| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Pollution
4. Mr. Win Griffiths: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement about the latest levels of atmospheric pollution and the plans he has to reduce it. [33935]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. James Clappison): Air quality in the United Kingdom is generally good or very good most of the time. We shall shortly be publishing a consultation draft national air quality strategy.
Mr. Griffiths: Would the Minister like to tell us whether he intends to give local authorities additional powers to act against pollution black spots, and whether there are any proposals for a national approach to deal with pollution problems, which are very severe in some cities and cause real damage to the health of adults and children?
Mr. Clappison: As the hon. Gentleman may know, 80 local authorities in 14 different areas--including some in south Wales--are trialling the duties under the Environment Act 1995. Resources have been made available to assist them and we shall look at the implications of that trial period.
The national air quality strategy to which I referred is a comprehensive strategy for dealing with emissions and will lead to major improvements in air quality, in addition to the improvements that we have already made in reducing lead, sulphur and other harmful emissions under our international commitments.
I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's interest in this matter. It is a shame that there is not more constructive interest from those on the Labour Front Bench. The only emissions that are apparent from the Labour party are internal emissions, particularly from south Wales.
Mr. Evennett:
Is my hon. Friend aware that there is growing concern about air quality in my borough of Bexley? When he publishes his draft document, will he include some proposals to deal with the growing problem of air pollution in the London area?
Mr. Clappison:
My hon. Friend makes an important point. Local authorities will have powers: local authority air management areas will be established. My hon. Friend will also be interested in the action that we have taken to deal with summertime smog, and in the recent conference of north-west European countries, hosted by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, which discussed that international problem. The conference set the aim of reducing it, and if possible eliminating it, by 2005.
Mrs. Helen Jackson:
Does the Minister agree with the report published recently by the Environmental Industries Commission, which states that those industries have lost £2 billion because of the Government's failure to regulate? The problem has been exacerbated by the two-year delay in the control of volatile organic compound emissions. Is this not another example of the Government's producing warm green words and absolutely no action?
Mr. Clappison:
The hon. Lady completely misunderstands the VOC issue. As she will know, we have entered into a protocol on VOCs under the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, and we are well on the way to meeting our international commitments--as we are in regard to other emissions. What we are prepared to be judged on is our success in meeting international obligations. When we set targets and agree to obligations, we meet them, and that results in better air quality.
6. Mr. Skinner:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what, at the latest date for which figures are available, was the number of local authority dwellings. [33937]
The Minister for Local Government, Housing and Urban Regeneration (Mr. David Curry):
At the beginning of April 1995, there were 3,565,000 local authority dwellings in England.
Mr. Skinner:
Is it not almost unbelievable that, during 1995, local authorities, deprived of money by this Tory Government, were unable to build more than 612 houses in one year? In 1978, which we regarded as a bad year for Labour, 78,000 houses were built. The ratio between the number of houses being built now and the number being built in the years before the Labour Government were kicked out of office is about 80:1. Is it not high time that the Government worked it out? There are millions of bricks in stock; people are lying on the streets and in doorways; builders and construction workers are without jobs. You do not have to be a Pythagoras to solve that theorem--but then this Government are not capable of anything.
Mr. Curry:
Let me tell the hon. Gentleman how pleased I am to see him here and in such good voice.
Earlier today, the hon. Gentleman gave notice that he was unstarring his question. I knew that the Labour party intended to discipline dissident Members, and I was rather afraid that the hon. Gentleman had already been liquidated. I am glad that he is back--but he is back with exactly the same attitude that he had nearly 20 years ago,
which is that housing must be built by councils. We have moved on from that old agenda to allowing building by housing associations, giving tenants the right to own their property and letting local authorities transfer property to the private sector.
Three weeks ago, I announced estate challenge results that allowed some of the worst estates to be moved to new landlords, subject to a ballot. Just three weeks later, Durham has already balloted its tenants. Those tenants do not want the hon. Gentleman's old-fashioned style; they want the new policies that give them better opportunities and new hope. The hon. Gentleman will die with the old Labour ship.
Mr. Yeo:
In view of the concern expressed by the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner), will my right hon. Friend join me in looking forward to his enthusiastic support for recent proposals from the Ministry of Defence which will ensure that the most effective use is made of the large number of houses that it owns?
