| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Council and Housing Association Dwellings (London)
11. Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North): If he will estimate the number of new council and housing association dwellings to be built in London in the next 12 months. [116152]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. Chris Mullin): Although no new-build council homes are planned for next year, some replacement homes will be built as part of regeneration schemes. In addition, 5,400 new housing association homes are planned for London next year, of which 3,940 will be for rent.
Mr. Corbyn: Does the Minister realise what a depressing answer that will be for thousands of people in London who are on housing waiting lists or transfer lists, or living in bed-and-breakfast or hostel accommodation? If we are to deal with the housing problem that affects anyone on an average or below average income in London, there must be a significant increase in the number of properties made available for rent by councils or housing associations. Especially in inner London, people look to the Government to ensure that money is spent not just on improving existing estates--although that is welcome and necessary--but on purchasing and providing new homes for rent. Failing that, London will become an increasingly socially divided city as poorer people are forced to move out because there is nowhere for them to live.
Mr. Mullin: I certainly acknowledge that there is a serious shortage of affordable housing in London, but I hope my hon. Friend will acknowledge that the housing investment programme for London has increased dramatically under this Government. This year it will be £613 million, which represents a 54 per cent. increase on the previous year.
Let me also gently say to my hon. Friend that about 2 per cent. of Islington's council stock--not counting properties that are awaiting demolition or major renovation--are empty. One of the most effective ways of creating more affordable housing in London would be to put to proper use council housing in Islington--and, indeed, elsewhere--that is currently vacant. Islington has one of the highest vacancy rates.
Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby):
Something else that has grown dramatically under this Government is the number of asylum seekers in London. How much of that social housing will be taken up by people who have been
Mr. Mullin:
As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Government are making provision to disperse asylum seekers around the country.
This is not a problem that suddenly arose in May 1997. It existed long before then, and the Government whom the hon. Gentleman supported did very little about it. I regret attempts by some Conservative Members to play--let me call it not the race card but the asylum seeker card.
12. Mr. Simon Hughes (Southwark, North and Bermondsey):
When he will respond to the urban taskforce report. [116153]
The Minister for Local Government and the Regions (Ms Hilary Armstrong):
We propose to publish a response to the recommendations in the urban taskforce report later this year, at the same time that we publish our White Paper on urban policy.
Mr. Hughes:
Given that one of the recommendations of the taskforce was that it should have an influence on the comprehensive spending review so that urban policy became a term of reference, may we have a date for the report's publication before the announcement of the comprehensive spending review? Also, may we have a guarantee that sustainable communities will be at the heart of the policy, and that in every instance regeneration will put first the interests of those who live in the urban communities that are to be regenerated?
Ms Armstrong:
It is precisely because we want to take into account the urban taskforce's ideas--some of which we are already implementing and getting on with, but specifically those relating to the Government's wider policies, including our policies on regeneration and urban renaissance--that they will be considered as part of the spending review. We shall therefore respond to the ideas following the review. I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government are determined that we shall have regeneration that really means something, that changes the opportunities of those who live in such areas, and that ensures that those people are able to benefit from the advantages of regeneration. We are also determined to build sustainable communities, which are at the heart of our policy.
Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham):
Given that, in the name of urban regeneration, Lord Rogers recommended a cut in VAT on residential renovations, has the right hon. Lady complained to the Treasury that such a helpful measure was not forthcoming in the Budget?
Ms Armstrong:
Perhaps the hon. Gentleman did not hear all of the Budget, which showed that the Government believe that there is a strong case for stamp duty relief for new build on brownfield sites. We intend to consult on the matter. We shall demonstrate again that we recognise the important distinction between development on greenfield and brownfield sites. It really is a pity that the hon.
Concessionary Fares
13. Mr. Paul Burstow (Sutton and Cheam): What plans he has for a common age of entitlement to concessionary fares for older people. [116155]
The Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. John Prescott): The Government have a strong commitment to concessionary travel for elderly people. In the Transport Bill, we are introducing a statutory minimum for local authority concessionary travel schemes, which will provide at least half-fare travel on buses. After the recent Budget, we announced that the bus pass will also be available free of charge. Those two measures will benefit up to 5.3 million senior citizens. Under the terms of the Pensions Act 1995, the age of entitlement for concessionary travel for both men and women will be equalised at 65 by 2020.
Mr. Burstow: The statutory minimum scheme will be greatly welcomed by very many pensioners across the country. However, given that fact, and given that the statutory minimum scheme will effectively make it unlawful to discriminate on grounds of age, will not the Secretary of State take the opportunity to introduce a common age of entitlement to travel schemes for everyone based on the age of 60?
Mr. Prescott: I recognise the point that the hon. Gentleman is making. As he will know, there have been a number of court judgments in Europe on the matter, and those judgments have not held against our differential at 60 and 65. It is therefore a matter of resources. It would cost about £65 million to meet his request. When considering expenditure, we have to make a judgment on priorities, and the 1p Liberal tax would not necessarily pay for a common age of entitlement.
Angela Smith (Basildon): Many pensioners in my constituency have warmly welcomed the Government's decision on concessionary fares for older people--although, quite rightly, they still complain about the lack of bus services in many areas. However, will the Deputy Prime Minister consider extending the scheme to include young people in full-time education and those who are under 18, who still have to pay full fares?
Mr. Prescott: Those matters are affected by cost resource and priorities, which have to be determined. I note, however, that the Labour candidate for mayor of London has made a similar suggestion.
Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield): I know that the right hon. Gentleman is very keen to extend concessionary travel for older people, but how would establishing a common age for concessionary travel, which was the intention of the original question, help older people in many parts of the country where there is little or no public transport at all? Is it not important that the Deputy Prime Minister should consider the problems
faced by many elderly people who do not have their own cars and live in remote rural areas--such as some of the villages in my own constituency of Macclesfield?
Mr. Prescott: The hon. Gentleman makes a serious point, but under the Conservative Government there was a massive decline in public transport provision, particularly in rural areas. Our £170 million of rural grants has led to 1,800 new services in rural areas. It may not cover everywhere, but it is a major step forward. I suppose that I should also be grateful that the hon. Gentleman did not mention the Manchester airport eastern link road, as he often does.
Ivory Trade
14. Mrs. Helen Brinton (Peterborough): What steps the Government are taking to secure the restoration of a ban on the international trade in ivory. [116156]
The Minister for the Environment (Mr. Michael Meacher): There can be no further international trade in ivory unless the 11th conference of parties to the convention on international trade in endangered species, which opens next week in Nairobi, agrees a specific proposal to permit that. The Government believe that any change to the conservation status of elephants under CITES would be premature. We are therefore urging all the proponents to withdraw their proposals on elephants. If they are not withdrawn, the UK, together with our European partners, will oppose all the proposals including those seeking further trade in ivory.
Mrs. Brinton: I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Has he, like me, seen the excellent article in The Mail on Sunday last week, entitled "Why killing elephants is again all the fashion"? It was about not just ivory, but a revival in trading in elephant skins. Will he assure me that the Government will do all they can at the talks in Nairobi later this week to support the position of Kenya and India, which want to ban that evil, wicked trade?
Mr. Meacher: I can certainly assure my hon. Friend that we do not want a return to the large-scale poaching and full-scale ivory trading that characterised the 1980s; but for all trading in ivory to be ended and for elephants to be uplifted to appendix 1 of CITES, two conditions must be met. The first is that there must be evidence that the limited, experimental, one-off trade has led to an increase in poaching. The evidence is confused and there is no convincing proof. Secondly, the numbers must justify such a move. Elephant numbers are not small, their distribution is not restricted and they are not in decline. In the three countries concerned with the trade, over the past 15 years elephant numbers have quadrupled in Botswana, gone up sixfold in Namibia and nearly doubled in Zimbabwe. We are concerned to prevent any increase in ivory trading. That is why we have required all parties to withdraw their proposals so that we can monitor the illegal killing of elephants and provide convincing evidence for further action.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |