asked the Secretary of State for the Environment, what has been the average penalty for conviction for not having a road fund vehicle licence in the last 12 months.

In 1972 the average fine was just under £9. In addition, orders were made for the payment of, on average, just under £6 in arrears of duty.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that correspondence that I have received from all parts of the country, particularly London, provides evidence suggesting that there is mass evasion of the paying of car licences, which irritates ordinary people? Will he consider holding a conference between the police authorities and the licensing authorities, as there does not seem to be any clear-cut method whereby those who evade paying their car licences can be apprehended? They do it for a variety of reasons, including not having an MOT test certificate, not having insurance—

Order. I have received representations that Question Time is going much too slowly. We must have short supplementary questions.

I note what the hon. Gentleman said. Many of the matters that he raises are for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, and I shall call his attention to them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement about the future of traffic in already congested areas of cities and towns.

No, Sir.

As every other family now has a car and the proportion is likely to increase, do the Government intend to deal with the matter on a national scale or leave it to local authorities to deal with the increasing problem haphazardly and at their whim?

I did not mean for a moment to suggest by the brevity of my answer that the Government do not take the problem very seriously. Local authorities have a big rôle to play in dealing with it, but I accept that the Government cannot avoid large responsibilities.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the House the assurance that he will not follow the fashion made popular by the Select Committee on Urban Motorways that the car is to be utterly banned from our cities? Will he urge local authorities to seek a compromise between the motor car and public transport?

Yes, indeed, Sir. If only one were dealing always with other people's transport, the problem would not exist.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress he has now made to prevent profiteering from the abuse of housing improvement grants.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given to my hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea (Mr. Worsley) on 12th June.—[Vol. 857, c. 292–3.]

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that the recent White Paper, Cmnd. 5339, will do virtually nothing to stop the exploitation and profiteering that is going on, particularly in the stress areas, which will increase between now and the proposed legislation indicated in the White Paper? Will the Minister give local authorities the power to put a suspension or moratorium on the making of improvement grants in stress areas where there is evidence of their exploitation for profit purposes?

The hon. Gentleman is under a misapprehension. Local authorities already have these powers. It is a discretionary grant; local authorities make improvement grants at their discretion. I have already urged them many times not to make grants if they feel that the sort of things to which the hon. Member refers are going on. The proposals in the White Paper will have substantial effects after the legislation is passed.

Does my hon. Friend agree that there is a case for requiring local authorities to impose a certain length of time during which the person obtaining the improvement grant must remain in occupation? There are many cases of people obtaining the grant and then selling the house, making a profit out of the grant.

My hon. Friend will have read the White Paper and will know that, subject to consultations now going on, it provides new discretionary powers for local authorities to attach conditions.

Does the Minister accept that that reply is exactly to the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton), who says that pending legislation arising from the White Paper people are worried about the kind of abuses that have been going on, which will go on, and will get worse? Is he aware that three old-age pensioners spent last night at No. 77 Leverton Street, N.W.5. in a house with no roof on it, under the pelting rain, because the roof had been taken off by the landlord, who is converting the property without having obtained planning permission for any of the improvements? Further, is he aware that landlords can continue with that process until legislation is introduced?

On the contrary, the discretion to make an improvement grant remains one for the local authority. I am sorry to hear that the hon. Gentleman's local authority made an improvement grant under those conditions.

I recognise that occasionally there is an abuse of the grant, but does not my hon. Friend agree that over the past two or three years there has been an enormous increase in housing costs and that properly the amount of the grant should be substantially increased and not diminished?

I do not think that it is necessary, in general, to take immediate action to raise the maximum amount of the grant. As is made clear in the White Paper, at the moment only 20 per cent. of all improvement grants are within £100 of the existing ceiling.

The Minister has constantly reiterated the point about local authorities having discretion which will allow them to withhold grants in the circumstances referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for St. Pancras, North (Mr. Stallard). Is he not aware that his own officials, in evidence to the Select Committee's sub-committee, have raised grave doubts about the legal powers of local authorities to use their discretion in this way? Further, will he consider urgently the suggestion that the right way to handle this matter, at least in the stress areas, is to introduce speedy legislation to authorise local authorities to take over and exercise management responsibilities at a moment's notice, as was suggested with regard to empty office buildings a year ago?

I am not sure how proper it is for me to refer to evidence given to a Select Committee which, as I understand it, is still sitting. Local authorities have the right either to make improvement grants or to refrain from doing so. That is a discretion which they have, and which they have always had.

On a point of order. In view of the entirely unsatisfactory replies to the questions that have been raised, I beg to give notice that I intend to raise this matter on the Adjournment as soon as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the establishment of the advisory routes system for heavy lorries.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the establishment of the advisory lorry routes system.

Discussions are continuing with the haulage industry. Meanwhile, by the end of August advisory routes for lorries will be signposted in eight of our major ports. Also, in a recent circular local authorities have been reminded of their powers to restrict lorry movements and parking, and a review initiated on the exercise and impact of existing regulations.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. Does he agree that the advisory route system should be wider and should proceed very fast? Further, does he agree that it could fit in very effectively and successfully with longer-term administrative and legislative proposals and that there should be a much more fundamental national approach to lorry routeing and zoning?

I take note of what my hon. Friend suggested. I also take the opportunity of acknowledging the valuable contribution that he has made towards the solution of the problem.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the last few weeks there has been a considerable number of accidents involving large heavy lorries? Further, is he aware that many of those lorries came from the Continent? Does he agree that many accidents happen because such lorries are using totally unsuitable routes? What will the Minister do about this?

Improve our road system as quickly as possible.

Does my right hon Friend agree that the success of the advisory route system will depend largely on the co-operation and good will of the haulage industry? Does he not consider that stronger measures should be taken for drivers to be advised of the most suitable routes, particularly drivers arriving at the ports?

As I said in my original answer, we are moving towards what my hon. Friend is asking for.

How can the Minister declare that the Government will improve the roads as quickly as possible when a few weeks ago his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer declared in the House, in unequivocal terms, that the road expenditure programme, not only for this year but for next year, will be cut drastically? Is he aware that local authorities have had a circular telling them precisely how to do that?

The hon. Gentleman puts his point with the unexampled and unrivalled charm for which he is so well known.

Answer the question.

If the hon. Gentleman really thinks that his question is worth asking, he might wait for the answer. The answer is that the total amount spent on the road programme will continue to increase.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will issue a circular to local authorities advising them on the use of their powers to prohibit heavy lorries on minor roads.

One was issued last month.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply, but does he realise that life in many villages on minor roads is intolerable, due to their use by large lorries, and that no matter how much these minor roads are improved he will not improve the situation? Will he not take even firmer measures with the local authorities?

I am always prepared to consider any possible course of action to deal with a problem which I am sure the hon. Gentleman recognises is very difficult.

Will my right hon. Friend take measures to encourage the breaking of bulk at fly-offs on the motorways, particularly for the large lorries which come from Europe and from various manufacturing centres in the United Kingdom, so that smaller lorries can be sent on to the minor roads?

I take note of what my hon. Friend has said.

Will my right hon. Friend make sure that when these heavy lorries are diverted from minor roads to major roads, the signs, certainly in port areas, are given in the main European languages?

I shall consider that most carefully.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will make arrangements to visit Portsmouth.

I have at present no plans to do so.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman oblige the citizens of Portsmouth by making early plans to visit Portsmouth? When he comes will he look at two problems in particular? First, will he consider the difficulties arising from the fact that Portsmouth has a large proportion of public sector housing and that some of the worst living conditions in the city are in the public sector? Will he consider the need for a large injection of public funds completely to improve the environment of the public sector? Secondly, will he consider the absolutely appalling concept proposed by a special working party for a strategic lorry park on the already overcrowded Portsea Island? That would be completely unacceptable to the people of Portsmouth, who are short of space already.

I shall bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman says. The lorry park is a matter, in the first instance, for the Portsmouth City Council. Thereafter the planning procedures may apply. If the hon. Gentleman has specific questions that he wishes to put on the Order Paper I shall do my best to answer them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has yet met the Chairman of the GLC Housing Committee; and if he will make a statement of the matters discussed.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has yet met the Chairman of the GLC Housing Committee; and if he will make a statement.

I had a full discussion with the Chairman of the GLC's Housing Development Committee on 13th June. A number of problems of mutual interest were raised and I am now looking forward to a continuation of the past very close co-operation between the council and my Department.

I note the Minister's reply. Is the hon. Gentleman now in a position to say what help he intends to give the GLC to acquire land in the outer boroughs? Further, what help will he give authorities to purchase more properties by way of loan sanctions and subsidies so that they can do so in the stress areas?

I understand that the chairman of the GLC Housing Development Committee is to have a discussion with all the London boroughs. We must await the outcome of that discussion.

What advice has my hon. Friend given to the Greater London Housing Development Committee about the sale of council houses?

I fear that the Greater London Council and I differ about the sale of council houses. I think that my hon. Friend and I are in agreement on that matter.

Will the Minister tell us what discussions he has had or intends to have with the Chairman of the GLC about speeding up the process of compulsory purchase orders to help alleviate the general problem in stress areas?

That point was not raised with the chairman of the housing development committee, but it is one that I am pursuing in view of questions which have been raised. I am hoping that I shall be able to make some improvement in the matter.

As the Under-Secretary of State for the Environment is Chairman of the London Housing Action Group, will he be in a position to tell the House, in answer to the questions already asked, what he proposes to do to enable the GLC and other authorities to purchase land in the outer London areas more speedily, and to get houses built?

As I have said, this question relates to the meeting that I had with the GLC Housing Development Committee and the matters which we discussed. At that meeting the chairman told me that she was proposing to have meetings with the chairmen of the London boroughs about the question of land. We must now wait and see what is the outcome of the meetings.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what view the Government has recently expressed to the Common Market authorities on their proposal to raise the age for obtaining driving licences from 17 to 18 years.

None, Sir, as I have not yet had any occasion to do so.

As the Government have now had nearly nine months to consider the matter, will my right hon. Friend be good enough to tell the House to what conclusions the Government have come on the question whether the age at which driving licences are issued should be raised from 17 to 18?

The Commission's proposals have been in orbit for only a comparatively short time. The proposals have not yet come before the Council of Ministers. I have not felt called upon to express an opinion. For myself, I can only say that I view a large part of the contents of the proposals with very great reservations.

The House will show great interest in the right hon. Gentleman's remarks. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the proposals are a directive of the Commission and were circulated as long ago as last October or November? It may be that the Government's present policy is to wait until the last minute, when matters get to the Council of Ministers, but many people would like to know the Government's attitude to the odd collection of proposals contained in the directive.

I have contented myself so far by politely saying that I have a great many reservations about the contents of the proposals that have emanated from the Commission. Incidentally, it is not a directive. The matter has not yet been considered by the Council of Ministers. As I have said, I think that a number of the proposals are things that I should not like at all.

I recognise that the risks of accidents are greater with a heavier traffic flow and that the best way to deal with this question is through more stringent tests and teaching methods, but will my right hon. Friend resist strongly the suggestion that the licence age should be raised from 17?

As I have said, I have many reservations on these proposals. I see no call to alter the driving age.

Will the right hon. Gentleman remind other Ministers that even in a federal country like the United States these matters are left to the individual States? Surely the Commission has more to do than fussing around with proposals like this.

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, I am not responsible for the proposals that emanate from the Commission. What I am responsible for is the response which Her Majesty's Government make to them—and these present proposals are, I think, not to be wholly welcomed.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is aware of the inconvenience caused to residents of Barking by the construction of a flyover at Lodge Avenue; what exchanges he has had on this matter with the council of the London Borough of Barking; why representations and correspondence from that council's officers were repeatedly ignored by his Department and not acknowledged; and if he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. We appreciate and regret that major roadworks inevitably cause some inconvenience to residents in spite of efforts to mitigate these effects. None of the representations made by the council has been ignored. Meetings attended by representatives of the council to discuss the works were held on 4th April and 2nd June.

Will the hon. Gentleman say what efforts were made to mitigate this particular inconvenience, which is of a very extreme nature? Some of the people living nearby cannot get in or out of their front doors because the works come right up to their houses. There is not much mitigation there.

Various works were carried out to pavements, for example. There should be a substantial improvement by September, when one of the carriageways will open. This is a major road scheme for a three-quarters of a mile heavy traffic route, and the responsible engineers and my Department have been working hard with the borough to try to make the inconvenience to residents as little as possible.

While thanking the hon. Gentleman for that answer, so far as it goes, may I point out that September is a long time away? Does the hon. Gentleman realise that ambulances and fire engines cannot get through, either?

It is a long time, but we are pressing on with this complicated and expensive scheme as quickly as possible. September is the earliest possible date, bearing in mind all the considerations.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what environmental projects will be deferred or cancelled as a result of the cuts in public expenditure announced on 21st May 1973.

I have nothing to add to the answer given to my hon. Friend the Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen) on 25th May.—[Vol. 857, c. 184–6.]

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman not give an undertaking that since all the information we are now receiving indicates that very much money will have to be spent in future in giving Britain a satisfactory environment he will press his Cabinet colleagues as strongly as possible that, wherever public expenditure is available, it should be provided and not cut from environmental projects?

Excluding housing, for which we have made additional provisions, we still expect a growth in local government expenditure in 1974–75 of about 2½per cent.

Is it possible that the building of reservoirs in rural areas can be postponed?

Every project has to be judged on its merits.

How will the cuts affect the east-west roads proposed in the Northern Region? The north-south communications are now reasonably satisfactory, but without the two east-west road links the scheme remains half-baked.

For various reasons I have a good deal of sympathy with that general proposition, but it is too early to say which roads will be affected. Naturally, discussions are going on as to which projects might be deferred. The Question refers to projects being cancelled, but we have much more in mind the deferment of projects while the construction industry is under heavy pressure. It is a question of resources as well as money.

Did I understand the right hon. and learned Gentleman to say that next year expenditure on the environment, less housing, would rise by only 2½ per cent.? If I did so understand him, may I ask whether he is aware that this is a smaller rise than the Government are expecting in the gross national product, and that he is telling us, therefore, that the entire block of environmental expenditure is to decline next year as a proportion of the gross national product?

I referred to local government expenditure as a whole. What the right hon. Gentleman calls "environmental" may vary from project to project. People have different conceptions of what is "environment". On the expenditure as a whole, the original idea was to have a growth of about 4 per cent. but now, excluding housing, it will be 2½ per cent. In housing, however, we envisage a substantial increase. I remember the Opposition, in the local elections, emphasising that we ought to put houses before roads.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many claims for rent allowances for unfurnished properties are now being met; and what estimate he has made of the rate of take-up by eligible persons other than those receiving supplementary benefit.

I regret that information on rent allowances granted is not yet available from enough local authorities to enable any reliable estimate to be given. The initial rate of take-up has been slow, but it is steadily improving.

Will my hon. Friend consider the suggestion that national insurance pensioners should be given special additional help to encourage them to obtain their entitlement under the Housing Finance Act? For the longer term, will he consider the possibility of the introduction of a householders' allowance in the tax credit scheme, so that applications for benefit under the Act are put on a more or less automatic basis?

I note my hon. Friend's suggestion. He will appreciate that I cannot anticipate the provisions of the tax credit scheme. But he will appreciate that to include rent allowance could make the scheme much more complex.

There are indications that rebates or allowances in the council house sector are generally good, and that the take-up is probably about 30 per cent. or more, but is my hon. Friend aware that in the private sector the take-up is very low? Will he consider further publicity, so that private tenants can take advantage of the considerable benefits open to them under the Act?

Yes, Sir. My hon. Friend is right in saying that the take-up in the private sector is very good, but in dealing with the private sector one has to remember that this great reform has been in operation for less than six months. The indications are that the numbers are improving, but my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Construction and I will not be satisfied until there is great improvement in the take-up in rent allow- ances, and we shall use ever possible means to bring that about.

If the Minister considers a 30 per cent. take-up very good, is not the failure to take up allowances an indication of the complete and abject failure of the whole policy of selectivity?

With respect to the hon. Gentleman, the needs allowance upon which the rent rebate is calculated is very generous. The percentage of take-up in the public sector is good when related to the number of people who qualify for this help.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the latest average price of newly-built and second-hand dwellings as compared with 18th June 1970.

The estimated average price of houses mortgaged with building societies in the first quarter of 1973 was £9,483 for new dwellings, and £9,283 for other dwellings. Corresponding figures for the second quarter of 1970 were £5,082 and £4,778, respectively.

I suppose that that is what the Prime Minister means by the boom. We certainly got it in housing! Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the predominant reason why we have this fantastic increase in house costs is the Tory Government's Housing Finance Act and the upward spiral in rents and prices—[Interruption.]—which has lined the pockets of some of those who are shouting? Is it any wonder that property spivs and prostitutes are competing with one another to say that life is better under the Conservatives?

The hon. Member's supplementary is worthy of his usual comments in the House.

Does my hon. Friend not agree, that disagreable as these figures undoubtedly are, there has nevertheless been a welcome reduction in the rate of increase over recent months? Does he not further agree that since this has coincided with a more difficult mortgage situation it points to the desirability of the building societies equalising their lending over a lengthy period if necessary through a voluntary stabilisation fund?

My hon. Friend is quite right. He will have noted in the April White Paper our intention to seek voluntary arrangements with building societies.

The hon. Gentleman says that his hon. Friend the Member for Billericay (Mr. McCrindle) is quite right and that this is due to the natural inflow of funds. Is it not because, far from the rate of increase in house prices slowing down, it was 10 per cent. in the first quarter of this year which was a substantially faster rise than in the last quarter of last year? What does he think about that? Does he think that the Government are totally helpless in the face of it?

No, I do not think that at all. The right hon. Gentleman quite fairly draws attention to the first quarter, but I must point out that this is a comlicated set of figures relating partly to mortgage approvals and partly to mortgage completions for the period concerned. The subjective evidence that I receive is that the rate of increase is very much less than the figures—

Not in London.

The hon. Member says that that is not the case in London, but the situation varies very much in different parts of London.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will request the London local authorities to provide him with statistics showing what proportion of the 99,000 houses standing empty in London is owned by them and the period of time for which they have been empty.

No, Sir. The figure quoted comes from the 1971 Census County Report for London and cannot be broken down to supply the information requested. A recent survey by the London Housing Office showed that only a small proportion of local authority dwellings are vacant at any one time.

Will my hon. Friend try to give the House some figures? Is he aware that the figures that have been quoted in official reports are appalling? Is he aware that it is said that some of these houses have been empty for five or six years, and that local authorities in London bear a heavy responsibility for this? It is at least his function—I do not attribute blame—to give us the right figures and supply the information that we need, because it is only if we have the information that we can bring pressure to bear, as we all wish to.

The recent survey to which I referred showed that most boroughs had only 200 to 300 council dwellings empty at any one moment, and usually far fewer. These properties were usually vacant for good reasons, such as repair, improvement or re-allocation.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is a lot of empty property in London, but not for the reasons that he has given'? Is he aware that this property is empty because it is too expensive for anyone to rent or buy? Does he agree that in view of the massive homelessness in London this is a ridiculous situation? Will he help local authorities compulsorily to purchase buildings such as Centre Point, which could be converted into homes for the homeless as an interim measure?

In the recent discussions with London local authorities my right hon. and learned Friend made it clear that he would consider the possibility of using compulsory purchase orders where owners were blatantly disregarding the obligation to bring their housing into use. There is another point. In the recent White Paper it was made clear that further encouragement would be given to making use of empty houses, because the local authority would be given discretion to rate such properties 100 per cent. instead of 50 per cent., as at present.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will supplement the work of the Alkali Inspectorate in Attercliffe and Tinsley, Sheffield.

Since 1971 the Sheffield-based district of the Alkali and Clean Air Inspectorate has been reduced in size, enabling the inspectors to concentrate more closely on the City area. The Inspectorate is already assisted in Attercliffe and Tinsley by the city council, which controls a number of registered works, and regular visits will shortly be undertaken by one of the new industrial grit and dust testing teams being set up by my right hon. and learned Friend.

When the Minister next drives up the M1 will he look to his left and right as he crosses the Tinsley Viaduct and observe the greatest concentration of industrial pollution in this country? Is he aware that according to those who have suffered this—now including industrial workers as well as housewives—this pollution is increasing in its intensity and its offensive nature? Will he reconsider the present state of the Inspectorate, with a view to increasing not merely the numbers of inspectors but also their powers?

I am conscious, as a result of driving up the M1, of the problem that the hon. Gentleman raises. This is being dealt with urgently. I have received the hon. Gentleman's letter concerning the breakdown and the difficulties that have recently arisen, causing trouble to neighbouring factories. I hope that we can deal urgently with this, because it is a serious matter.

Does my right hon. Friend not agree that there is an urgent need to increase the strength of this Inspectorate, since the inspectors are grossly overworked? Will he also consider, in the near future, the amalgamation of this Inspectorate with the Factory Inspectorate?

There has been an increase in the Inspectorate by the reduction in the size of the district that it has to cover. The city of Sheffield has taken over certain duties, which should help. There is also the new dust and grit testing team, which will be of great assistance. If my hon. Friend will put down a Question about the amalgamation I shall deal with it.

We are grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his expressions of concern and his promise of urgent action, but does he realise that conditions in my hon. Friend's constituency are much worse than they have been for many years? At a time when we are seeking to improve environmental conditions, this is an urgent matter. Is he aware that it would be appreciated if he or one of his colleagues from the Department would come to Sheffield to see this for themselves?

I can give an assurance that either my Under-Secretary or I will come to look at this, because we think it is a serious matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to encourage the expansion of the building industry in order that it can meet the demands being made on it, especially in the private sector.

It is my policy to encourage the building industry to meet all the demands made on it.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that the building industry is so short of labour in some parts of the country that it is difficult to get a builder to carry out quite small repair jobs, because he is reluctant to transfer his men from work on new housing? Does my hon. Friend hold out any hope of this situation being remedied?

My hon. Friend is right. This is what worries the whole House. There are, in particular, shortages of bricklayers and carpenters, especially in the Midlands and the South-East. I am engaged in talks with both sides of industry to see what can be done about this.

Since one of the most serious aspects of this is the development of labour only, or "lump" labour, will the hon. Gentleman tell the House what encouragement he is giving, in the discussions taking place between the unions and the employers, to the reaching of a voluntary agreement for dealing with this? If this is not possible, will he say whether the Government are prepared to introduce legislation to deal with it?

It would be wiser to wait and see the outcome of the negotiations between the employers and the unions. I am hoping that they will be successful.

In addition to stimulating expansion of the building industry, will my hon. Friend co-operate with the industry in seeking the stimulation of new techniques and methods devised to increase labour productivity both in relation to craftsmen and labourers within the industry?

I agree with my right hon. and learned Friend. It is encouraging that the number of craftsmen going through the training opportunities scheme has substantially increased, and I hope that this will have some effect.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will make it his policy not to permit any erosion of the Metropolitan Green Belt within the new Epping Forest district of Essex.

Particular development proposals have to be considered on their merits but it is well known that we are determined to preserve an effective green belt around London.

More homes are needed, and my right hon. and learned Friend's statement clearly is satisfactory, but is he aware of the anxiety occasioned by the indication that the Government wish to take some green belt land for building? It would help to remove anxiety if the Government clarified their intentions.

I appreciate the anxieties. It is important to emphasise that land will not be taken for housing where it conflicts with basic green belt policy. We have increased the green belt round London and we propose to see a further extension. If land is taken which is nationally green belt, although it may have no amenity or other value, we shall have replacement in mind. We appreciate the need to improve access and amenity facilities in the green belt.

Leaving aside the proposals for the expansion of Harlow, as we should, because the proposals are under consideration, will my right hon. and learned Friend consider particularly closely those areas which are only theoretically green belt? There are old decayed greenhouses in the Lea Valley where the horticultural industry has changed. Will he consider those particu larly closely, because many of them are industrial slums?

Those are the sort of factors that must be borne in mind before there is any incursion into what is described as green belt. In considering whether to make a draft order expanding the designated area, I would bear carefully in mind whether any expansion of Harlow New Town required incursion into existing or proposed green belt.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment to what extent his letters to local authorities requesting them to reconsider their rate demands have led to reductions in those demands.

One hundred and seventy local authorities in England effected reductions amounting to £11·3 million. I am informed by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Wales that the inclusion of Wales in this answer would make the figures 210 local authorities and reductions of £13·2 million.

I am glad to hear that at least some local authorities have heeded my right hon. Friend's advice. However, is he satisfied that he has sufficient staff in his Department to consider whether rate demands are unreasonable? What will he do if local authorities continue to make extravagant and unjustified demands?

We have power to monitor the rate poundages and to make suggestions to local authorities when we think reductions might be made. Of the 1,400 authorities that were asked to review their proposals, in 480 cases the invitation suggested specific amounts. It is the local authority's responsibility to fix the rate poundage. There is no question of ordering local authorities what the rate poundage should be. The staff in my Department are able to deal with this matter, as I think is shown by the fact that they were able to suggest specific reductions in 480 cases.

In monitoring this matter, will the right hon. Gentleman's Department take two things into consideration—first, that because of inflation the expenditure of local authorities that should be made this year on necessary works will be much less if it is deferred and, secondly, because of a slight aberration by the electorate in electing Conservative-controlled councils that have delayed doing things excessive expenditure has been incurred in some cases this year to make up for the backlog?

I do not agree with the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. Perhaps he would remind me of the first part.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that inflation means that money should be spent on necessary work now rather than next year?

The question of inflation was discussed fully with all those authorities that were asked to reduce the amount of rate poundage. Views as to what should be allowed for inflation differ between local authorities. This has been one of the considerations in the monitoring that we have been doing.

I appreciate that it is possible to ask local authorities to reduce their rates, but is it not the case that most local authorities, in consequence of Government policy, have had to impose large increases on most ratepayers? The right hon. Gentleman talks about advising local authorities to reduce rates. Is he aware that his Department advised one of my local authorities to reduce rates by cutting out a proposal for concessionary fares to old-age pensioners?

If the hon. Gentleman writes to me about the case, I shall look into it. Generally speaking, there has been co-operation between central Government and local government in considering what should be the right figures based on the figures agreed between local authority associations and my Department in the course of the last rate support grant negotiations.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will arrange for an investigation into signposting to Keighley, and in particular from the M606 through Bradford.

Signing within Bradford is the responsibility of the city council. The Department's regional office has been asked to discuss possible improvements with it.

I am glad to hear that. I appreciate that the Minister is not intimately concerned with the question of signposting in Keighley, but I assure him that it is appallingly bad. Skipton, a much smaller town, has many more sign-posts. Last year—

Order. The hon. Lady must ask a supplementary question.

When he is next in the West Riding, will my hon. Friend come with me to Keighley so that I may show him what the situation is?

I am always happy to accept my hon. Friend's invitation to go anywhere with her. I know this part of the country very well, and I hope that the discussions that we are having with the Bradford City Council will go some way towards satisfying my hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the regional dispersal of oil refineries and his Department's policy regarding the location of refineries in the next five years.

The siting of oil refineries was debated on the Adjournment on 15th June and I have nothing to add to what my hon. Friend said in reply to that debate.

Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman concede that his hon. Friend's reply to the Adjournment debate that I initiated on Friday was extremely inadequate? As there will be a need to expand the number of oil refineries, is not the time ripe for a national strategy in siting oil refineries in the United Kingdom? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman consult the other Ministers involved to see how a national strategy can be devised?

I have no reason to dissent from what the hon. Gentleman has said as a general proposition. I shall consult my right hon. and hon. Friend's concerned. Each case must be considered on its merits. We cannot prejudge all the circumstances that might arise. However, I thought that my hon. Friend's reply to the Adjournment debate was helpful. We have taken into account, and will continue to take into account, the points that the hon Gentleman made in the Adjournment debate.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend take this matter more seriously? Is he aware of the intensive opposition in South-East Essex to the planning approvals given by Labour and Conservative Governments to the siting of oil refineries too close to residential populations for health or safety? Will he make it clear that in future considerations of commercial interests will not be allowed to prevail in the face of the opposition of local authorities, the elected Member of Parliament and the Minister's own inspector?

What my hon. Friend says illustrates my point that we must consider cases on their merits. With the new approvals, there is more or less a balance between the refining capacity to be provided and the requirements of the South-East area. On national policy—and we cannot rule it out of consideration in these matters—the Government follow the line adopted by the previous Government, which is set out in the White Paper on fuel policy published in November 1967. Paragraph 41 sets out in broad terms the sort of considerations that have to be borne in mind, as well as the local representations. We try to strike the best balance possible.

We have moved on some way since 1967. Is it not impossible to consider every case on its merits unless we have some sense of national policy and strategy? We are getting into a mess when oil refineries are being imposed on the residents of Canvey Island, who detest the idea, while other parts of the country long to have them for regional reasons. Following our recent brief debate, will the Secretary of State consider publishing a White Paper or a Green Paper setting out broadly what are the arguments—regional, economic and the rest—for this policy, rather than that policy, in relation to refineries? There is a great deal of public disquiet about this.

I shall certainly bear that in mind. I am not quite sure what the right hon. Gentleman means when he says that we have moved on some way since 1967. In due course he may sug- gest to us in what way he disagrees with the 1967 statement of the broad national policy. A number of proposals are coming forward for the construction of refineries elsewhere—for example, in Scotland. To some extent the initiative rests with the companies to assess the demand, but thereafter the regional and national considerations have to be borne in mind in any public inquiry.

My right hon. and learned Friend will obviously wish to bear in mind that if as a result of a general policy of refusing refineries we reach the same position as the United States—which is seriously short of refinery capacity in general, which is contributing to the severe energy crisis—this will not be generally popular in the United Kingdom?

That factor was recognised in 1967 and it is still relevant today.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that I strongly support the plea made by the hon. Member for Essex South-East (Sir Bernard Braine)? There is already more oil stored along those few miles of the Thames Estuary from Canvey Island to Purfleet than is stored anywhere else in Europe. Does the Minister realise that the people who live along this dread river bank are not only gravely inconvenienced but are in fearful danger?

I cannot accept the latter part of the supplementary question. Questions of health, pollution and safety are relevant to any public inquiry on the siting of a particular oil refinery. I am aware of the public anxieties. One factor to be borne in mind is proximity to markets. I have said that, as far as one can judge, the present position is that the capacity of oil refineries matches the demand in the South-Eastern area. We have also to bear in mind the export of oil and balance of payments considerations, to which the 1967 White Paper drew attention.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment, following the public inquiry at Harvington, Evesham, Worcestershire, on 30th April 1973, whether he is yet in a position to make an announcement of his decision on the construction of the proposed bypass at Harvington on the A439 and whether he will make a statement.

We are considering the inspector's report, and shall make an announcement as soon as a decision has been reached.

Does my hon. Friend realise that the money for this bypass was authorised in 1969—four years ago—in a sum of £150,000, which became £171,000 in 1971 and is now estimated at £240,000, and still there is no decision? Will he undertake to promulgate a final decision and give the go-ahead for the roadway before the end of July, when we rise for the recess?

I remind my hon. Friend that we received the inspector's report only last month. I take note of the urgent representations that he has made about an early decision and I shall do my best to see that this comes about.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will take immediate steps to restrict danger to pedestrians in the narrow part of the Tring High Street on the A41 trunk road.

We are discussing with the local authority and the police a scheme for alternate one-way working in the High Street under signal control, with a view to this being introduced on an experimental basis.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that reply. Will he confirm that there will not be any hold-up on account of finance? In the discussions to which he has referred it was said that traffic lights for such one-way working would be too expensive?

Subject to the delivery of the necessary equipment, I expect the scheme to be implemented within two or three months.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied with the number of tenders for new council house building schemes.

Some authorities have encountered problems in obtaining tenders, but the number of dwellings in tenders accepted by local authorities in England and Wales in the first four months of 1973 was 23 per cent. up on the same period last year.

Is the Minister aware that throughout the country families are having to live amongst the muck and rubble of demolition because local authorities cannot get tenders for the building of houses to rehouse them? In Gateshead, three major schemes attracted tenders only from the public works department, which the Government did not allow because they were above the cost yardstick. Will the Minister do something urgently about these problems?

If I may refer to the hon. Gentleman's constituency, my Department is in touch with the council about the three schemes with which there were difficulties. I hope that we shall be able to resolve those difficulties so as to enable competitive tenders to be obtained, so that all three schemes can go ahead.

Is the Minister aware of the survey of the North-East, which I placed before his right hon. and learned Friend and which contained evidence that because of the unit cost yardstick local authorities cannot build council houses? The unit cost yardstick argument has gone on long enough. Is not the Minister aware that representations from all parts of the United Kingdom have been made to him, his Department and the Government to consider a new unit cost yardstick that will enable local authorities to get on with their building needs?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, considerable efforts are being made to try to solve his local problem. I ask him to realise the large volume of house building that is being undertaken by the building industry, particularly in his region. There has been an enormous increase in the amount of work done under the house improvement grant scheme—the number of grants has doubled in comparison with last year—as well as all the new house building in the public and private sectors.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in the Byker area of Newcastle people are living in abject misery because redevelopment is being held up by the cost yardstick problem? This is not a political issue—the council is Tory-controlled. I know that the building industry is heavily overburdened with revitalisation, but will the Minister accept that the cost yardstick is the main problem and get down to it?

We should like to get that building work moving ahead as rapidly as possible. The hon. Gentleman has been good enough to refer to the tremendous demands being made upon the industry. He knows that last November we introduced this special market allowance to give some flexibility to these negotiations. Against the background of this difficult situation we are placing a large number of contracts.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the average cost of an acre of building land on 1st January 1972 and on 1st January 1973; and what is the figure for the latest convenient date.

The latest available figures cover the second half of 1972, when the weighted average price per acre of private sector housing land in England and Wales was some £20,000. For the second half of 1971 it was some £10,400

The Minister spoke extremely quietly. Does not that answer show the sickening severity of housing land price inflation? Is it not clear that it continued unabated during the so-called freeze, while the Government remained content to tolerate or encourage private rapacity? Would the Minister care to say whom he regards as responsible for this.

I cannot accept what the hon. Gentleman says. The figures I have given to the House are about four months behind, because the index carries a built-in time lag between the date when the price of a plot is agreed and the recording of the price statistics. The figures are therefore considerably out of date. The short answer is to release more land and to provide more land, so that plenty of housing land is available for people to build houses.

Will the Minister please repeat the figures? Will he admit that, even if his latest proposal to bring more land into use succeeded, it would still have to be bought at market value—which is often a hundred times its previous value—before building or planning permission is given? Should not it be sold at its previous value as potato fields or disused dockland, as is proposed in the plan for public ownership of land just published by the Labour Party?

I have read the Labour Party's plans with great interest. I recommend them to the House to read. If they were ever put into operation they would cost tens of thousands of millions of pounds. They are wholly impracticable.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In his original reply the Minister deliberately mumbled. For the convenience of the House, might the hon. Gentleman be allowed to repeat the figures for which my hon. Friend asked in his original Question?

If the House would like me to repeat the original answer, I should be glad to do so. It reads:

"The latest available figures cover the second half of 1972, when the weighted average price per acre of private sector housing land in England and Wales was some £20,000. For the second half of 1971 it was some £10,400."

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Minister still has not shouted out those figures. My hearing is not inadequate. I did not hear the first figure. Will the hon. Gentleman please repeat it?

Order. This is not a matter for the Chair. I confess that I did not hear the figure the first time, but certainly I heard it the second time.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is clear that quite a number of hon. Members did not hear the figures quoted. I heard them reasonably clearly, being in fairly close proximity to the hon. Gentleman, but may I ask for confirmation that he said that there had been a 100 per cent. increase in land prices?

I do not think that that is a point of order.