asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his latest assessment of the effect of the Rent Act 1974 on availability of private rented accommodation.

My Department is so far as practicable monitoring the effects of the Act. But it will not for some time be possible to say what its effects on the supply of private rented accommodation have been.

Will the Minister acknowledge the increasing evidence in my constituency that the 1974 Act is having the unintended effect of diminishing the available pool of rented accommodation for families, married couples, single people and students? Will he receive sympathetically the dossier I shall soon be sending him and take whatever corrective steps are then found necessary?

I shall certainly be glad to study whatever dossier and other evidence the hon. Gentleman has available, because criticism of the Act so far has been based on anecdote rather than on assembled fact.

Will the Minister tell us how much furnished accommodation the public sector is providing at the moment?

Will the hon. Gentleman tell me how much privately rented accommodation is being provided under the legislation introduced by the previous Conservative Government? [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] Local authorities have a duty to provide rented accommodation, and they are providing far more than they did under the Conservative Government.

Does the Minister appreciate that in holiday resorts there is the problem that people do not like to let accommodation all the year round because during the summer they can let it temporarily for a much greater return?

I recognise that problem, but protections of one kind always lead to problems of another kind. In the Rent Act 1974 we sought to strike a suitable balance. All the evidence I have received shows that we have struck that balance.

Will the Minister accept that it is his job to answer questions rather than to ask them? Will he also accept that there is mounting evidence, for instance, from "After Six", that there is a desperate problem of furnished accommodation following the 1974 Act? Will he set up an inquiry into the possibility of some new form of short let?

I am interested to see that "After Six" has replaced "Time out" as the source of information for the Conservative Party. The "After Six" survey was based on the notice boards of eight newsagents and seven local London newspapers. The chairman of "After Six", in a letter to the Sunday Times on 13th April, referred to the survey which the hon. Gentleman has mentioned and said:

"Further it is very inconclusive as it may show merely a short-term reaction to legislation difficult to understand. In any event, the effects appeared to be very different in different parts of London."

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will obtain and make available details of all accidents that took place on London Transport's Underground system in the last 12 months.

Yes, Sir. I am obtaining full details and will write to the hon. Member, but apart from Moor-gate the accidents were minor.

I am grateful to the Minister and I should like to pay tribute to the good record of London Transport. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is only right that the public should know the accident rate of London Transport?

I should like to endorse what the hon. Gentleman has properly and generously said about the good record of London Transport, which underlines the great tragedy at Moorgate.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his policy towards the use of international sport as a political weapon.

The Government are opposed to sport being used to serve political ends and to the manipulation of individual sportsmen and sportswomen.

Does that interesting reply mean that the Government no longer intend to discourage British sporting teams visiting countries of whose règimes the Government may disapprove?

I presume that the hon. Gentleman means South Africa.

indicated assent.

If so, he totally fails to understand the situation. It is the South African Government who have imposed their policy on the whole of world sport. Bodies such as the International Olympic Committee, FIFA and every other international body of sport have had to react to the imposition of the South African political system on world sport. It is that situation about which I am complaining.

If we accept the South African system, what will be the result in terms of the withdrawal of countries like Tanzania, Kenya and others?

The reaction of world sport to the South African situation has, interestingly, produced many changes and is producing changes in South Africa. To the extent that those changes are progressive, we welcome them. Clearly, no international sport can take place where one country tries to discriminate between one sportsman and another not on merit but on some other ground.

Will the Minister accept that there is some inconsistency in his present position? Furthermore, will he accept that South Africa is taking marked steps in the right direction towards multiracial sports and merit selection and that everyone in this country should be working towards harmony?

I am the model of consistency in these matters. I have acknowledged that changes are taking place. They have not gone anything like far enough. One of the things about which the sport bodies complain was typified last weekend when the British World Cup Final referee had to intervene in a situation involving segregated grounds and non-multiracial teams playing against each other.

Does my hon. Friend agree that while some boycotts are not necessarily productive, in this particular case it can be argued that the attempts to outlaw, certainly on the cricket field. the South Africans from participating with ourselves and some other countries have resulted quite recently in South Africa having to change its policy and invite two coloured players to take part in the recent cricket match against the Robbins XI?

It is true that changes have come as a result of pressure from the outside world. We welcome the changes which the South African Government have made, but we wish that the South African Government would make more progressive changes without the need for great outside pressure to bring them about.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to complete his major review of the trunk road system.

Consultations with local authorities are continuing and I hope to announce the results of the review shortly.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this is regarded as an urgent matter by the people of Thorne in my constituency? The M18 motorway by-passing the town was opened as long ago as June 1972 but the old main road through the town centre is still classed as a trunk road, so that no restrictions can be placed on the size of vehicles using it and urban redevelopment is delayed.

I am aware of the very great concern of my hon. Friend about the A614 at Thorne. I pay tribute to the very diligent and persistent way in which he has pressed this matter. We have had to hold up some individual cases pending the review, but I think that we should seek to get a decision about Thorne very soon.

May I ask the Minister to assure us that when he makes his decision there will not be considerable de-trunking of roads such as the A6? This is an issue which over the years has been funked by successive Governments, who have passed the responsiblity on to local authorities, whose future programmes for road construction have already been severely reduced.

The hon. Gentleman gives a glimpse of the kind of difficulties involved in the review and the reason why the consultations are naturally long and difficult. The financial aspect is important. We are only just beginning the very first year of the new transport supplementary grant system. I could not, therefore, expect the final review to be completed for a considerable time. However, we shall try to deal with special cases.

At the risk of being tedious about the A9, may I ask whether the Minister would care to say anything about this killer road now that the summer is approaching? The frustration of drivers travelling behind lorries and caravans has during the last five years been one of the causes of 100 accidents leading to deaths.

I could not, without notice, give a detailed answer on that question. In any event, if the hon. Lady's concern is north of the border I would not dare to give an opinion about it.

Does the Minister agree that Greater London, a city of 7 million people, badly needs a proper network to collect the traffic from the trunk roads coming into the city? What is he doing to speed up the construction of Ringway 3?

The hon. Gentleman knows that the prime responsibility for roads within the Greater London area rests with the Greater London Council. As regards the orbital road, the outer road, we are doing our best. However, the hon. Gentleman is probably not unaware that a public inquiry has been going on for some months, and it is likely to last even longer. Going through the detailed and lengthy public participation, the public inquiry on the line, side road orders and compulsory purchase orders is a very long job. Another good reason is that the funds available for roads have been curtailed.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to announce Her Majesty's Government's plans to implement the recommendations of Lord Sand-ford's Committee on the National Parks.

I hope to announce the Government's conclusions before the Summer Recess.

Does my hon. Friend appreciate the grave concern of all those concerned with the national parks at the very long delays that have resulted before any announcement can be made? Will he also guarantee that there will be an opportunity to debate the recommendations at least before the Summer Recess?

I should certainly welcome any debate, but that, unfortunately, is not a matter for me, although it can be pursued by my hon. Friend through the usual channels. We received this report about a year ago. It involved more than 100 recommendations. They were very substantial and had to be discussed with all the amenity interests—the ramblers, people in the national parks, farmers, local authorities and so on. That process has inevitably taken a long time. On administration, we have again done a great deal. There is now a statutory national park officer for each park and parks are required to prepare and publish plans. We have done a lot in the meantime. But the substantial part of the report is very important indeed. We shall be making our pronouncements on it as soon as we can, and certainly before the Summer Recess.

May I help the Minister? We have had a debate in the House on the Sandford Report, at the same time as we debated the Nugent Report. We discussed these matters and there was a promise of early implementation, particularly on aspects which did not require a great deal of public expenditure and which did not require legislation—of which there are innumerable examples. One is very disappointed that one now has to wait until the summer before these matters can be implemented.

The hon. Gentleman may be disappointed, but I assure him that in this case his disappointment will be short-lived.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will introduce legislation to enable local authorities to act as estate agents, undertake the legal side of house purchase, and provide a wide range of community services such as funeral arrangements and taxi services; and if he will make a statement.

I suppose that, as a solicitor, I ought to declare an interest. I sympahise with the general objectives to which my hon. Friend has referred, and we shall keep these possibilities in mind along with other candidates for legislative time.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that while most of us acknowledge that in the foreseeable future the great bulk of local authorities would not wish to extend their activities into a great many commercial fields, there is an overwhelming case in terms of competition, of community service, of local government finance and of political purpose for local authorities to be allowed to have this extension of services?

I have always taken the view that local authorities should be given as much independence and freedom as possible. That is a view that is often expressed on both sides of the House. I intend, however, that this freedom and independence shall be given a purpose and a means to implement it.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that this proposal is municipalisation gone mad, and that to extend the public sector to undertakers and taxi drivers, to say nothing of conveyancing and acting as estate agents—perhaps I, too, should declare an interest—is merely to increase the burden on the ratepayer?

If the right hon. Gentleman and I, and other members of our profession, were to die of starvation, we should at least get cheaper funerals. However, it ill behoves the patron saint of municipal lotteries to start worrying about municipal trading.

I accept everything that my right hon. Friend has said, but I wonder whether he could have discussions with his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary in view of the pressing need of the local authority associations to look at the whole question of new legislation for taxis and hackney carriages.

I always delight in conversations with my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, and I shall certainly bear this in mind.

Will the Minister accept that we shall look with interest at what his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science has to say about education in the light of the independence that he has mentioned? Secondly, since clearly, following the Budget Statement yesterday local authorities have to cut their suit according to their cloth, if the Minister's answer had been "No, Sir" it would have been much more in accordance with what the Chancellor was saying yesterday.

But not quite so truthful. The whole basis of this matter is whether in fact, as my hon. Friend is implying by his Question, the Government side of the House and the Government believe that this is something which is desirable, leaving aside the economic constraints which exist at any particular time. I personally—and, I think, my hon. Friends—have never made any secret of what we believe.

As a chartered surveyor, I declare an interest. Does not the right hon. Gentleman accept that there is already intense competition in estate agency and that where local authorities have taken on this service in the past they have proved abysmally unsuccessful?

It would be interesting to debate the success or lack of success of municipal undertakings in estate agency, or, indeed, of some estate agents, because not everyone can be successful. I am afraid that I must stick to my main principle.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps his Department is taking to encourage the use of domestic central heating systems serving all the houses in one area.

My Department encourages local authorities to consider the applicability of district heating at an early stage of their thinking about new housing developments. Where the Department is satisfied that the extra capital costs involved in district heating are justified, they are accepted for loan sanction and subsidy purposes.

Is my hon. Friend aware that such systems of domestic central heating contribute not only to making life more comfortable for the occupants of the houses but also to energy conservation? Will he therefore consult the Department of Energy with a view to ensuring that maximum help is given to local authorities to include district central heating in the early stages of their housing planning procedures and also that financial encouragement is given to them to install such systems in existing houses?

There are two views about the universal popularity of such schemes. A meeting is to take place in my constituency tonight following an out-cry by some of my constituents about the new district heating in my constituency. At the same time, provided that such schemes are well conceived and acceptable to the people who live in the dwellings concerned, there is a great deal to be said for them in terms of energy conservation. As I said, we make subsidies available, and there is further help in general improvement areas. For the kind of extensions which my hon. Friend suggests, further legislation may be necessary, but we shall certainly be ready to consider the entire problem.

As two-thirds of the fuel put into our power stations is wasted in the cooling systems, would it not be better for this heat to be used for district heating and other purposes, thereby saving up to £1 billion a year on the balance of payments? Is it not time that we gave more priority to such projects and legislated if necessary?

We are giving a good deal of priority to them by the subsidy arrangements I have mentioned. If necessary, we shall consider legislation. If we do, I trust that the House and the Conservative Party will facilitate it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will initiate an inquiry into refreshment and rest facilities on motorways, with particular reference to the needs of lorry drivers.

No, Sir. The facilities are kept under review, and lorry drivers' needs are discussed with their representative organisations.

Is the Minister aware that when even a sausage sandwich costs 25p lorry drivers cannot afford to eat adequately in motorway service cafés, and that their consequent fatigue is a danger to themselves and to other road users?

I have great sympathy with what my hon. Friend says and, indeed, with the road haulage drivers. The difficulty is that my Department has no responsibility for the prices charged or for the management of those facilities, which are very costly to run. The cafés are often in the countryside which makes it difficult to get staff, and with any enterprise that is run on a 24-hour basis the problem of unsocial hours arises, with the consequent increase in costs. If my hon. Friend or any other hon. Member has any suggestions for improvements I shall be glad to consider them. At present I have no funds available to subsidise the services, and without subsidies I doubt whether substantial changes in price levels can be avoided.

If the British people vote to remain in Europe, will my right hon. Friend, as a compensation to motorway users, consider opening up the refreshment tenders to European countries, so that people like Jacque Borrel can tender and the British public can obtain decent food on their motorways?

My hon. Friend is taking unfair advantage in trying to persuade me to take a pro-European line in the forthcoming referendum when I have made clear that as chairman of the party I wish to remain neutral. If we remain in Europe after the referendum—as, no doubt, my hon. Friend will do her best to secure—her suggestion will deserve the most careful consideration.

Is there not some merit in the hon. Lady's suggestion that more competition should be provided and that as many people as possible should be encouraged to provide motorway services? In answer to the Minister's request for useful suggestions, I ask him to reconsider that part of the former Road Traffic Bill introduced by the Conservative Government which would enable small road transport operators more easily to get licences to operate services in remote places such as motorway restaurants and cafés.

The hon. Gentleman is stretching things rather far in his last remarks in thinking that a substantial change in standards and prices would be secured if a minibus service were allowed to operate in the middle of the night to facilitate the staff turn-round. If he can give me more than an off-the-cuff appreciation of that suggestion, I shall certainly take it into account. The hon. Gentleman is right in saying that my hon. Friend's suggestion is worthy of consideration. All the ideas from the Government side of the House come within that category and my hon. Friend the member for Northampton, North (Mrs. Colquhoun) makes many constructive suggestions. I hope that we can pursue these ideas. Sometimes the suggestion is made that we should serve French food on our motorways at English prices. That would be the ideal solution.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind despite what he says, that his Department owns these sites and that many service operators are not fulfilling the conditions of their contract because they are failing to provide separate accommodation for transport drivers or are providing it only on one side of the motorway at a time? Will he also bear in mind that, if we stay in the EEC, from 1st January 1976 the eight-hour driving day will become law, which means that lorry drivers will want much more accommodation, or does he expect the British lorry driver, as does his French and German counterpart, to have to sleep in the cab?

I do not favour lorry drivers having to sleep in the cab. I appreciate my hon. Friend's concern to persuade me to take a pro-Eupropean view in the forthcoming controversy, but I content myself by saying that after the referendum we shall have to review all these matters in the European context. It is true that my Department owns the sites, but it is not responsible for the catering arrangements and breaking the contracts would pose considerable problems. If my hon. Friend knows of breaches in the conditions, my officers will follow them up.

Is the Minister aware that when he speaks from the Government Dispatch Box he speaks not as Chairman of the Labour Party but as a Minister, and that his job is to stick up for the Government and their policy of staying in the Common Market?

The hon. Gentleman is being most helpful in pointing out our duties. I am following Government policy in the sense that I am not anticipating the outcome of the referendum. The essence of the referendum is that the British people will determine the outcome and we shall accept their decision.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when work will begin on major repairs to the M1 south of Luton; what the arrangements for subsequent traffic flow will be; how long the work will take; and what is the estimated total cost.

Work estimated to cost not more than £2 million is expected to start in the autumn and to take between three and five months. The best arrangements for the subsequent traffic flow will be determined in the light of experience gained in the current diversions required for preliminary investigation of the road structure.

As this section of the M1 is a vital link in the country's road network, and as diversions during the day always cause traffic chaos nearby, will the Minister ensure that the work is done at night to minimise inconvenience and avoid the traffic chaos and the jams that have already occurred in the South Bedfordshire area?

That is an interesting suggestion, but it may be impracticable on technical grounds to do all the work at night. Of course, as the M1 is an extremely busy road it is desirable to complete this necessary improvement as soon as possible. We estimate the current load of the M1 at about 65,000 vehicles a day. We shall do all we can to minimise the congestion. That is why we are using the opportunity this week and next week to see what pattern of diversion may be the least disturbing.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what are the latest housing figures in the public and private sectors, respectively.

Final figures of house building for February were published yesterday and are available in the Library. These show continued rises in public sector house building which increased very sharply last year, while in the private sector starts have improved markedly this year and completions show signs of picking up.

The figures are welcome as they are on a gradually rising trend, particularly in the public sector, but does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the most inhibiting factors at present, and a factor that will continue to be inhibiting in the near future, is the astronomical cost of building each unit in the stress areas? Will he consider paying some attention, notwithstanding his right hon. Friend's announcement yesterday which will inhibit this proposal even more, to providing incentives for local authorities to carry out the Government's proposed building programme in the public sector to the extent that there will be a write-off of the loan charge debt set against each house that is built or proposed to be built by a local authority? In spite of the present difficulties, does my right hon. Friend agree that that is an idea that could add momentum in the local authority sector bearing in mind the Government's willingness and wish to get the job done?

I am happy to consider any proposal that is made to me for encouraging local authority house building or private house building. I want to encourage both sectors. I am happy to point out that even under the present arrangements local authority starts and completions are well over one-third up on the disastrous level that we inherited a year ago.

What range of increases in council house rents will take place as a result of the Chancellor's statement that housing subsidies will be reduced by £65 million? Further, what effect will this have on the public sector?

I cannot give that information without notice. It is a completely different question. If the hon. Gentleman tables a Question to that effect, I shall seek to answer it.

I accept my right hon. Friend's reply, but in view of the upswing in the figures, which show a tremendous improvement on the record of the Conservative Government, will he consider keeping under review the 66 per cent. capital subsidy so as to maintain the tempo if the programme shows any sign of tailing off? That is a matter that will have to be kept under constant review if local authorities are to be encouraged further to expand their building schemes. If that approach is not adopted, the impact on rents will be rather dramatic.

If the public sector house building programme were to show any sign of flagging in the way my hon. Friend has raised as a hypothesis, we would be willing to review our methods of subsidy.

As the question refers to housing figures, will the Secretary of State tell us the latest situation as regards improvement grants? Further, will he explain why he was unable to give any incentive to builders bearing in mind the Budget Statement of his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer?

There is a question on the Order Paper on the subject raised by the hon. Gentleman's first point. The answer to his second point is that at a time when private sector starts for the past three months are 30 per cent. up on the previous three months, it hardly seems that some further incentive is needed.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will re-examine the system of block allocation of capital payments for locally determined schemes as laid down in Circular 2/70.

No, Sir.

The right hon. Gentleman will be aware of Circular 2/70, but will he confirm that the consultative council that his right hon. Friend announced yesterday will seek to take rather more effective action to ensure the Government's ability

"to monitor the total level"—

"and main trends of expenditure",

I think that the hon. Gentleman is referring to Circular 86/74. That is the circular which brought Circular 2/70 up to date after the reorganisation of local government. I hasten to say that I am not making any point about this because the principle remains entirely the same. It is the central Government who decide the economic constraints on the locally determined sector. Within that policy we have tried to give as much freedom as possible to local authorities within each county area to make their own decisions on how the money should be spent. I think that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, as long ago as 26th February, drew attention to certain schemes—he did not mention particular cases—which might be considered somewhat extravagant. Of course, he went on to say that a number of buildings were perhaps necessitated by local government reorganisation. We shall watch the whole question of local authority public expenditure. Indeed, it is vital that we should do so.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied with the provision of suitable accommodation for the elderly; and if he will make a statement.

The level of provision is not satisfactory and my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Construction has asked the Department to look into various aspects of housing for old people, including the provision of sheltered housing.

Is the Minister able to give us any idea of numbers? What is the shortfall, and how much public authority housing is sheltered?

It is difficult to give figures of shortfall because that would require a very precise knowledge of demand. I can tell the hon. Lady that one-third of all new building by local authorities, new towns and housing associations consists of one-bedroom accommodation, most of which is likely to be needed for old people.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in the town in which I reside great attempts were made over the past seven or eight years to provide vast numbers of warden-controlled sheltered accommodation units for the old people who live in the town? Further, is he aware that, concurrent with the recent surcharge that has been imposed upon the 11 councillors, the district auditor is now threatening to surcharge the same 11 councillors for providing comprehensive warden schemes because they had the termerity to employ wardens at the miserly rate of £25 a week to operate throughout the day and night with a telecommunications system? Will my hon. Friend do something about that? Will he insist that district auditors do not get involved in political affairs and that they stick to the business they are supposed to be undertaking—namely, balancing the books or seeing that they are balanced correctly?

I am sure my hon. Friend accepts that it would not be appropriate for me to enter into arguments about the actions of district auditors, particularly when audits are taking place. I know of my hon. Friend's pride in what has been done by his friends in Clay Cross for old people. [Interruption.] Yes, I know that my hon. Friend is proud of what his council has done. Without entering into the merits of the case, I welcome the efforts of local authorities to help their old people.

Is the Minister able to give the House any guarantee that the vague reference to tighter control of local authority spending used yesterday by the Chancellor of the Exchequer will not injure plans by local authorities for the building of sheltered housing communities?

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer made clear in his Budget Statement that the cuts in expenditure on housing did not refer to new building. New building will be able to go ahead at the record subsidies provided for new building by the Labour Government.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what recent changes there have been in the time taken to make planning decisions in his Department.

Many different kinds of planning decisions are involved. Planning appeals are by far the most numerous and the speed of decision on these has improved steadily over recent months.

Is the Minister aware that the average time which elapses between the holding of a public inquiry and a decision by the Secretary of State is eight and a half months? Does he not regard that length of time as being likely to do great damage to the Government's plans to speed up housing construction?

The situation relating to planning inquiries is always difficult because on the one hand one wants to be able to make a decision as quickly as possible—the hon. Gentleman is right to stress that point, and I do not want to be complacent about this because the process has to be speeded up—and on the other hand one must allow for the fullest possible public participation and involvement. This is common to all sides, and it is a question of balance between the two. The speed of decision-making in the Department has increased, and we shall do everything we can to see that it improves.

Has my right hon. Friend considered whether delays could be due to the shortage of inspectors employed by his Department and by his right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Wales? Will he be good enough to look at this matter?

I cannot speak for my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Wales, but in my Department the number of inspectors has increased and a large body of new ideas has come forward from Mr. Dobry in his report. We shall look at those ideas and see whether we can implement them. We are as anxious as anybody to speed up the process of decision-making, provided that the right amount of public participation remains.

Why has the Minister delayed a decision on the Dobry proposals by sending that report out for comments from those who assisted in drawing up the report? When does he hope to implement its recommendations?

To implement all the Dobry recommendations without consulting the local authority associations would be a very doubtful procedure. However, perhaps I may assure the right hon. Member for Crosby (Mr. Page) that whereas when he left office the Department had 17,000 appeal cases outstanding, we have succeeded in reducing the number to 12,000.

In looking at the question of delay, will the Government examine a related difficulty? Is my right hon. Friend aware that developers believe that if they get the foundations of buildings into the ground and then await the Minister's decision, they will have a case for holding local authorities to ransom? They know that if a local authority stops development it will have to pay considerable compensation. Does not my right hon. Friend not agree that this is a real and difficult problem?

The whole question of enforcement is a matter to which Mr. Dobry in his very worthy report has drawn attention. We will examine the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what discussions he has had with the Greater London Council through the Housing Action Group on its policy of municipalisation of privately rented property.

None, Sir, but I am in frequent and direct touch with the Greater London Council about its housing policies, including municipalisation.

Does the Minister recall that yesterday the Chancellor of the Exchequer laid great emphasis on the control of local government spending? Surely the municipalisation programme is not intended to make the local authorities into property investors. Surely it is unjustifiable that the Greater London Council should spend over £1 million in buying up properties in my constituency which to a large extent are already fully occupied. Is the expenditure of £1 million justified in respect of a mere 40 or so vacant tenancies? Surely that is an abuse of public money.

The hon. Gentleman referred in the House last month to a case which disturbed him, but although my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Construction asked him to send details none has yet been received.

The Minister has had them.

Hon. Members should consider with great care the reason why they are opposed to municipalisation—whether for public expenditure reasons or for one of the reasons given by an estate agent who, referring to the hon. Gentleman's constituency and to Greater London Council purchases there, said:

"No private house owner likes council tenants next door and the village and hill set will loathe it. It's real Snobsville there."

Is not the Minister aware that when the Minister for Housing and Construction asked me to supply details, I did so? I wrote a letter to the Minister and delivered it personally to his office.

The hon. Gentleman is always welcome at my office to discuss these matters. [Interruption.] If he will allow me to reply, he will receive a full and handsome withdrawal. I cannot give it if he will not allow me to open my mouth. I have no information about that letter being received, which is why I specifically asked the hon. Gentleman for further information. I shall be happy to study any such letter, but I hope that the evidence he has given and the reasons for it are more valid than I have seen from him so far.

Dill the Minister advise the House whether the £50 million cuts mentioned in public expenditure yesterday, and which we are told do not relate to new local authority house building, relate to cuts in municipalisation?

We have not yet decided where they should fall. When we do so, the House will be informed.

