These are factors that we will bear in mind in considering whether to extend the scheme. I am reviewing its working at present.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will speed up his decision on the line of the North Lancashire motorway where it runs through Blackburn.

I will do my best.

Will not the Minister tell us when we can expect his decision? Is he aware that the Blackburn borough engineer has forecast that there may be a 12 months' delay before it is known'? Is it not grossly unfair to leave those affected in uncertainty about the future of their businesses and homes, particularly with the rise in property values going on all the time, so that those who lose their own homes and have to get others may find that they have been adversely hit by this intolerable delay?

Nobody knows better than the right hon. Lady the real difficulties involved. When I said that I would do my best I meant it. I would rather not give the right hon. Lady an answer at the moment. I will write to her as soon as I am in a position to do so.

Will the Minister personally do everything he can to hurry on the project as a whole, it long having been accepted that it is vital to the industrial survival of North-East Lancashire that the road should be completed right through to Colne before the new town begins to grow.

I will do exactly what my hon. and learned Friend has said. I am rather relieved to be encouraged to get on with a road rather than to hold one back.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will now announce his intention with regard to building a bypass for the village of Kimbolton.

The A45 through Kimbolton is the responsibility of the county council. However, the future requirements of this section of A45 can be determined only when decisions are taken on the proposed M1-A1 link in this area.

Is my hon. Friend aware that it looks from other answers and letters that I have received that decisions on these matters will not be taken for a year or two? Meanwhile juggernauts are unable to negotiate the bends at each end of this ancient village, and the walls of scheduled buildings centuries old are being knocked down. Will he do his best to give the highest priority for a bypass for Kimbolton?

I expect the feasibility study to be completed by the end of this year. If in the meantime the county wishes to put forward proposals for a bypass at Kimbolton we will consider them. However, it would be better to wait for the result of the feasibility study to get the right answer.

Does my hon. Friend appreciate that, although many people welcome the fact that a motorway is likely between the Midlands and the East Coast, the A45, which runs through some very small places, needs improvement whether or not the motorway is built?

I appreciate that improvements are needed. We have accelerated the feasibility study and we hope to have the answers by the end of this year. It should solve many of the traffic problems that my hon. Friend and my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Huntingdonshire (Sir D. Renton) have in their constituencies.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what action his Department is taking to reduce pollution levels in British rivers in 1973.

Reductions of pollution this year will result mainly from substantial increases in expenditure by local authorities and other dischargers on the treatment of dirty water to river authority requirements. Later, the reorganisation proposed in the Water Bill will facilitate the better use of the resources available.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that when volunteers recently dredged the canal or river which passes through my constituency—it was in a disgraceful condition—they dragged out everything from beds and prams to a sawn-off shotgun? Will he take steps to give immediate and generous help to voluntary effort of that nature?

I am glad to know that in the hon. and learned Gentleman's constituency, as in many others, people are voluntarily joining together to improve their environment. That is something to be encouraged. However, the Question deals with the larger issue of pollution from discharges into the rivers.

Can my hon. Friend estimate the total cost of reducing river pollution to an acceptable level?

Without notice I cannot give an exact figure. I can say that capital investment in cleaning rivers has risen by about 37 per cent. over the greatest figure ever achieved under the last Government, and during this Parliament will achieve a 50 per cent. increase.

Can the hon. Gentleman give an assurance that where such schemes have been submitted by the local authorities they will not be monitored out in the counter-inflation legislation?

No, Sir. Schemes for cleaning up the rivers will be put forward in the first instance by the river authorities and local authorities, and later by the new regional water authorities—if the House accepts the Water Bill.

Was not the scheme for cleaning up rivers, announced by the previous Secretary of State for the Environment, the most important and most determined in our history? Can my hon. Friend give the House an assurance that that scheme is going forward with full effect?

Yes, Sir. More than one mile in every 10 of the non-tidal rivers which were grossly polluted in 1970 has now been massively improved. That very welcome improvement is accelerating.

My question relates to the pollution of the rivers by detergents which are allowed to pour back into the rivers by manufacturing processes in the West Riding of Yorkshire. This pollution affects my constituency in particular. How do United Kingdom safety standards compare with those of our partners in the Common Market?