Mr. Curry:
One can always live in hope, although it must be said that, in the case of the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner), there is not much hope.
The MOD's proposals will produce two important results. First, they will enable empty stock to be brought into productive use; it is a scandal that it has not been already. Secondly, they will allow houses inhabited by service personnel to be brought up to a proper standard, so that those people have the houses that they deserve. That is not the case at present, which is a very good argument for going ahead.
Mr. Raynsford:
Will the Minister now recognise that under his Government, the output of new housing for renting has fallen to its lowest level since the end of the second world war? At the same time, the number of homeless people in Britain has doubled since Labour was last in power. When will the Government face their responsibilities and get unemployed building workers back to work building the homes that are needed, letting councils use their capital receipts to finance that building?
Mr. Curry:
The hon. Gentleman keeps returning to his old anthem about capital receipts, but it is a myth that that money is doing nothing. Those receipts have been invested and are earning interest. If they were not, council tax bills would go up.
The hon. Gentleman is at pains to say, "No spending commitments." Even in the most informal setting, one could not prise a spending commitment out of him with forceps. If that money were put into house building, it would be bound to affect the public sector borrowing requirement, and other expenditure by local authorities would have to be pruned if public expenditure were not to rise. The hon. Gentleman must answer that question.
Like the hon. Member for Bolsover, with whom I doubt he would want to compare himself, the hon. Gentleman still represents the old municipal side of Labour. We and the agenda have moved on from that, and we are moving tenants with us to much greater opportunities. They will not want the hon. Gentleman's remedies thrust down their throats.
Mr. Dunn:
In the context of local authority dwellings, does my right hon. Friend agree that there are thousands of empty properties in housing black spots such as Lambeth, Lewisham and Liverpool which are not well administered by local authorities? Is this not the question that we should be asking: "Why do these black spots exist and which party has created them"?
Mr. Curry:
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The essential skills of a local authority are to fill voids and collect rents. When it does not do that, people are deprived of homes and the borough is deprived of revenue for its services. There are 600,000 to 800,000 empty properties around the country and they must be brought back into use. It would be more sensible to do that than to have them lying idle. Some of them are in the private sector, but too many are still in the public sector and need to be utilised.
7. Mr. Hanson:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what contribution he estimates the private finance initiative will make to the capital programme of local authorities. [33938]
Mr. Robert B. Jones:
The private finance initiative offers potential for significant additions to local authority capital investment in the coming years. That is why my right hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government, Housing and Urban Regeneration announced on 21 May substantial changes to the local government capital finance regulations to facilitate the further development of the private finance initiative.
Mr. Hanson:
Does the Minister accept that, in the absence of proper local capital spending programmes by central and local government, the private finance initiative is becoming increasingly attractive to many local authorities? Does he also accept that the 32 regulations are red tape that needs to be removed and that we need clear, open guidance for local authorities so that the backlog on the private finance initiative is made available? In future, local authorities must have a clearer idea of what the private finance initiative means.
Mr. Jones:
I am glad that the hon. Gentleman welcomes the private finance initiative, and I hope that he will get that message across to some of his hon. Friends who still seem hostile to the idea of involving private sector capital.
Of course we want to make sure that there is no red tape. That is why my right hon. Friend has had three different tranches of measures to strip away the bureaucracy. We are prepared to look at any suggestions by local authorities about other areas that are worthy of examination.
Of course bureaucracy is a problem not just on the regulatory side. We have to ensure that local authorities, as clients, do not have fussy contract documents or overlong tender lists or other measures that would block a good package.
Ms Armstrong:
The Minister's staggering complacency is almost beyond words. Has he not noticed that, in the past few weeks, the confidence of the private sector has virtually collapsed? The legal decision added to the regulatory regime have prompted it to say, certainly to us, that it has no confidence in the ability of the private finance initiative further to push capital development by local authorities. Will the hon. Gentleman therefore quickly review the position, because the construction industry and, more important, the public are suffering enormous losses as the necessary capital investment is simply not being made?
Mr. Jones:
What we have witnessed is the staggering ignorance of the hon. Lady. If she talked to individual construction companies throughout the country that are involved in submitting projects and having them assessed, or met the construction industry on a national basis, as I do, she would know that they are enthusiastic about this and view it as the way forward.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |