asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many square feet of new buildings are proposed by Ready Mix Concrete Company at the Thorpe Water Leisure Park.

I understand that proposals recently approved by Surrey County Council include about 87,000 square feet of new buildings.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the plans suggest a Battersea Fun Fair type development in what is a green belt area? Is it right that a decision of this magnitude should be reached behind closed doors, because this only breeds rumour and counter-rumour? Will my right hon. Friend consider appointing a public inquiry so that local views can be expressed publicly, because only this will quell the local anger?

This development involves about 400 acres of worked-out gravel lagoons as a water park. The outline proposal was referred by my right hon. Friend the then Secretary of State in 1971 as a substantial departure, but we thought it right to leave it to the Surrey County Council to decide. The council granted planning permission in January 1972 and detailed permission on 1st November. It would be wrong of us, not having called in the first application, now to investigate the details. This is surely a matter for the local planning authority to deal with.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied with the working of the Caravan Sites Act 1960 and the Caravan Sites Act 1968.

There is room for improvement in the working of the Acts, and my right hon. and learned Friend and I, in co-operation with local authorities, are continuously striving to implement the Acts effectively.

I thank the Minister for that reply. Is he aware that complaints have been coming into the headquarters of my union—the Transport and General Workers' Union—from some of its old members on sites such as these? The complaints appear to relate to sites privately owned although licensed by local authorities. The complaints contain stories of harassment and, in one case, of caravan dwellers being told that they could have visitors for only two weeks of the year. As these people are not protected by any rent control or other control such as that which is available to ordinary householders, will the Minister undertake to look at that aspect of these complaints?

Caravan dwellers have the benefit of the law. It is an offence to harass a caravan dweller on a site which requires a licence. Any order for possession of a caravan can be suspended by the courts for a period of one year. Rented caravans have the benefit of the furnished letting part of the Rent Acts.

Will my right hon. Friend take powers to designate parts of counties as areas under the 1968 Act? At present, wherever authorised sites are placed other caravan dwellers swarm into the area, with the result that there is a great discouragement upon the counties to proceed with further caravan sites within the whole country?

My hon. Friend is right. I have had strong representations that we should designate part of a county. This matter is still under consideration. It may need legislation to bring it into effect.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on holiday sites in particular there are shameless abuses of these two Acts? There is complete neglect of the sites and ignoring of the regulations in many cases. This militates greatly against foreign visitors coming here with touring vans. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware also that many site operators, with impunity, increased site rents at the time of the operation of phase 2 and phase 3 of the counter-inflation policy and that they harass people on holiday sites by insisting that they buy a van at an inflated price from the site owner in many instances? Will the Minister look into all this?

Local authorities can impose conditions on caravan sites in granting licences for them and, in doing so, must follow the model which has been laid down.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to introduce comprehensive legislation dealing with caravan sites and mobile home residents.

As my hon. Friend will know from her recent discussions on this topic, there are great practical difficulties in legislating in this field, and at present the Government have no plans for legislation on this subject.

Is my hon. Friend aware that mobile home residents have no effective security of tenure and no legal protection against the imposition of conditions and a number of practices which would be unacceptable in any other context? Does he agree that we have an obligation at least to afford to mobile home residents the security and protection that is afforded to all other types of dwellings?

My hon. Friend will know that some of the practices that concern her and many other hon. Members, as shown by an answer to an earlier question today, can be referred to the Director General of Fair Trading. I am anxious that nothing should be done which would cause the supply of places on caravan sites rapidly to dry up. It is extremely difficult to devise legislation that would have the effect that my hon. Friend has in mind. However, I shall be glad to consider any further representations from her on this topic.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that ground rent increases of 60 per cent. in 18 months, which have been imposed upon mobile home occupiers in my constituency, are an absolute disgrace. Does he further realise that his Department's circular on white land has discouraged the use of further land for mobile home residents? Is it not high time that the Government introduced control over increases in rent for mobile home residents?

I do not think that the circular discouraged the use of mobile homes. I shall consider the point that the hon. Gentleman has in mind. I believe that the right kind of mobile home in the right place can frequently make a useful contribution. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will send me details of the cases that he has in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many night-time road accidents involved parked cars during the winter of 1972–73; whether the number of such accidents showed an increase on the previous year; and, if so, by how many.

2,711 during the period November 1972 to February 1973; the corresponding figure for 1971–72 was 2,090.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in Wiltshire the number of accidents involving parked cars is 75 per cent. in urban areas? Is he further aware that, as a result of the 1972 vehicle lighting regulations, a good many people are now leaving their cars parked outside all night without lights, even though they have adequate drives and garages? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that this practice is entirely reprehensible and inconsiderate, and will he do something about it?

This has been a very difficult problem for a long time. The previous situation was very unsatisfactory and I freely admit that the new regulations give no cause for being content. I am looking at the matter urgently with the police and others interested.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will review the planning appeals procedure.

A review is already being carried out by Mr. George Dobry, QC, assisted by an advisory group.

I am grateful for that reply, but is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that the appeals procedure can now be seen to be neither fair nor just, because ordinary folk cannot afford to employ the expertise required in pursuing their case? Is he therefore prepared to consider whether opposing groups ought to be given financial aid to prepare and conduct their case, and to make representations to local authorities or anyone else to whom they have to appeal? Will he please consider that aspect?

I hope that in many cases people will be able to make written representations. There really is no need in many cases why they should be involved in any considerable cost. But I shall certainly ask Mr. Dobry to bear in mind the points which the hon. Gentleman has raised.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm whether individuals or other interested organisations may make written representations to Mr. George Dobry and his team of advisers who are undertaking this inquiry? Will Members of Parliament be able to make oral representations to this team of advisers?

Certainly. I know that Mr. Dobry and his group will welcome representations from whatever quarter they may come. I should have thought it correct, in the first instance, to write. Then consideration might be given by Mr. Dobry and the group to the question whether or not it would be helpful to receive oral representations.

Will the Secretary of State also make sure that the answer does not lie in the loosening of democratic control over planning committees and planning applications, as has been suggested? In this age of considerable concern and suspicion over planning matters, particularly over individual applications, there should still be full democratic control and we should not revert to planning officers deciding in their own right, as has been suggested.

I hope that all suggestions for streamlining planning procedures will be considered by Mr. Dobry. There is some anxiety that ordinary routine matters should be speeded up as soon as possible, but there is no question of taking away from the appropriate authorities their statutory rights and responsibilities.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to call in for determination by him, under Section 35 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971, any planning application of a local authority or local planning authority in its own area.

No, Sir. This would be quite contrary to our policy, endorsed by successive Parliaments, that local planning authorities should take decisions for both public and private development proposals.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that planning laws should not only be fair but should be seen by the public to be fair? There have been recent cases of local planning authorities giving themselves permission to put up buildings which are out of scale with their surroundings, thus wrecking the character of their neighbourhoods. Will my right hon. and learned Friend look sympathetically at this matter?

In the circular that we issued on 5th June we said:

"the basic principle should be that opinion should be enabled to declare itself before any approval is given to proposals of wide concern or substantial impact on the environment; and that this should be so whether the proposal is that of a Government Department, a local authority, statutory undertakers or a private developer."

Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman realise that that answer does not get round the objection that it is deeply offensive to residents that a local authority should be both applicant and judge in a case? Does he agree that it would be more in accordance with natural justice that such cases should be referred to the Department, or at least that all neighbours should not only be advised—which is desirable—but required to be informed?

The circular which I issued in June on the publicity of planning applications not only dealt with the register but indicated the circumstances in which notices should be put up on a site where any development of substance was taking place. I am sure that is right. Earlier, hon. Gentlemen opposite were urging me not to interfere with the democratic process. It may be right in certain cases for the Secretary of State to call in applications, but I believe that something more than a local interest must be involved.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received from the Council for the Protection of Rural England on the subject of the third London airport at Maplin.

The Council for the Protection of Rural England has expressed the view that a third London airport is needed and that Maplin is the best site for it.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is highly significant that the Council for the Protection of Rural England has expressed a clear view in favour of Maplin, because without Maplin there would be an intolerable expansion of aircraft movements and aircraft noise at the existing London airports of Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton and Stansted, which would damage rural life in Surrey, East Sussex, West Sussex, Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Berkshire, Hertfordshire and North Essex, as well as life in urban areas such as my constituency?

The council most certainly drew attention to the possible effects on those areas, but, in fairness, it went on to say that Maplin is the best place not because it raises no environmental problems—some are inevitable, whatever site is used—but because the use of this offshore site and the routeing of aircraft over the sea which it makes possible reduces the environmental damage to a minimum.

Will the Minister say whether he has received any representations from the council for the rest of England—namely, the Cabinet—in view of yesterday's announcements and a 13 per cent. bank rate?

The hon. Gentleman will know that my right hon. and learned Friend has promised that a full review of this matter will be placed before the House, and I am quite sure that it will be.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the progress made to evaluate the economic viability of the Maplin seaport.

The Port of London Authority has not put forward detailed proposals for a seaport.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that this matter is becoming increasingly disturbing? Does he accept that by the time this port comes into being the whole pattern of the carrying of oil to existing refineries and, perhaps, to new refineries will have altered because of the increasing estimates of yield from the North Sea? Will he undertake to get the information from the Port of London Authority and the National Ports Council and make models and other information available to hon. Members before the Government in any way firmly make up their mind on this matter?

No, Sir. It is for the Port of London Authority first to decide if and when it wishes to put forward proposals for a seaport. It is for the authority to reach a judgment on the general market situation as it sees it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that whatever the viability or otherwise of this project the Maplin Development Authority has already held a Press conference before representatives of local interests have been appointed, as the Act requires? Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the need for local public opinion to be carried with this project? Will he say when these people will he appointed to the board?

I do not know about appointments to the board. I appreciate my hon. Friend's anxiety to see that there is plenty of local consultation, and that, I assure him, there will be. As yet, I have not received detailed or formal proposals from the Port of London Authority. I cannot say anything or move until I receive those proposals.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied with the present level of housing construction.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish the latest available house construction figures for 1973.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what are the latest available figures for house building completions in the public and private sectors for 1973.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the rate of house building.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied with the present rate of house building.

The latest house building figures, to the end of September, were published on 30th October. As is customary, a copy is in the Library. Since June 1970, 2,162,000 decent homes have been or are being provided.

In a whole catalogue of Government failures, is it not a fact that housing is among the most appalling? After the collapse yesterday of the Government's economic policies, should they not start all over again and this time base their priorities upon what people basically believe to be more nearly right?

I cannot accept what the hon. Gentleman has said, and the House will not expect me to answer. I repeat that since June 1970, 2,162,000 decent homes have been or are being provided.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the resources of the industry have been somewhat drained from the new construction programme into the phenomenal housing improvement programme, under which nearly 1 million houses have been improved, in sharp contrast to the rundown in the industry in the late 1960s?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend in the conclusion which he has drawn. I am sure that all parties in all quarters of the House will wish to congratulate the Government on the fact that in the first nine months of this year 342,000 improvement grants were approved, compared with 131,000 in 1970.

Is not the way the hon. Gentleman talks about the housing figures reminiscent of the way his former boss—"do-nothing-Walker"—talked about the trade figures yesterday, and is the position not a complete sham? Does the country not know that the housing figures are a complete disgrace and that one has to go back to 1947 in some parts of the country to get figures for council housing that are as bad? Does the hon. Gentleman agree that there can be no dramatic revival, especially in view of the economic shambles that was acknowledged yesterday?

No, Sir. I do not think that I can agree with that either. If the house building programme is in such a shambles, perhaps the hon. Gentleman will be kind enough on another occasion to explain how it is that we have total starts of 260,000, when under his Government in the first nine months of 1970 the figure was 242,000, which he no doubt thought was a triumph.

Dame Irene Ward.

On a point of order—

I deprecate points of order during Question Time.

It is strictly relevant and germane to the Question and the answer. My Question referred to housing construction and so far the Minister has not answered that point at all.

The Chair has absolutely no responsibility for what the Minister says. It is not a matter of order at all.

May I congratulate my hon. Friend on the success of the improvement grants, which give lots of people good houses which they might never have had, but which they jolly well deserve? I sat on the Select Committee and I should like my hon. Friend to suggest to hon. Gentlemen opposite that they read its report. They will then know what they are talking about, which they do not know now.

I am most grateful to my hon. Friend. I have read with great interest the report of the Select Committee, to which the Government will be replying in due course. I entirely agree with my hon. Friend, and I should have thought that it was common ground in all parts of the House—I am amazed that it is not, and there is evidently a certain amount of sour grapes—that we all welcome the great increase in improvement grants.

How does the hon. Gentleman expect the increase in the bank rate to affect the already deplorable level of house building, and how does he expect local authorities—such as that in Leicester—which are Labour-controlled and desperately anxious to increase house building in their areas, to cope with this additional difficult factor?

The measures taken yesterday were intended to deal with special circumstances. It would be quite wrong to assume that interest rates will necessarily stay at their new levels for long. As for local authority construction, I am only too anxious that local authorities which need to build should do so. If Leicester needs special assistance, perhaps the hon. and learned Gentleman will get in touch with me.

I shall, with pleasure.

Although the decline in the number of completions each year since 1968 is undoubtedly a cause for concern, does my hon. Friend recognise that it is far better to renovate wherever practicable than to demolish, because it is economically cheaper and socially better?

I agree absolutely with my hon. Friend. There are, of course, exceptions to the rule—for example, where slum clearance programmes are necessary to deal with genuine slums—but as a general statement of principle I agree entirely with my hon. Friend.

Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that his answer to the supplementary question asked by the hon. Member for Birmingham, Handsworth (Mr. Sydney Chapman) and the question itself completely miss the point? The issue is not a matter of choice between renovation and construction; it is a matter of getting both under way on a much larger scale. May I remind the hon. Gentleman that in 1970 his own Department issued statistics compiled by the statistical division indicating the need for the construction—in addition to renovations—of 400,000 dwellings a year to meet expected needs? The figure is running at a level of fewer than 300,000 completions this year. When can we expect to move in the direction of his own Department's figure of 400,000 completions a year, in addition to the improvement programme?

That, coming from the hon. Gentleman, is a bit much. When he was at the Ministry of Housing in 1970 the figures for housing starts were running at a lower level than they are now and the hon. Gentleman did not make those noises at that time.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what are the latest available figures for council house building starts and completions so far in 1973 compared with those for the similar period of 1970; and what steps he is taking to arrest the decline.

Public sector starts and completions in the first nine months of 1973 were 87,000 and 79,300 respectively. In the same period of 1970 the figures were 118,000 and 132,000. Total starts for the same nine-month period were 260,000 in 1973 and 242,000 in 1970; total completions were 220,000 and 256,000 respectively; and improvement grants approved were 342,000 and 131,000 respectively.

Is the Minister aware that so far this year council house completions are the lowest for 26 years? As the 13 per cent. bank rate will mean an even more calamitous blow to the council house building programme, will he grant subsidised loans through the Public Works Loan Board instead of reducing the subsidy by £130 million a year compared with what the figure would have been in 1976, which is the Government's policy?

On the point about subsidy, perhaps the hon. Gentleman would be good enough to look at an answer given recently to his hon. Friend the Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher), which shows that the amount of rent subsidy has increased. It certainly has not gone down; it has practically doubled. On the question of local authorities needing to build council houses, I very much hope that they will do so. The primary responsibility in that regard lies with local authorities. Local authorities have had certain difficulties in contractual and tendering matters. This is why the Government have taken steps in the last month to try to see whether some help can be given to local authorities in contractual and tendering matters.

Will the Minister now answer the question that was put to him earlier? Will he confirm that building in both public and private sectors is inadequate—so much so that this year we shall build fewer than 300,000 houses? Would he also take note that in many areas houses are being pulled down faster than they are being replaced? This means that within a short time slum clearance programmes in older areas are likely to be seriously imperilled. Will he ensure that the Government's building policy is completely changed?

The hon. Gentleman is wrong to say that buildings are being pulled down faster than they are being replaced. That is a misunderstanding, which my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment cleared up in the debate on the Queen's Speech. [An HON MEMBER: "What about making a forecast?"] I would not wish to make a forecast. I do not think that Conservative or Labour Ministers have ever made forecasts about the rate of building. I have already pointed out that in the past three years over 2 million decent homes have been provided. I do not think that is too bad.

Will the Minister make more explicit the figures he gave in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun)? The Minister said that 87,000 dwellings had been started in the public sector. Does he agree that about 20,000 of those 87,000 houses are by new towns, Government Departments and housing associations, and that the real figure to be provided by local authorities for this year will be in the region of 67,000, the lowest figure for 20 years?

I have already told the House that the primary responsibility on this score lies with the local authorities. When the Labour Party was in power Labour Ministers argued strongly on this point. [Interruption.] I know that the Opposition do not like the answer, but I am entitled to make my case in the House. It is the primary responsibility of local authorities to deal with the housing problems in their areas. Local authorities get the money from housing subsidies provided largely by central Government. I advise Labour Members who complain to look at the total figure of subsidy being provided to local authorities. As for any particular point to be made about the yardstick, or other difficult and specific matters, perhaps hon. Members will get in touch with me. So far as I know, I have not received any complaints from Brent.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied that valuations for compulsorily-purchased properties are made on the same principles and standards for different local authorities.

The same statutory rules and basic principles govern all local authority valuations whether made by district valuers or local authority valuers. I cannot answer for individual standards.

If individual standards are causing concern, as they are in my constituency, where a number of people are being offered grossly inadequate compensation when their properties are purchased compulsorily, ought not the right bon. Gentleman to investigate the position? Does he not agree that he cannot wash his hands of such matters, and that he should ensure consistency throughout the country?

I investigated this complaint from the hon. Gentleman's constituency when the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, Central (Mr. Cant) put a number of cases before my Department. When we examined those cases it was significant that in 23 out of 47 the offer made by the city estate valuer was less than the figure recommended by the district valuer. On that basis the district valuer is perhaps a little more generous than the authority purchasing the properties.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many requests he has received from inner London borough councils requesting his approval for compulsory purchase orders on empty houses in their boroughs; and how many he has granted.

Since January 1971 the inner London boroughs have submitted 15 compulsory purchase orders on individual empty dwellings required for the provision of housing accommodation. Five of those have been confirmed, one rejected, and one withdrawn, and eight are still under consideration.

I am grateful for those figures, but is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that his attitude to compulsory purchase orders is seriously affecting the housing problems of many local authorities? Speculators are making fortunes out of keeping houses empty while local authorities see their homeless lists increasing week by week. Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman further aware that there are an estimated 100,000 houses empty in London which could and should be housing the people of London? When will he meet local authority representatives to discuss the possibility of speeding up and clarifying compulsory purchase order procedures, because this is what is deterring local authorities from sending orders to him?

I have given the hon. Gentleman the figures. Under the law the initiative lies with the local authorities. The hon. Gentleman can see the action that we have taken, with a considerable number of orders being confirmed. We have made it clear that we think that local authorities should make compulsory purchase orders in cases where properties are empty and they are satisfied that the position is unlikely to be remedied in the ordinary course of events.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the hon. Member for Wandsworth, Central (Mr. Thomas Cox) has it all wrong, and that, although there are tens of thousands of houses empty in London, many of them are empty because London boroughs take up to a year to grant planning consent for the erection of any building? Is my right hon. and learned Friend further aware that at present rates of interest the delay can add £1,000 or more to the cost of buildings when they are erected?

There are many aspects to the problem, but the initiative lies in the first instance with the borough councils concerned. We shall play our part when they play theirs.

May I assure the Secretary of State that in the Lambeth area of my constituency it is easy to find 50 houses which have been empty for more than a year? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman confirm that he will act promptly on compulsory purchase orders submitted by local authorities, that he will not make borrowing for the purchase of empty houses subject to key sector lending and thereby control the acquisition of empty houses, and that he will consider the use of requisitioning powers by local authorities, because the housing situation is very desperate? We simply cannot afford to wait for compulsory purchase orders to be confirmed.

I have set out the general position and I hope that individual boroughs will act on their own initiative. I indicated in the White Paper the circumstances in which compulsory purchase orders would be approved and the circumstances in which local authorities ought to act, namely, where properties are empty where they should not be empty, and where the position cannot be remedied in the ordinary way. Clearly there is a limit on the amount of money that local authorities can or should spend on buying up properties in the market.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will introduce legislation to enable tenants of licensed premises to seek a legal limitation of the rent increases brewers are seeking to impose.

No, Sir; but I understand that my right hon. Friend the Minister for Trade and Consumer Affairs is in contact with all sections of the industry about the brewers' relationship with their tenant licensees.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that licensees in my constituency have been advised by the brewers that it is their intention to impose increases of as much as 700 per cent.? Is not this a continuation of the policy of those now controlling the brewing industry to force out licensees and to put in managers? Is it not a fact that the licensee is perhaps the least protected person of any section in commerce and industry?

I understand that my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister for Trade and Consumer Affairs has under review with the parties concerned a proposed code of practice on tenant security for the tenants of licensed houses and has called for further details of reports of very steep increases in rents. I understand that good progress has been made in my right hon. and learned Friend's talks.

Does the hon. Gentleman understand, first, that this problem is not confined to any constituency but is common throughout the country? Will the hon. Gentleman take special note of the point made by the hon. Member for Southwark (Mr. Lamborn) that many of these rent increases are being used to force the landlords of public houses to become tenants? Will the hon. Gentleman also bear in mind the early day motion on the Order Paper on this matter, in the names of a number of hon. Members, including my own? Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind, too—

Order. Enough is enough.

I shall ask my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister for Trade and Consumer Affairs to note the points made by the hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Cyril Smith). He will appreciate that my right hon. and learned Friend is primarily responsible for those matters and it might be helpful if a Question were to be addressed to him.

In regard to the trend to management, does the hon. Gentleman not think that any alterations in the Landlord and Tenant Act will still mean that greedy brewers will kick out tenants when notices expire? Will he ask the Government to refer to the Director General of Fair Trading the whole question of what is going on in the licensed trade?

I shall ask my right hon. and learned Friend to take note of the hon. Gentleman's points, but any discussion about possible amendment of the Landlord and Tenant Act would have to await the outcome of the discussions.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will seek powers to introduce a compulsory register of landlords in England and Wales.

My right hon. and learned Friend announced in the debate on the Queen's speech on 6th November that the Government would shortly introduce a measure which will give all residential tenants the right to know who their landlord is. This seems to be more helpful to the tenants.

I thank my hon. Friend for answering my Question so quickly. Would not such a register help to provide some check on the activities of the less reputable landlords, and also would it not help with the problem of some even less reputable landlords who appear to be based on Dublin and places such as that?

I would not like to comment on any specific case without notice. If my hon. Friend has a specific case in mind, perhaps he will get in touch with me. I hope that the existence of the new arrangement will be of assistance to tenants, but I must ask the House to await publication of the Bill.

Does the Minister agree that what is required is a register to which landlords would be admitted only if they could guarantee that the premises they owned lived up to certain standards for the tenants who lived in them? If these standards were laid down before landlords were registered, this would help many of my constituents who live in sub-human conditions and who are neglected by landlords, who make fun of those conditions?

In so far as it lies within my power, I am anxious to do anything to help tenants who live in unsatisfactory conditions because of unsatisfactory landlords, in that minority of cases. I do not think that the answer necessarily lies in a register, but I think it is right that all tenants should know who their landlord is, and we have had complaints about this matter.

Will the Minister bear in mind that not all private landlords are bad landlords? Will be undertake that the Government will take no further steps to discourage the private landlord, who is discouraged quite enough already? Will he agree that housing provided by private landlords makes a valuable contribution to the housing situation?

I agree with my hon. Friend that that contribution is both valuable and crucial. I think I can say from memory that nearly 3 million tenanted dwellings are owned by private landlords. One of the greatest tragedies comes from the Opposition's threat to municipalise all privately-rented property, at a cost of £14,000 million. This will make the housing situation in large cities worse rather than better.

Will the Minister also include on any register those landlords whose properties are vacant? Is he aware that such a register will be of value only if it is a pre-requisite to special grant assistance to local authorities to take over those homes where they are vacant, or where necessary in areas of housing shortage?

I do not think that a register is necessarily the right way to proceed. I do not intend to have a register. On the question of properties left vacant, perhaps the hon. Member for Manchester, Blackley (Mr. Rose) will look at the answer given on this specific point by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State earlier today.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what has been the average increase in water rates charged by the water undertakings in the past year.

My Department does not collect information about individual water rates but I know that water undertakers generally froze their rates for the current year, and in most cases will be running at a loss. The very few increases which have come to my notice affect only the second half of the year and, of these, I understand that the worst is roughly 7½ pence a week for the average householder.

Is the Minister aware that the East Worcestershire Waterworks Company has just increased its domestic water rate by 48 per cent.? Is he also aware that last year it had a surplus of £278,000, after interest, before dividends and income tax? Is he further aware that wages paid by the company went up by 13 per cent., but that directors' fees were increased by 65 per cent.?

It is not for me but for the company to justify these increases by reference to the price code. I understand that the company consulted the Price Commission, which was unable to say that the increases were unjustified.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he can now give a firm date for the start of the work on the Malton Bypass on the A64.

This scheme, along with others, will be considered for a place in the future programme during the review my right hon. and learned Friend will carry out shortly. A statement on the programme will be made before the end of the year.

Does my hon. Friend appreciate that the delay in making this announcement is hampering industrial development in Yorkshire and jeopardising the plans of the English Tourist Board? Will he represent to his and my right hon. Friend that this, to Yorkshire, is a more important project than the Channel Tunnel?

My right hon. Friend has already made that point clear both to my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State and myself. We certainly have taken it well on board.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will amend the Highway Code to introduce an official system of flashing headlights between motor vehicle drivers for give-way purposes.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this method of signalling is already used by about 90 per cent. of drivers? Therefore, should it not be made official in some form to avoid a lot of confusion? As it is now a widespread practice, why not authorise it?

I believe that it would be difficult to draw up a sensible, easily understood code that people would be willing to practise—[Interruption.]—I am obliged to the hon. Gentleman for his interruption, which I am glad to say I could not hear. This point has been carefully considered. On the whole, I do not believe that a welter of bureaucratic advice would be very helpful.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many tenants in local authority housing in East Suffolk are currently receiving rebates under the Housing Finance Act 1971.

I do not have a total figure, but inquiries indicate that the number is in line with the national level of about one-third of all council tenants.

Does my hon. Friend think that this is a final figure, even for a national average, or are there still others who will claim this amount? Does he realise that large numbers of council tenants are most grateful to this Government, who have helped the less fortunate?

I do not think that it is a final figure. Comprehensive information is collected annually by the Institute of Municipal Treasurers and Accountants, and my hon. and gallant Friend will be glad to hear that the institute will publish data for 1972–73 by the end of the year.

Will the Minister also publish figures showing the numbers of tenants who are now paying less rent than before the Act came into being?

To some extent those figures will be disclosed when the data can be examined, but the two large increases in the value of the rebates this year more than offset any rent increases for the lower paid. Many people are now paying less rent than before.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will appoint a disabled sportsman or woman to the National Sports Council.

Not as such; but I agree that the sports council must have knowledge and understanding of disabled people's needs.

Who better than the disabled can give that knowledge and understanding? Why does the Minister continually refuse to allow the disabled to have representation, as of right, on the National Sports Council when other special interests have such representation—the Armed Forces, local authorities and other governing bodies of sport? Will he appoint a representative for the disabled to the governing body on sport?

I could not be more sympathetic to the general point that the National Sports Council needs to have regard for disabled sport. I have seen much of it. But essentially the council is not a representative body. It is a body of people appointed in their own right. I will give sympathetic consideration to the possibility of appointing such a person very soon.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the request made by the right hon. Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle) would have the support of many people in the country who believe that the more we can do to give the disabled representation the more helpful it will be in every way? I thank him for saying that he is considering the matter, and I hope that it will not be too long before he conies to a decision.

I agree with my hon. Friend.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that when he uses the term, "not as such", he fails to appreciate the special significance of the case put by my right hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle), because, while no member of the National Sports Council is a representative of a specific organisation or walk of life, there is a powerful case for the disabled being recognised as such because their needs are not properly understood by the council or anyone else? Will he reconsider the matter in the light of that submission?

I cannot accept that the present Chairman and members of the National Sports Council have no knowledge of disabled sport. On the contrary, they have a keen interest in it. I repeat that I shall again consider whether it is possible to find a suitable disabled person for appointment. I remind the House that there are many forms of disablement, and it may not be possible to cater for them all.

Perhaps it is a matter of appointing not so much a disabled person but a representative of the Central Council for the Disabled to enable the disabled to have a place on the National Sports Council.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is aware of the low standard of accuracy of tyre pressure gauges at garages and filling stations; and if, in the interests of road safety, he will introduce regulations to remedy this.

Having considered the available evidence, I do not think that legislation is necessary.

Will my right hon. Friend reconsider this question? Is he aware that considerable road safety implications are involved in these days of very high motoring speeds? Does he not agree that wrong tyre pressure settings can prove fatal? Is my right hon. Friend aware that in a survey last July the London borough of Croydon found that 25 per cent. of the gauges inspected were seriously defective? Does he not think that this should be put right?

On the whole, this is a valuable and free service to the public. My information is that in one survey 82 per cent. of the gauges showed an error of 2 lb. or less. I doubt whether legislation would prove profitable to anyone.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will issue a circular to local authorities urging them to step up the provision of inside lavatories in all council houses or provide covered ways to outside ones.

No, Sir. I am confident that local authorities are already fully aware of the need for improvement to their houses lacking these and other basic amenities, and of the Exchequer assistance available for such work.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in the city of Birmingham many hundreds of elderly and infirm people are living in houses without these amenities, and that for these people to have to face the winter months in these conditions is excessively depressing? Is he aware that the city holds out no hope of an early rectification of this matter for elderly people?

There is no restriction on expenditure by local authorities on improvements of this kind, as far as the Government are concerned. Of course, the administration of a scheme of the kind that my hon. Friend describes is essentially a matter for the local authority.

But surely the hon. Gentleman accepts that, although in theory there is no stopping a local authority from having the money available, in practice, with all the various problems which it has in relation to building new council houses, and so on, it is an impossible situation. Is he aware that areas such as Birmingham, Liverpool and other great cities, which have a good record of building council houses, now have the problem of modernisation of council houses as well as the need to build more houses? Will he, therefore, make more money available to the great conurbations in order that they can do both these jobs? The Government are failing to provide enough money at present.

I cannot accept the implied criticism made by the hon. Gentleman. So far this year, Government contributions for improvements to 94,100 local authority dwellings have been approved, compared with 77,800 for the same period last year.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has for encouraging local housing authorities to sponsor low-cost housing schemes for young married couples.

Circular 60/73, issued on 27th April, informed local authorities of my right hon. and learned Friend's readiness to approve schemes of building for sale designed for this purpose. I hope that more authorities will follow the example of those who have already responded to this initiative.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply, but does he recall that it is now many years since I brought the Department's attention to the scheme of the Bushey Urban District Council and only 18 months since he was talking about a conference as a result of the Newham scheme? What has happened since then?

Since the beginning of 1972, about 40 local authorities have received approval for schemes comprising well over 3,000 dwellings, and several other local authorities have schemes under consideration. More could be done in small towns and in villages and in large towns, and I agree with my hon. Friend that these schemes should be very helpful to young married couples and others on the housing waiting lists.

I appreciate the point made by the hon. Gentleman about low-cost housing schemes for young married couples, but what steps is the Department taking to meet the strain and anguish being created for so many of these young married couples who, with their wages severely restrained if they are buying a house at the existing mortgage rate, are finding it almost unbearable and will find the rate now threatened as a result of yesterday's announcements completely unbearable?

My hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Construction has already made the Government's position clear in this respect, but I stress that the helpfulness of such schemes, which would apply in so many parts of the country, makes it more and more important that local authorities should bring them forward.

Is not part of the blockage in council house vacancies due to the fact that council house tenants cannot move out when they want to, because they cannot, on the average industrial wage, get a mortgage to buy the house they would like to buy? Would it be possible for local councils to grant a second mortgage, admittedly at some extra risk, so that a council house tenant wishing to buy his own house could be helped?

A scheme of the kind mentioned by my hon. Friend would certainly be considered, but the figures show that young married couples have been holding their own in the home ownership market. Again, I stress that schemes of this kind would be extremely helpful in assisting more of them to move on to home ownership.

The Minister said that 3,000 dwellings had been approved for building for sale in the last two years, as if that were a marked improvement. Is he aware that in the last 10–15 years the average has been 1,500 dwellings built for sale by local authorities? That indicates that the figures for this year and last year are no better than they have been over the last 20 years.

The hon. Gentleman must remember that he was a member of the Labour Government who did not encourage local authorities to bring forward these schemes. The difference is that the Conservative Government are prepared to give every encouragement to local authorities, and we hope that more and more local authorities will bring forward schemes for approval.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the progress of the Pleasley Bypass—A617.

I understand that it is in an advanced state of preparation by the highway authority—Derbyshire County Council.

The scheme has been in a high state of preparation ever since I came into the House seven years ago. The road that goes through this little village is the main feeder road from Mansfield to the Ml. I hope that the Government will do a U-turn on this—there are enough U-turns in the village. The people in the village are asking how many more accidents and deaths there will be before they get a bypass.

In that case I suggest that they ask the Derbyshire County Council, because it is a principal road within the responsibility of the local authority. We are doing all we can to help.