In terms of biodegradable detergents our standards have generally been higher. There have been recent negotiations seeking to achieve EEC standards which would have been lower than those in this country. Thanks to my right hon. and learned Friend's endeavours we have been able to persuade the whole of the Community to come up to the very high standards which we impose.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the provisions in the statute which give authority for local authorities to impose conditions of their own in allowing discretionary improvement grants.

The only provision is that contained in Section 4(4) of the Housing Act 1969 which empowers a local authority to require, as a condition of paying the grant, that the works are carried out within such time, not being less than 12 months, as the local authority may specify.

Is my hon. Friend aware that an Under-Secretary of State in his Department told the Environment and Home Office Sub-Committee of the Expenditure Committee on 24th and 31st January that in general these conditions are illegal? What does the Minister propose to do to stop the London Borough of Camden from imposing illegal conditions, forcing my constituents to refuse grants or run the risk of testing this in the courts? Why will he not take action?

It is not for me to interpret the law. That is for the courts. I am advised that the discretion given to local authorities under Part I of the 1969 Act gives them no power to impose any further conditions than the ones I outlined to the House a few moments ago. We are engaged in reviewing the whole question of older houses and improvements and I hope to report in due course.

Does the hon. Gentleman accept that Camden has probably had more than its fair share of abuses with the improvement grant system? Many of us feel that the restrictions recently introduced are long overdue. Is he aware that a property in my constituency, in North St. Pancras, changed hands 15 months ago for £7,000, attracted an improvement grant of £9,640, and is currently on sale today for £112,000?

I cannot comment on a specific case. If the hon. Gentleman will write to me I shall be most interested to have the details. I must point out to the House that it is in the discretion of local authorities whether to give improvement grants. Presumably Camden, rightly or wrongly, thought that that was a good case.

Local authorities may have discretion whether to give a grant, but should they not carry out the statute as it has been passed by this House? Whilst my hon. Friend cannot be expected to interpret the law, could he issue a circular giving his interpretation of the statute as it was intended?

A number of circulars about improvements have been issued from time to time. I would prefer to wait until the review is complete before risking another circular. I cannot interpret the law, but my advice is that local authorities do not have power to impose further conditions.

When will the hon. Gentleman come to a conclusion? Many of us wrote to him about cases six weeks or two months ago and are still awaiting replies. We must ensure that local authorities get on with their job.

I am delighted to inform the hon. Gentleman that I had the great pleasure of signing a letter to him this morning.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the local authorities which rely upon the use of short sea outfalls for the disposal of sewage; and if he will take steps to encourage them to introduce other forms of disposal on environmental grounds.

My Department has been carrying out a survey of sea outfalls. As soon as this information has been compiled I will make it available to my hon. Friend.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that it is alarming that in 1973 there should be any such outfalls, with the hazard that may arise to children and adults using the beaches, and also the threat to wild life in certain circumstances?

I am afraid that I cannot accept that proposition entirely. This country has a very large amount of sea space and a comparatively small amount of land space. Provided sewage is properly treated before its discharge into the sea it makes sense to use the purifying capabilities of the sea rather than large areas of land in very short supply.

Taking the outfall from the city of Edinburgh into the Firth of Forth, for example, is there not a case for discussing with the Reclamation Industries Council various ways in which sewage can be treated and put to more constructive uses?

I think there is such a case, but the hon. Gentleman will know that studies have been made and that the Government's views have been made known about the whole question of recycling waste for useful purposes.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what advice he has offered officials producing the new rating valuation lists.

The valuation officers of the Inland Revenue are required by statute to prepare the new valuation lists in accordance with the provisions of the General Rate Act 1967. It is not for my right hon. and learned Friend to give them advice.

Is the hon. Gentleman saying that officials have taken the decision of their own volition, to have what is, in effect, industrial derating, and that domestic ratepayers are to pay more rates than they would previously have done? Will he acknowledge that the council house tenant and domestic ratepayers in general must pay in rates well above the 5 per cent. increase that the Prime Minister would like to see?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman is not suggesting that officers of the Inland Revenue have done anything other than their full duty under the Act, which was brought in by the Labour Government. Material assistance has been given to mitigate the pressure on domestic ratepayers, and the whole series of discussions that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State have been having with local authorities may yet lead to decisions which will be made known to the House at an appropriate time.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Ford Motor Company is likely to benefit to the extent of about £250,000 through the derating that is implicit for industry in this rating revaluation? The shortfall will have to be made up by domestic ratepayers in the London boroughs of Havering and Barking. Does not he feel that in the light of this circumstance the Government should consider carefully whether they should proceed with rating revaluation at this time?

I am sure that my right hon. and learned Friend will be glad to consider the specific case mentioned by the hon. Gentleman. If revaluation had not been postponed for 10 years by the last Government we should not be confronted with the substantial changes of value with which we are now having to cope.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he has yet received the results of the inquiry conducted by the National Ports Council into the operations of the "non-scheme" ports; and if he will make a statement.

I would refer my hon Friend to the reply given to a similar Question from the right hon. Member for Sheffield, Park (Mr. Mulley) on 31st January.—[Vol. 849, c. 392.]

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that now that it has become apparent that the Aldington-Jones recommendation on the redundancy scheme has cost the taxpayer £30 million, much of it going to perfectly able-bodied and fit dockers who have had to be replaced from the temporary register, it suggests that Lord Aldington and Mr. Jones were less than perfect in their conclusions? Will my right hon. Friend therefore treat with considerable scepticism any suggestion emanating from that quarter which would have serious financial effects on the smaller ports?

I do not know of anyone who has been perfect in respect of recommendations having to do with the dock industry for many years. The Aldington-Jones Committee made a constructive attempt to get rid of a real sore—the existence of a temporary unattached register—and in particular to enable those who were sick or 55 and over to get out of the industry without further trouble. I think it has been a useful thing, although costly—I agree. My hon. Friend mentioned the smaller ports. The question of the boundaries of the national dock labour scheme was not within the terms of reference of the National Ports Council's inquiry.

Contrary to the opinion of the hon. Member for South Angus (Mr. Bruce-Gardyne), there are men who have sacrificed the whole of their working lives in the Liverpool docks and are receiving nothing like the amount of money mentioned by the hon. Gentleman. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have people in my constituency who have done 45 years' hard work in the Liverpool docks but are being treated in a most parsimonious fashion?

I do not know that that point arises on this Question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on his long-term housing policy.

I would refer the hon. Member to the full statement on the Government's housing policy made by my right hon. and learned Friend in the housing debate on Tuesday 6th February.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that statement and the reply which he has just given are appallingly complacent, in view of the abysmal housing record of this Government and the skyrocketing house prices of last year? If the Government are serious in their intention to solve the housing problem, does he not think it time that they set a target figure for house building big enough to provide a sufficient number of houses to solve the problem of homelessness and to reduce rising house prices, which have gone unchecked for the past 18 months or so?

Anyone reading the speech of my right hon. and learned Friend would find it far from complacent. He made clear the Government's view on rising house prices and their housing policy. As for setting targets, I would have thought that the experience of the last Labour Government would lead anyone to the conclusion that it is most unwise to do so.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that an important element in his policy must be the securing of an adequate supply of highly skilled labour for the industry? Is he aware that there is evidence of a scarcity of such labour? Does he realise that the number of apprentices entering the industry has fallen drastically in recent years, despite the protestations of the Government that workers in this industry are highly paid? Will he consider that aspect of the shortage?

Certainly. I am hoping shortly to have a meeting with the employers and trade unions to discuss this problem.

Will my hon. Friend consider this shortage in the light of the fact that a bricklayer is required to spend three years learning his trade when most bricklaying jobs, except for the really complicated ones, could be carried out by a man after six months' training?

You try it!

I detect a genuine wish on both sides of the House that progress should be made, and I will convey that feeling to the employers and the unions.

The Minister referred to the speech by the Secretary of State last Tuesday. There must be some error here, because the House certainly missed any constructive parts of that speech. I can recall no positive suggestions. Can the hon. Gentleman remind the House of perhaps three brief points which the Secretary of State made—or two?

My right hon. and learned Friend's speech was so full of constructive ideas that it would be a pity to spoil it for the House by attempting to shorten it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement regarding the report which he received from the National Ports Council arising from the meeting which the Council had on 29th November 1972 with the management and union representatives of Bambergers Ltd.

Members of the National Ports Council met representatives of Bambergers Ltd. and others during their survey of non-scheme ports and wharves. I received the council's report on the survey on 31st January and will make a statement as soon as possible.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be a little more forthcoming and answer a perfectly fair question? I thank him for what he has said. Can he confirm or deny that this firm will be forced to employ registered dock labour? If it is, will General and Municipal workers be able to qualify and continue their jobs?

All I can say at the moment—and I repeat this for the hon. Gentleman—is that the question of the extension of the national dock labour scheme to cover the small ports and wharves was not within the remit of the National Ports Council inquiry.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will give a general direction to British Railways that when they dispose of surplus property they should give the appropriate local authority the opportunity to acquire the property at valuation.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that deep concern has been expressed in the Manchester area about the disposal by British Railways of the city's Central Station? By which company was this property acquired, and at what price? If it has already been re-sold, at what price was it re-sold and at what profit? Will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that there is a full inquiry into this disquieting affair? Will he agree that we must break down the wall of secrecy surrounding these deals affecting the disposal of public property for private profit?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that there is no veil of secrecy. As far as I am concerned the nationalised industries are encouraged to behave in a commercial manner.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of a Press report saying that this public property was resold for a reported profit of £1 million within weeks of its purchase from British Railways? Is he satisfied with the valuation advice received by British Railways about this?

I was asked the general question—

Answer the question.

The right hon. Gentleman advises me to answer the question. I can recollect occasions when he managed to avoid doing so. The hon. Gentleman has now drawn to my attention a particular case and I will gladly look into it.

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm or deny that it has ceased to be a matter of general policy that local authorities are given the first option to buy from British Railways when they are disposing of property?

That has not ceased to be a matter of general practice. It is still the practice for nationalised industries with surplus land to give local authorities the first opportunity of buying it.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply I give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible date.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will introduce legislation to amend the Local Authorities (Goods and Services) Act 1970 in order to enable local authorities to include pre-school play groups in the list of public bodies specified in the Act.

Legislation is not necessary. My right hon. and learned Friend has power under the Act to designate by order public bodies to which local authorities may supply goods and services. He hopes to make a further order shortly, to extend the list of designated bodies. Pre-school play groups are certainly under consideration.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the recent correspondence which the Department has had with Berkshire County Council, informing it that it can no longer supply goods and services to play groups because it is excluded under the Act, is causing a great deal of concern and distress within the play group movement? Will he expedite any decisions to change this, thus making these services available to play groups?

It was the Berkshire case which raised the matter with which we are dealing. I hope that the order will be laid before the House shortly after the Easter Recess.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will mark tree-planting year by planting Australian gum trees in the central reservation area of motorways.

There is insufficient space to accommodate large trees in the central reservation of motorways, but my Department will be carrying out extensive roadside planting in 1973.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, contrary to what some hon. Gentlemen opposite may have thought, this is not a zany question? Is he aware that these trees grow extremely well in this country, that they are slender, and excellent windbreaks, and that as they do not shed their leaves they are an admirable defence against glare yet do not produce a skidding hazard? Is he further aware that they would bring about a considerable beautification of the country?

I can assure my hon. Friend that it would never for one moment occur to me to suspect that he was asking a zany question.

Has the right hon. Gentleman considered the safety effects of growing shrubbery on the central reservations of motorways, as is done on the Continent?

I have considered it. I have frequently been invited to consider almost every conceivable form of barrier. On the whole, I am of the opinion that the one we are using generally is best.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the current state of supply of bricks.

Overall demand and supply are now approximately in balance.

Can my hon. Friend explain how it is that developers are being quoted nine months to a year for supplies of facing bricks?

I would be grateful if my hon. Friend would give me details. I have been assured by the builders and brickmakers that there is no national problem, although there may be a few local ones. For example, the London Brick Company, which produces about 45 per cent. of the country's bricks, removed all restrictions on the acceptance of orders in December, and bricks are currently being delivered against orders being placed four to eight weeks ahead.

Can the Minister explain why in recent months we have been importing bricks from the Continent?

I am saying that at the moment demand and supply are approximately in balance. Earlier last year there were local shortages, and some delays in obtaining bricks. This is not a national problem now, although there may be isolated examples of shortages in respect of specialist bricks which take time to obtain.