asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to complete consultations arising from his Green Paper on local government finance.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received in the last month on reform of the domestic rating system.

Comments have been invited by 31 March. By Monday 18 January, 10 representations had been received advocating a variety of solutions.

Before my right hon. Friend completes his consultations, will he bear in mind that the burden on the ratepayer has been greatly exacerbated by the present two-tier system, which involves two levels of local government competing over the spending of ratepayers' money? Does my right hon. Friend agree that the daunting task facing him and his colleagues in the reform of the rating system would be made much easier if the upper level of local government were abolished and we returned to the unitary system?

There are pressures to look at the structure of parts of local government. Those pressures would be reduced if some authorities were less free with their spending policies. The Government's immediate priority is to deal with the financial aspects in the Green Paper.

Since domestic rates bring in only 16 per cent. of total local authority revenue, and as they are an inherently unfair tax, does my right hon. Friend agree that their replacement by a tax, or taxes, collected nationally would not be detrimental to local government freedom, because local government has never had any financial freedom?

My hon. Friend will recognise that that is a controversial assertion. However, there is merit in the underlying argument. I must ask him to wait until the end of the consultation period before expecting me to reach any conclusions.

Does the Secretary of State recognise that many of the representations on local government finance that he has received and will receive boil down to the fact that he is starving local government of sufficient funds to carry out the duties for which its members believe they have been duly elected? Will he give prime consideration to ensuring that local government receives more money?

It is difficult to square that with the thought that the first investigation into an alternative method of financing local government was held when the very reverse policies were in practice.

Notwithstanding the observations of try hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Mr. Chapman), does my right hon. Friend recognise that for many years local government has been able to determine its level of spending and has been answerable to the ratepayers for any excesses? In the consultations, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the importance of speedy legislation—preferably in 1982–83?

I am sure that my hon. Friend will forgive me if I do not intrude into the debate between him and my hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Mr. Chapman). When we have reached conclusions, it will be important to advance with dispatch.

Will my right hon. Friend continue to consider the problems of commercial and industrial ratepayers, who are mentioned briefly in the Green Paper, who bear a high proportion of local government finance? They are being threatened out of existence by some local authorities.

I hope that my hon. Friend will not misunderstand me when I say that it is difficult for me to avoid considering the problems of all ratepayers. I am aware that great concern is being expressed by commercial and industrial ratepayers, who find themselves paying ever increasing rate bills without any form of direct representation on authorities. The Government's main concern is to deal with alternatives to, or the reform of, domestic rates. In that context, I shall have to consider the implications for commercial and industrial rates.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what measures he proposes to protect ratepayers in high spending local authorities during 1982–83.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that the Government's measures will receive widespread support throughout the rate-paying electorate, especially from industrial and commercial ratepayers, who have no vote or voice on the way in which high-spending authorities are spending their money? Does he agree that the only way to protect the ratepayer against extravagant Labour-controlled high-spending authorities is to increase accountability of councils to their electorates.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for putting the first part of his supplementary question. There is no doubt that this year some supplementary rates have caused enormous distress and real difficulties for private ratepayers and for business and industry. We wish to encourage accountability and more information about council activities, costs and expenditures. I know that my hon. Friend supports that approach.

How does the right hon. Gentleman intend to protect tenant ratepayers in St. Helens, Auckland, who have lost their homes, most of their furniture and most of their clothing because they could not afford to have their heating on all day and suffered burst pipes as a result of the freeze? Is he aware that the local authority faces a bill of almost £500,000? Will he undertake to send one of his colleagues to St. Helens to see the position and to say how the Government will protect the ratepayers to whom I have referred?

The hon. Gentleman will understand that I cannot answer off the cuff a detailed question about his constituency. The best way in which he can represent his constituents' interests in the serious situation that they face is to approach my Department. It may be a matter for my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Construction. I know that my hon. Friend will wish to consider the facts.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the actions of high-spending authorities are of concern also to ratepayers within the areas of low-spending local authorities? Will he assure such ratepayers that they need not fear a contraction of their services next year as a result of the imposition of financial penalties because of the actions of high-spending authorities?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising an important issue. There is a cash limit on the rate support grant. Under the practice of the Labour Government, high-spending authorities could attract more grant for themselves at the expense of prudent low-spending authorities. That is a practice that we have been determined to change. The previous Government imposed holdback on local authorities across the board. The advantage of our proposals, as set out in clause 4 of the Local Government Finance (No. 2) Bill, is that no longer will holdback be across the board. It will no longer apply equally to the prudent as well as to the extravagant.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that some of the high-spending authorities are those in greatest need? The Government have closed schools and old people's homes and removed welfare benefits. Does he further accept that the judgment on a local authority should come from the electors, not from the Government? Does he appreciate that the Government are removing the freedom of electors to elect the representatives that they want to form an authority?

No hon. Member could ask that supplementary question without revealing a failure to study even the most basic local authority statistics. If the hon. Gentleman studies them he will find, regardless of political persuasion, that Labour authorities in areas of high need are able to provide adequate services without the levels of expenditure of other less efficient authorities which fail to provide adequate services. The hon. Gentleman should study some of the comparative statistics on the performance of authorities. If he does, he will appreciate the degree of inefficiency in some authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received from housing associations about the allocation of resources for the provision of rented accommodation during the next financial year.

We have received a number of representations from housing associations about the importance of making continued provision for rented accommodation. As my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Construction said in reply to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Reading, North (Mr. Durant) yesterday, the Housing Corporation's 1982–83 development programme for England will include provision for new fair rent schemes about 20 per cent. higher in real terms than in the current year.

Does the Under-Secretary agree that housing associations have carried out an extremely useful job in supplementing local authority housing provision? Therefore, will he assure the House that the high level of resources will continue, at least throughout the lifetime of this Government, until a new Government are elected, who will do the job even better?

As chairman of the Acton housing association for seven years, I endorse what the hon. Gentleman said about valuable role of housing associations in tackling housing need. We have increased the resources available to the Housing Corporation for next year in recognition of the valuable role that it plays and will, I hope, continue to play.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what are the latest figures available for the number of local authority housing starts and completions; if he will take steps to increase these numbers; and if he will make a statement.

In the first 11 months of 1981 there were 20,000 local authority and new town housing starts in England and 52,000 completions. As announced by my right hon. Friend on 21 December, the gross provision for local authority housing capital expenditure in 1982–83 shows an increase in real terms on the current year.

Will the Minister now come clean and admit that the Government's policies have destroyed local authority housing programmes and all hope for hundreds of thousands of desperate people on council housing waiting lists?

I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman. Far from the Government destroying all hope, the hopes of many of achieving owner-occupation have been fulfilled. The Government have also made a considerable contribution to the rented sector. I have no doubt that the hon. Gentleman has been corresponding with the Department about the area represented by the local authority within his constituency. If he wishes to accuse the Government of not making sufficient capital investment available to his own local authority, I am sure that he will want to ask why the Cannock Chase district council has spent only one-quarter of its allocation, plus receipts, halfway through this financial year.

Will my hon. Friend tell the House what capital receipts have been received from the sale of council houses, and will he urge councils to spend those capital receipts on housing before the end of the financial year?

We estimated at the beginning of the financial year that there would be housing capital receipts in excess of £400 million. That estimate looks like being fulfilled, if not exceeded. I agree with my hon. Friend that it is imperative that local authorities make every possible attempt to utilise to the full the substantial housing and non-housing capital receipts which represent an addition to the allocation itself.

Does the Minister agree that the figures that he has announced are below those forecast by the Select Committee on the Environment and that on present trends nearly 500,000 families will be suffering from homelessness, low standards of accommodation, overcrowding or inability to form households by the end of this Parliament? Does he accept that the actuality will be even worse than the forecasts of the Select Committee on which the Conservative Party had a majority?

The figures that I have quoted refer to the public sector. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will wish to welcome the increase of about 22 per cent. in private sector housing starts in the first 11 months of 1981, despite the recession.

An increase on what?

Before the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Mr. Douglas-Mann) becomes too critical of the Government's housing policy, no doubt he will reflect on the fact that the Social Democratic Party, which he has recently joined, has no housing policy.

Does my hon. Friend agree that perhaps the best way to restore hope to the hundreds of thousands who are on council housing waiting lists is for the Labour Party to withdraw its blind and dogmatic objections to the Government's shorthold proposals and give people the right to rent homes?

My hon. Friend is right. If the right hon. Member for Manchester, Ardwick (Mr. Kaufman) had not entered the particular commitment to repeal shorthold on behalf of the official Opposition, many thousands of additional properties to rent would be available now.

Is it not a fact that the number of new council houses started in 1981 was the lowest for 70 years? The allocation for 1982, with a reduction of 4 per cent. on the Government's phoney inflation rate of 8·9 per cent., will mean that 1982 will be worse than the disastrous 1981. Will the Government now increase HIP allocations by £1 billion, put 120,000 building workers to work and halve homelessness?

If the right hon. Gentleman is concerned about housing the homeless, he should immediately withdraw his objection to shorthold.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received from national sporting bodies on the present and future provision of playing fields by local authorities.

The Football Association has written to me about the possible sale of school playing fields by local education authorities. I am aware also that the Sports Council and the Central Council for Physical Recreation have expressed concern on this issue. One of the national newspapers has given me a list of allegedly threatened playing fields, which I am having checked through the regional councils for sport and recreation.

Will the Minister state whether it is the Government's intention that local authorities should sell playing fields for building speculation? If not, will he meet a delegation of interested Members and representatives of sports associations who are worried about the implications of the regulations? Having listened to their representations, will he discuss with the Secretary of State for Education and Science an amendment to remove that threat to school playing fields and other recreation facilities?

It is not the Government's intention to sell off those premises and facilities. I shall try to acquaint the House with the background. The Department of Education and Science regulations merely set new minimum standards for school playing fields. In some areas that could lead to increases in schools' usable sports facilities. I am as concerned as are the hon. Gentleman and other hon. Members. That is why I have asked the regional councils for sport and recreation to check on what is happening in those counties. I shall reserve judgment on whether further meetings are necessary until I have that information. A number of authorities have sold land in recent months, just as they have in recent years. That is nothing new. The regulations set new minimum standards.

What representations have been received from national sporting bodies, or would my hon. Friend like to tell us a little more about the extraordinary episode last month, when he tried to exert pressure on the secretary of the Football Association to drop the bulldog logo as our World Cup emblem, on the ground that the Spaniards might find it provocative? Does he agree that, even on the most generous interpretation, his responsibilities for sport are somewhat amorphous and that excessive zeal in defending foreign sensibilities is not among them?

Order. It is up to the Minister whether he answers that supplementary question. It is a little remote from the original question.

By your leave, Mr. Speaker. I have had no representations from the Football Association on the reports in the press. I admire my hon. Friend's versatility in introducing that subject.

If the Minister does not believe that the new regulations and another set on selling playing fields in higher education establishments will lead to the sales of those facilities, why did he tell the conference of the Central Council for Physical Recreation that he expected the new document to lead to the sale of the playing fields at such schools? Is he not alarmed at the evidence? We welcome the fact that he is consulting the regional councils, but will he ensure that no playing field is sold if it is capable of dual use, especially in areas of deprivation? Will he also ensure that the National Playing Fields Association's standard of six acres of playing field per 1,000 population is applied in all cases and that no playing field is sold if that standard is not met?

I endorse the right hon. Gentleman's remarks about the importance of dual use. At the conference in Bournemouth I stressed the importance of dual use. I said that the Department of Education and Science had conducted a 10 per cent. sample survey to try to find out the extent of use throughout the 105 local education authorities. I want to make it clear that the regulations merely set new minimum standards.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it ill behoves the former Minister with responsibility for sport, the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Small Heath (Mr. Howell), to talk about dual use of local authority pitches, when the Labour Administration did nothing to help? Does he also agree that part of the reason why local authorities' school pitches cannot be used at weekends is the attitude of narrow-minded school caretakers and their unions?

My hon. Friend must look at what is happening in many local authorities in the country. I am enormously encouraged by what I have seen. Many local education authorities have put themselves out greatly in the interests of the community. I pay tribute to them. I should like to see more of that coming on stream.

Is the Minister aware that there is a considerable shortage of playing fields and that his present policy has united in opposition the Sports Council, the Central Council for Physical Recreation and all the teachers' organisations? Why does he not reconsider the matter?

It is not a question of reconsideration. If the hon. Gentleman has any examples in his constituency or in the surrounding counties, he should let me know. I shall draw them to the attention of the appropriate regional council for sport and recreation.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will introduce legislation to provide for a ceiling on the level of industrial and commercial rates.

I have no plans to do so. Legislation to set a ceiling on increases in business rates would not necessarily achieve our aim of getting high-spending local authorities to reduce the level of their spending, and could in certain circumstances lead to intolerable burdens on the domestic ratepayer.

Will my right hon. Friend change his plans—if he has nothing to do at the moment—because the Government had proposed that there should be a cut-off point for rate increases that could be imposed on business and commercial ratepayers? That would have made local authorities that were seeking extortionate rate increases impose them on those who, by their votes, could get rid of those authorities, rather than on the commercial and industrial ratepayer, whose only recourse is to go out of business.

My hon. Friend will understand that our earlier proposal involved transferring the burden to the domestic ratepayer, who had the opportunity to register his opinion through a local poll. We felt that without that protection, it would not be fair to transfer that burden to the domestic ratepayer. Business and industry will benefit considerably from protection against supplementary rates, which did great damage last year. Indeed, there was a prospect of further supplementary rates being demanded this year.

Does the Minister accept that there is a case for some industrial derating, particularly for new small businesses in areas that are not assisted in England and Wales? For instance, there is still industrial derating in Scotland. Why cannot that apply in parts of England and Wales?

There are always arguments for exemptions and reliefs. They have been considered by successive Governments at different times. We conducted experiments in the form of enterprise zones in which we provided total relief from rates. We are monitoring those experiments closely.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many right-to-buy applications have now been processed by housing authorities.

I estimate that, by 30 September 1981 local authorities and new towns in Great Britain had received 440,000 applications. Some 48,000 sales had by that date been completed or, in the case of Scotland, reached the stage when missives had been concluded.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the success to date of that policy. Does he, none the less, accept that in a number of areas, including Conservative-controlled authorities, thousands of tenants have been waiting for over a year for the completion of the purchase of their homes? Will he consider sympathetically an amendment to the 1980 Act that would impose a timetable on all the stages, including completion, and not just on the start of the purchase?

I am aware that tenants throughout the country, many of whom are in contact with my Department, are concerned about the speed with which the legal processes are advancing. I hope that local government, as it becomes familiar with the techniques of conveying such housing, will make the processes advance faster. That will make it unnecessary to amend the legislation.

In the light of the exhortation of the hon. Member for Reading, North (Mr. Durant) that councils should sell council houses to raise money to build more council houses, will the Secretary of State confirm that, on average, the sale of 12 council houses will be required to finance the building of one?

That is a completely meaningless statement. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] The hon. Gentleman must be aware that what large numbers of local authority tenants want is the proper management and maintenance of their houses, better use of existing stock and a more rapid turnover in existing vacancies.

What action will the Secretary of State take about councils, such as Greenwich, which deliberately penalise tenants who express an interest in buying their houses by denying them improvements, decorations and repairs for which they have paid in their rent? However angry Labour councillors may be about being forced to sell council houses, does he agree that they should not vent their anger on tenants who have done no more than exercise their legal rights?

I am very much in sympathy with that view. It is unjustifiable for a large public body to use the resources at its disposal against the relatively limited resources of individual citizens who have clear legal rights.

Has my right hon. Friend yet been involved in discussions about giving the right to buy to Ministry of Defence tenants? Does he believe that the idea has merit?

The Ministry of Defence needs to maintain a stock of houses for its strategic purposes, but my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence has discretion to dispose of surplus homes.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what information he has as to the likely effect of grant-related expenditure adjustments on the rate levels of the outer London boroughs.

Rate levels are determined primarily by authorities' expenditure decisions. For 1982–83 outer London boroughs can expect increases in grant-related expenditure in line with those applying nationally and an increased share of the block grant if they meet their expenditure targets.

As there are anxieties that basic services may have to be reduced, depending on the outer London borough concerned, how much money does my right hon. Friend believe might be involved in adjusting the formula for the percentage reduction of spending to the real rate of inflation, as opposed to the theoretical lower rate of inflation?

I could not answer that detailed question without notice, but I shall give my hon. Friend the information.

Does the Minister recall the Secretary of State's assurance to me in the House about the London borough of Brent, which has inner city problems and the highest number of ethnic minority residents of all the London boroughs? Will he ensure that any adjustment in the rate support grant, and so on, in the coming year takes those factors into account?

The proposals will shortly be contained in an order to be laid before the House. If the hon. Gentleman studies the proposals he will see that in the GREA the London borough of Brent, for some of the reasons that he gave, has benefited significantly.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the estimated number of housing starts in the Yorkshire and Humberside region in 1981; and how this compares with the figure for 1979.

Figures for the last quarter are not yet available, but about 10,000 dwellings were started in the region in the first three quarters of 1981, compared with 13,000 in the same period of 1979.

Is not the massacre of the housing programme one of the Government's most stupid policies? Will it not have serious social consequences, particularly in areas like Yorkshire, which still has many pre-First World War houses? Will it not also have disastrous economic consequences, as it seriously damages the private and public sectors of the house building industry?

When the hon. Gentleman talks about the massacre of the house building programme, he might reflect on the figures for the region from 1976 to 1979, when they fell from 22,040 to 13,255. We have increased the HIP allocation for Sheffield by 4·5 per cent. in real terms for next year. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to see more money spent in Sheffield to tackle housing problems, perhaps he will persuade the local authority to sell its homes to the 4,000 tenants who have already established their right to buy. That would bring in about £5 million and increase by about 25 per cent. the money that Sheffield has to spend on housing.

Bearing in mind the level of public housing in the past, will my hon. Friend give us the recent figures for private housing starts?

The private sector figures that I have for the region for the three quarters of last year are 2,121, 2,928 and 2,486. I am happy to say that for the past two quarters the figures show a useful increase over the same period in 1980.

Will the Minister bear in mind that thousands of houses, especially in South Yorkshire and the Yorkshire area generally, are crying out for modernisation? Where the local authority has no money to improve them, will the Government help financially?

The hon. Gentleman's question shows that it does not make sense for Opposition Members to concentrate their attack on starts. Housing conditions can also be improved by modernisaton and other work. We have introduced a new system whereby local authorities have absolute discretion to spend the money that we give them as they wish. If they wish to spend it on improvement they can do so. The region that the hon. Gentleman represents could get an extra £60 million if it sold to council tenants the homes that they have applied to buy.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to receive the report of the National Building Agency relating to the condition of houses in certain new towns.

On present plans my right hon. Friend expects to receive the report by the end of May.

Is the Minister aware of the massive problems facing Easington district council relating to Peterlee new town? Is he aware that one estimate of the cost of repairing houses in the town is £40 million? How can he expect local people to bear that cost? When the report is received, will Peterlee have first priority, especially as one of the Minister's colleagues admitted a few months ago that its plight was worse than that of all the other new towns? As Easington district council was told to get on with the repairs and that some money would be refunded, why has it not yet received a penny?

I am aware of the problems facing Easington district council. The hon. Gentleman strongly represents the council and his constituents. In making the HIP allocation to the authority we have borne in mind the problems created by the defects in the Peterlee new town houses that have been transferred to Easington. Despite our decision to wind up the National Building Agency, we have this morning signed an agreement under which the new town defects contract will be transferred to a private sector consultancy formed by former NBA staff.

By what date does my hon. Friend expect the NBA to complete all its tasks and be wound up?

As my right hon. Friend said, we are working to a wind-up date of March 1982.

As the £16 million repair bill that the Sedgefield district council will have to meet as a result of repairs in the new town of Newton Aycliffe will have risen by at least 12 per cent. as a result of the year's delay occasioned by the Minister referring the problem to the NBA, what does he intend to do?

One of the main reasons for the delay was that we were unable to agree with representatives of the Association of District Councils on the basis for a settlement. That led to a reference to the NBA. The association, through its various authorities affected by the problem, has bid for a substantial sum of public money and it is incumbent on us to establish the exact technical nature of the problem and to cost it as accurately as we can before payments are made.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what recent representations he has received on fishing in lakes and ponds in Royal parks.

I have received from my hon. Friend a petition signed by about 800 people protesting against the prohibition of fishing in 1981 in three ponds in Home park, Hampton Court.

As fishing is a healthy outdoor activity which should be encouraged, will my hon. Friend consider carefully what has happened in Hampton Court park at the Wallpond and two other ponds, where for 30 years people have been fishing without hindrance in large and ideal ponds, but now a keen new inspector has been appointed and he is turning everyone away merely because the three ponds are not listed on the permit alongside five other ponds in Hampton Court and the neighbouring Bushey Park? Provided that there is reasonable provision for the conservation of wildlife, will my hon. Friend consider sympathetically extending the permits to the other ponds, especially the Wallpond?

I am well aware of my hon. Friend's anxiety, as he came to discuss the matter with me a few weeks ago. It is the problem of conservation and sensible management of wildlife, to which he referred, and the fact that the ponds have been fished for some 30 years which leads to the need perhaps to rotate fishing in the eight ponds so that it may continue in five of them. I am certainly prepared to have studies carried out.

Have the Government any proposals to privatise the Royal parks?

If we may rely upon the right hon. Gentleman's support, we may well consider it.

Does my hon. Friend agree that fishing rights should be like planning permission, and that if people get away with it for four years they should have established-use certificates?

This is becoming a most constructive exchange. I take note of my hon. Friend's point.

May I add to the constructive nature of the exchange and ask the Minister whether he is prepared to enter into discussions with the Royal parks authorities and with bodies such as the National Anglers Council for management schemes in the Royal parks, which might include the use of lead-free weights and so on? In view of the desperate shortage of fishing opportunities in urban areas, will the Government press ahead with a scheme to create urban fishing areas?

I am meeting the National Anglers Council on Friday and these are matters that will be discussed.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what will be the method of administration of funds made available under the Inner Urban Areas Act in the London Dockland and adjacent areas.

The Docklands local authorities will continue to have the power to give loans and grants under the Act, and will continue to receive an allocation of resources for such projects outside the urban development area. Within the urban development area, the London Docklands Development Corporation has the same powers.

Does the Minister agree that within the area covered by the LDDC, the boundaries of which are somewhat arbitrary, it would be for the benefit of all if the LDDC listened to the local authority and thus fulfilled the universal wish that it should act in co-operation with local authorities and in accordance with local wishes?

I take the hon. Gentleman's point, but he will agree that in many of its activities the LDDC has already shown great co-operation with the local authorities and in many cases has entered into joint operations. I have every confidence that that atmosphere will continue.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the leader of the local authority sits on the LDDC? Will he also undertake to give greater publicity to the considerable achievement of the LDDC already, and our great expectations for even greater achievements in the future?

I entirely endorse my hon. Friend's view. In its relatively short life the LDDC has achieved a great deal. I believe that the first show houses are to be opened at Beckton by my right hon. Friend on 26 February.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will meet the football authorities to discuss arrangements for the World Cup.

I met the chairman and secretaries of the Football Associations of England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales on 1 December last to discuss the general problems of hooliganism abroad by British football supporters and the possibility, in particular, of hooliganism in Spain during the World Cup series.

Will the Minister congratulate Scotland and Northern Ireland on qualifying for the World Cup finals—and, of course, England, which managed to scrape home by the skin of its teeth? What steps are being taken to ensure that football fans receive a fair allocation of tickets without being subject to exploitation by unscrupulous ticket touts and travel agents? What steps are being taken to warn all football fans in advance to be on their best behaviour in Spain, especially in view of some of the recent examples of hooliganism on the part of English football fans abroad, who may be even more incensed when they see Scotland win the World Cup?

I shall refrain from speculation about the outcome. One might have hoped that the hon. Gentleman would include some commiseration for the Welsh, who did not quite make it but who, by all rights, should have been there. I am deeply concerned about the problems to which he referred. My officials are in Spain now, visiting all the centres with Spanish representatives. One of my officials also chairs a working party comprising representatives of the Football Association, the Foreign Office and Sports World Travel. All of these matters are under discussion, and I shall personally visit Madrid on 4 and 5 February to discuss these matters further.

When my hon. Friend meets the chairmen of the various associations, will he endeavour to persuade them to give a larger allocation to the National Federation of Football Supporters Clubs, as it is the most responsible supporters' body covering the whole of Great Britain? Does he agree that it was proved at the last international that its allocation of tickets to supporters was most satisfactory, in that there was no hooliganism?

I shall certainly look into that point. It is one of the matters that we shall be discussing in the next few weeks.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what information he has as to the extent to which local authority pay settlements so far agreed will affect the rate demands of these authorities.

I cannot know how individual local authorities will budget for wage settlements already agreed. Nor can I know what judgment they will make of forthcoming settlements. If their views of forthcoming pay settlements are excessive the Government will look to local authorities to make the economies necessary to keep within their cash spending targets.

Is it not, nevertheless, the case that restraint in wage demands has a direct effect on the eventual outcome for the hard-pressed ratepayer? Will my right hon. Friend keep that constantly before the general public?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Restraint in wage settlements will, of course, help the ratepayer. Moreover, it will actually help those employed by local government, as the more modest the settlements, the greater the number of people who will be employed.

I find that most of my constituents favour cuts in expenditure, provided that the Government set an example. They object to the Government seeking cuts in public expenditure when people such as the chairman of British Rail receive increases of 25 per cent.

Order. Only yesterday the hon. Gentleman drew my attention to the fact that a question was irrelevant. He has not even asked a question yet. He has been making a statement.

I was following up the reply to the previous supplementary question relating to wages, Mr. Speaker. Relevant to that, will the Secretary of State ensure that Mr. De Lorean and others receiving public funds are also told to cut their expenditure?

Sort that out.

I shall do my best to sort that out by referring the matter to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

I shall relate my question entirely to local government, Mr. Speaker, for very good reasons. Does my right hon. Friend agree that although local authority wage settlements have a direct relation to the level of rates, the paramount factor is the efficiency of local authorities and their co-operation with the unions in their sector? Will he give an assurance that councils such as the Macclesfield borough council, which has not increased its precept on the ratepayers of the area for four years and will not do so this year, will not be penalised by high-spending authorities, as it has been in the past?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. He will know, as he supported the measures that we introduced, that low-spending authorities are now not penalised as a consequence of the penalties that we have to apply to high-spending authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the total number of local authority and private housing starts in 1981; and how many of the local authority starts were for sheltered and other forms of special type accommodation.

In the first 11 months of 1981 there were 20,000 starts for local authorities and new towns and 97,000 for the private sector in England. Of the 17,000 local authority and new town dwellings started in the first three quarters of 1981, 1,900 were dwellings for the chronically sick and disabled. Figures of starts on dwellings for the elderly are not readily available but will be published in "Housing and Construction Statistics" this year.

When will the Government recognise that these miserable, pathetic figures will result in a formidable housing crisis in the country and endless heartbreak and tragedy for hundreds of thousands of people waiting to be rehoused? I ask the Ministers responsible for housing when this Tory vendetta against council dwellings will end?

The position would have been infinitely worse if we had adopted the policy advocated by the Opposition of freezing council rents. If that had happened, there would not have been a capital investment programme.

Is the Minister aware that the pitiful figure of 20,000 that he quoted compares with 87,000 only three years ago? Is the hon. Gentleman aware, further, that this morning hon. Members received figures from the building trades employers showing that only 19 per cent. of their firms were fully or nearly fully employed? Would it not be more sensible to take 440,000 building trade workers off the dole and have those firms working at 100 per cent. capacity?

It is partly for that reason that we have increased the local authority housing investment programme next year, for the first time since 1974–75. If the hon. Member talks about cuts, I remind him that the figure for public sector starts fell from 173,000 in 1975 to 81,000 in 1979.

On the basis of the figures just given by the Minister, how long will the 1 million people still living in houses without inside toilets, running hot water or bathrooms have to remain in those properties? Will he also say whether he agrees that, if the number of sheltered homes were increased, more family dwellings could be made available to people on waiting lists and that it would also get off the dole queue many building workers whose potential contribution is being wasted?

If the local authority in Liverpool would make faster progress in selling council houses, more money would be available with which to tackle the problems mentioned by the hon. Gentleman.

indicated dissent.

There is no point in the hon. Gentleman shaking his head when I say that. Real resources are available with which to tackle these problems.

Will my hon. Friend remind the hon. Member for Liverpool, Edge Hill (Mr. Alton) that if local authorities used their capital receipts they could do a great deal more to improve their properties?

That is the point that I was trying to make. Now that the point has been reinforced by my hon. Friend, I hope that it will go home.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many local authority homes he now expects to be built and how many improved during 1982.

This will depend on the decisions of local authorities on the spending of their single block capital allocations and their capital receipts.

Will the Minister tell the House of any peace-time year since the brick was invented when fewer houses were built than will be built in 1982 or were built in 1981?

There has been a reduction in starts on the local authority side, but there has been a significant increase in private sector starts in the course of 1981. As for 1982, I go back to what was said previously. There is still substantial scope for local authorities in the present financial year to spend more on housing. I draw the hon. Gentleman's attention to the example of Rotherham council. The position there is that capital expenditure on housing half way through this financial year was only just under one-third of the allocation and its receipts.

As I understand it, a council can spend only half its receipts from the sale of council houses on building new ones. Will my hon. Friend consider allowing councils to spend all their receipts in this way so that council house building may increase?

I assure my hon. Friend that the other half is not lost. It is taken into account in making allocations nationally. The local authorities retain all the cash. But if sales of council houses scored 100 per cent., the net allocations would be smaller. I remind my hon. Friend that there are other receipts that score 100 per cent. All sales of land score 100 per cent., and there has been a substantial increase in allocations this year as a result of land sales made by a number of authorities.

rose—

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the Minister's lamentable failure to show—

Order. If the hon. Member for Rother Valley (Mr. Hardy) gives notice of his intention to raise the matter on the Adjournment, he will prevent his right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Ardwick (Mr. Kaufman) from being called.

Why do the Minister and his colleagues consistently mislead the House with the claim that they have increased the housing investment programme allocation for the coming year? Is it not a fact that on the figures that the Minister gave me, the housing investment programme allocation is reduced by 4 per cent., and that that 4 per cent. reduction is based upon a phoney 9 per cent. inflation figure?

The right hon. Gentleman is living in the world which ended on 31 March 1981. From 1 April 1981, all local authorities have been able to add their capital receipts to their base allocations. The facts are that the gross provision for housing—the allocation plus receipts—represents an increase in real terms next year.

Is that not a completely phoney comparison? We are talking about the allocations in the information that the Minister provided to me. These are allocations, not notional capital receipts, and on these allocations the Government have reduced housing investment programme allocations by more than £70 million. Will the Minister stop misleading the House?

It is the right hon. Gentleman who is misleading the House. He knows that every local authority has been told in explicit terms in a different document that it is able to add its capital receipts to its allocation. This represents several hundreds of millions of pounds extra nationally which local authorities can add to their housing programmes as from 1 April this year.

Does my hon. Friend agree that there are ways of meeting housing needs other than by building new homes, including the promotion by local authorities of shared ownership, low-cost ownership and building for sale?

My hon. Friend is right. I am encouraged by the fact that there has been a significant response in the past six to nine months to the very important range of low-cost home ownership initiatives introduced by the Government.

I am sorry that I was a little premature in rising on my point of order just now, Mr. Speaker. I was extremely shocked by the Minister's display of his complete ignorance of the problems of local government. I beg to give notice that I shall seek an early opportunity to raise this grossly unsatisfactory matter on the Adjournment.

Cox asked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many (a) council and (b) private houses are now under construction in the Greater London Council area.

About 13,000 local authority and 14,300 private dwellings were under construction in London at the end of September 1981.

Is the Minister aware that those figures are an appalling indictment of two and a half years of Tory Government? In view of the enormous housing problems in London, why cannot the Government start to put into employment the thousands of building workers whom they forced to go on to the dole and get the local authorities to start to tackle these problems? The hon. Gentleman knows that they have to be tackled. Surely now is the time to start doing it.

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will get some comfort from the fact that private sector housing starts in London in the third quarter of 1981 were nearly double the number in the comparable period of 1980. The 1982–83 HIP allocation for London is £558 million, compared with £549 million this year. London will receive a HIP allocation equivalent to more than £200 per household compared with less than £100 per household for the rest of the country. We are trying to tackle London's housing problems.

To put the matter in context, how many council houses in Greater London are empty and have been empty for many months?

Our latest figures show that there are 32,814 local authority dwellings empty in London.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what measures he proposes to increase owner occupation in partnership areas and other inner city stress areas.

All the measures we have taken to promote low-cost home ownership are relevant in inner city stress areas. Additionally, as announced on 9 December—[Vol. 14, c. 865]—a special allocation of £5 million will be made available for low-cost home ownership schemes in 1982–83. We have invited authorities to submit schemes which involve a high ratio of private to public sector finance.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that very detailed answer. What is happening to the pepper potting scheme for building homes on small sites in urban areas?

It is being assaulted.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. A number of volume builders in local authorities have been working together to explore how these small, vacant urban sites can be developed economically to provide low-cost housing. The first project in Bolton has been completed successfully and several others are planned or are under way across the country.

What will the Secretary of State do about the problem, in Preston and many other areas, of small children still living on the fourteenth floor of multi-storey housing blocks that cannot be demolished because of lack of finance for housing?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman did not listen to what was said by my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Construction. Local authorities have some £400 million of underspent housing capital allocations available to them this current year, which they could have spent in the manner suggested by the hon. Gentleman.