Will the hon. Gentleman look into the practice of enabling local authorities to buy rented houses by compulsory purchase order at a price which is most unfair because it is based not on market value but on the low, pegged rents received by the owners?

Compulsory purchase orders are all considered on their merits. I cannot comment on any individual case, but if the hon. Lady has a case which is troubling her and which has been decided I shall be happy to discuss it with her. Otherwise I should be invading my right hon. Friend's semi-judicial function.

In view of the most unsatisfactory answer to my Question, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what information he has as to the number of times the Layfield Committee has met.

I am glad of this opportunity of thanking the members of the committee for the time they are devoting to this inquiry. The full committee has been meeting fortnightly since it began its work. Up to the present it has met 17 times. In addition, it has a large programme of oral evidence sessions, visits, subcommittee work and ad hoc meetings totalling some 35 full days in the first quarter of this year.

I am grateful for that reply. Will the Secretary of State urge the committee to complete its work as quickly as possible, because I am sure he is aware of the widespread concern about the rating system? There is great anger at the number of people who draw considerable benefits from services derived from rates but who subscribe nothing towards the cost of those services.

I am well aware of the widespread dissatisfaction with the rating system, as, presumably, were Conservative Ministers, who for three and a half years paid not the slightest attention to this problem. I have put every pressure on the committee and I still hope that it will adhere to the timetable I set—namely to report by the end of the year.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that on this occasion it is more important that the committee should carry out a thorough investigation than that it should have to operate to a timetable? We want to see a detailed study so that once and for all we can get this vexed question out of the way.

I strongly agree with my hon. Friend. We have had years and years of discussions about the rating system, local income tax and whether there are any other sources of local government finance which we can tap. I agree that in reaching any consensus or conclusion is now necessary to do the job thoroughly.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many letters he has received since 12th September 1974 regarding the White Paper on land (Command Paper No. 5730); and what has been the general nature of his replies.

I have received comments from a large number of bodies and individuals reflecting a wide range of opinion on the White Paper proposals. The replies have varied according to the issues raised.

Has the Minister been able to explain to his correspondents any method by which his land proposals will reduce the selling price of new houses?

Fortunately I have been able to explain to correspondents how the price of land will at last succeed in being stabilised and how we shall as a community be able to plan positively. The hon. Member was for some years Director of the House Builders Federation. He must know that the cost of houses depends not only on land but also on materials and labour. Therefore, that point does not come within my scope. [Interruption.] I was dealing with land. I can reassure the hon. Gentleman. He will be pleased to hear that the correspondents who wrote to me about the White Paper proposals were seven to one in favour of our land scheme.

Is the Minister aware that we receive that answer with great scepticism? Is he aware that in view of the heavy demands that the Community Land Bill will make on public service manpower, the heavy demands that its launching period will make on public expenditure and the fact that the scheme will not work, the House will be pleased if he will withdraw this ridiculous measure?

I am sure that on a near occasion the hon. Gentleman will have a chance to express his views in greater detail. His arithmetic is wrong. When the final duty comes into existence all over the country, the number of skilled professional people required in addition will reach a total of under 4,000 people for England, Scotland and Wales.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied with the present allocation of cost-sharing of work on coastal erosion as between his Department and the local authorities; and if he will consider accepting that the total expenditure thereon be now borne by his Department.

The present allocation of costs between my Department and local authorities in respect of works of coast protection varies to take account of the local circumstances of each case. I do not consider that it would be appropriate for the whole of these costs to be borne by the central Government.

Is the Minister aware that in some local authority areas such as mine the ratepayers are called upon continually to bear heavy burdens in places such as Highcliffe and Barton-on-Sea, which are not seaside resorts? If the principle is established, for instance, that the benefits from North Sea oil should accrue to the nation as a whole, is it not equally fair that the cost of coast erosion should be borne by the nation as a whole?

There have been 16 schemes in the hon. Gentleman's constituency since 1966 costing £1,240,000, 56 per cent. of the cost of which was borne by the Government. Therefore, as the Government are paying more than half the cost, they are bearing their fair share. Yesterday the Opposition demanded that the Government should cut public expenditure. This is an odd way for the hon. Gentleman to suggest that they should do so.

Does the Minister accept that many local authorities in the Solent area consider that excessive dredging in that area is having disastrous effects on coastal erosion, and that his Department could well spend time finding out exactly what is the relationship between dredging and coast erosion?

I should need notice to answer that question in detail. However, I shall look into what the hon. Gentleman has suggested and write to him.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that a sufficient share of the cost is borne by the property owners whose property is saved, especially bearing in mind the fact that so much property has been built on the coast to the detriment of the environment?

I think it is true that there has been considerable development in coastal areas. The merit of this scheme is that it is designed to acknowledge the situation where large numbers of people who do not live on the coast enjoy opportunities for pleasant holidays. Therefore, there should be a mixture of Government and local government money. That seems to me to be the right principle.

Will the Minister take into account the fact that there are parts of the country where there is a serious danger to life and to health? Between Whitstabe and Herne Bay there are several hundred houses which in the circumstances of a surge in the North Sea combined with wind from a certain direction would be flooded to a depth of three or four feet. This causes great concern in the area. There is also great concern at the high cost which will have to be borne locally. I hope that the Minister will reconsider the question of dealing with the problem nationally so that the cost of protecting life is not borne wholly by the local people.

I wish that hon. Gentlemen would not be as irresponsible as to demand cuts in public expenditure one day and to request greater public expenditure the next. The Opposition cannot get away from the fact that that is what they are asking. Under the present scheme, whereby there is a mixture of dealing with each case on its merits while taking into account special factors, such as the hon. Gentleman suggests, it is possible to obtain Government grants of up to 79 per cent. for coastal schemes. In the circumstances that is as generous as we can expect the Government to be at present.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what action the Government have taken to date designed to reduce homelessness.

We have taken action to stimulate public sector house building, improvement of the older stock, social ownership of rented accommodation and housing association activity; and we have extended security of tenure. I shall shortly by putting to local authority associations and other interested bodies a consultation paper on homelessness, inviting their views on the statutory, administrative and financial arrangements for dealing with this intractable problem.

Does not the Secretary of State recognise that this problem is not intractable and that it is the relative inaction of his Department which has produced this year's record figure of homelessness, which shows every sign of remaining for the following year? Will he therefore instruct local authorities to make better use of vacant properties? Will he consider something original such as perhaps a short-term grant for short-life properties, which would save a considerable sum of money when compared with the bed-and-breakfast basis?

My hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Construction answered a Question regarding empty properties on 25th February in the course of which he discussed a number of measures which could be taken and which he is now discussing with a number of associations. With respect, if the hon. Gentleman does not think that this is an intractable problem, he knows nothing about housing.

Does not the Secretary of State agree that the Rent Act 1974 has increased homelessness, since those who earn less than £3,000 a year are unable to buy houses on the private market while many people are ineligible for council housing, and that even if they are eligible for council housing they can get nowhere near the top of the list?

If the hon. Gentleman had been present when Question No. 4 was asked, he would have heard the answer.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will bring forward proposals for legislation to impose a duty on regional water authorities to provide adequate water supplies throughout their areas without recourse to water guarantee schemes.

Local authorities have been able, since 1945, to require statutory water undertakers to accept financial guarantees and to undertake expensive water supply schemes which local authorities consider should be carried out. I would not support either the restriction of local authority opportunities of this sort or the imposition on water authorities of an unlimited responsibility to carry out schemes regardless of cost.

Will the Minister at least change the practice of his Department so that it does not withhold grants in cases where water undertakings do not require guarantee schemes before proceeding with the provision of the water supply? Does he not agree that since local authorities have been advised not to increase expenditure, they are not in a position to undertake guarantee schemes? If the situation whereby many villages in the Wooler area of Northumberland have no water supply continues, that will serve as another illustration of the fact that the water reorganisation was an expensive mistake.

I am inclined to agree with that last point. Circumstances have not changed in the hon. Gentleman's constituency. Water is supnlied by the Newcastle and Gateshead Water Company. There is no change there. However, the hon. Gentleman's first point is new to me. I shall look into it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many proposals for the closure of unprofitable railway lines he has under consideration.

None, Sir.

When the Prime Minister and the Leader of the House talk about railway closures as being one way by which British Rail can balance their books in the future, what lines have they under consideration?

It is for the British Railways Board to propose the withdrawal of services where it thinks that is justified. There are statutory procedures to be followed, and then I have to decide whether to consent to the proposals. As I have said, I have no such outstanding proposals before me at present, and I am not aware of any such proposals emanating from the board.