Examination of witnesses (Questions 520
- 539)
WEDNESDAY 12 JANUARY 2000
RT HON
MICHAEL MEACHER
and MR ELLIOT
MORLEY
Christine Butler
520. How do you view the increasing trend of
people going to live in the countryside either for work or for
retirement purposes or to commute? Is it desirable or undesirable?
(Mr Meacher) I think it has both features. I think
that the influx of people moving into the countryside can at times
assist local economies. It can provide a better balance in rural
communities. I do not think that is a bad thing. At the same time,
of course, it can lead to much greater developmental pressures,
it can push up house prices, it can reduce the availability of
affordable housing, it can increase pressure on rural roads. It
works both ways. I do think the way to try to deal with it is
not just a rural matter, it is by trying to generate an urban
renaissance, if one can use a rather grand phrase, but that is
really at the centre of our Urban White Paper. It is to make towns
and cities better places, vibrant, safe and desirable places for
people to live so that they will feel much less pressure to flee
to the countryside.
521. Now, Professor Crow has been discharged
from his duties and not accepted for the role of looking at the
North East and Humberside. How do you look at his conclusions
then to SERPLAN in the light of that?
(Mr Meacher) The response to Professor Crow's report,
of course, has been exhaustively discussed in the media and in
this place as well.
522. Of course.
(Mr Meacher) It is highly controversial. It is not
a Government document, of course. The Government is giving its
response to it very shortly and I do not think it would be very
wise or helpful for me to give any detailed response.
Chairman
523. Can you tell us whether it is a very long
very shortly or a very short very shortly?
(Mr Meacher) It will be a pretty short very shortly.
I think the next month or two.
Christine Butler
524. Right. North East Regional Planning Guidance
is sticking to 60 per cent as the target. We know that is a target
which will be very hard to meet in the South East. What is your
view on that? Do you not think that where there is more capacity
there should be greater effort?
(Mr Meacher) Of course the 60 per cent build on brown
field as opposed to green field is a national figure and it is
a national average figure. We have never said, and of course it
would be ridiculous to suppose, that it could be achieved in every
region. There are huge differences between the East Midlands and
the most intensely urban areas of South East England. We do intend
to achieve the national figure and it does mean that all areas,
including the South East, are going to have to take account of
that. We have to do it in a sensible way and there is a limit
to what particular regions can tolerate.
525. Do you think your Department has enough
information that it can share with the Regional Development Agencies
and the Regional Planning Conferences to come to the best solutions?
(Mr Meacher) I very much hope so and in the debate
that will take place when the Government does give its view on
the Crow Report, that is exactly the kind of discussion, meetings,
negotiations that I expect to take place.
526. The Government will have to take some decisions.
Are you confident that the information is there? You did mention
before in an earlier reply all about the same issue, you said
there is diversity, not every rural community is the same, it
may be reasonable to have an influx of population in one, in a
market town but not in another one, therefore we do need good
evidence and sufficient information.
(Mr Meacher) I do not want to get too much drawn,
if I may say so, Chairman, into this issue, which will be discussed
in a different context. What we are looking at is the best demographic
data which is available to us of the future demand for new housing,
basically due to the increase in one person households rather
than internal migration within the country. We then have to decide
on its allocation regionally and through regional planning guidance
and other mechanisms we then have to ensure that there is flexibility
for that to be met in the most appropriate fashion in each region.
That is the process that we are engaged in. At each stage there
is opportunity for a great deal of discussion and negotiation
and that will certainly take place.
Mr Benn
527. What are you doing about the lack of affordable
housing in rural areas?
(Mr Meacher) There is undoubtedly a lack of affordable
housing. We have provided £5 billion under housing proposals
in the course of this Parliament. In the last year it was an extra
£2.1 billion, I think, which is something like a 48 per cent
increase over the previous year. So we are putting substantial
extra money into housing and, of course, local authorities can
use that in support of rural housing. The Housing Corporation
also is, of course, another source. They have provided something
in the order of 16,000 homes in small communities with less than
3,000 population in the last ten years. We would certainly like
to see that increased. That was over a limited period of time
and, therefore, as a national quantity is quite small. There is
a rural housing target set which is currently 3.4 per cent. I
think I am well aware of the arguments for that to be increased.
There is also a rural exceptions policy which does enable local
authorities to grant planning permissions for small sites which
otherwise would not get that planning permission. Having said
all of that, I accept that there is a lack of affordable housing.
It is a serious issue in the countryside and one of the main themes
that we have got to address in this White Paper is how we deal
with it.
528. Just increasing the supply, if there is
money chasing it which pushes up the price, may deal with supply
but not necessarily with affordability. The Chartered Institute
of Housing suggested in its evidence that there might be a case
for looking again at the right to buy for smaller communities,
5,000 or less. Do you think that will have a part to play?
(Mr Meacher) I think that is again a valuable suggestion
and one which we have already had some discussions on. It is difficult
in this Committee without pre-empting what is intended to be a
bright fresh striking and innovative White Paper to talk in too
much detail about the actual proposals but I think that is precisely
one of the items that we should look at and take on board very
seriously.
529. Are there any others you are looking at?
(Mr Meacher) There are several. Affordable housing
is a very big issue. There are many families who have lived in
the rural areas for generations, whose children grow up and want
to marry and stay in the countryside and they cannot afford the
housing. Now there are a whole range of ways of dealing with this.
There has been some discussion publicly about this and I have
to say the results did not encourage further helpful discussion
about constructive ways of solving this problem. I would prefer
at this stage to complete the discussions that we are having before
I speak about them publicly.
Mr Benn: We will await the eating of the pudding.
Miss McIntosh: My particular concern is that
it is starter homes for young entrants, young farmers and new
entrants coming into farming communities. I was pretty appalled
that Professor Crow had no regard whatsoever to the specific strategy
you have set out in the Government's housing policy such as green
field development, green belt housing projections, interpretation
of sustainable development and transport policy. I shudder with
horror to think that he is coming up to Yorkshire and Humberside
this year.
Mr Gray: They sacked him, he has been dropped.
Miss McIntosh
530. Oh good. That is a relief. Are you able
to give us any indication of how you are going to encourage developers
to target that specific category of people otherwise it is very
difficult to see a future for farming?
(Mr Meacher) This was really covered by the answer
I just gave. This is a prime group of people for whom it is very
important that there should be the opportunity to obtain housing
that they can afford and remain and continue their work in the
countryside. I accept absolutely that is an objective. It is not
in some cases happening at the present time. There does need to
be a significant change of policy. There does need to be greater
opportunity and incentives and availability of housing. This is
the supply point as well as the demand point and that has got
to change.
Mr Gray
531. Is all this affected by those who own two
or three houses perhaps?
(Mr Meacher) It is. I knew I could rely on you, Mr
Gray, to draw attention to this point and since you kindly do—
532. Being in my constituency or just outside
my constituency.
(Mr Meacher)—that does give me an opportunity
to say, contrary to the way in which this item appeared in some
parts of the media, I was actually making exactly that point,
that those people who are privileged and fortunate enough to have
more than one house should not prevent others from obtaining one
house. I think there are something like a quarter of a million
people in the country who have a second house. In the great majority
of cases it makes no difference to house prices at all. It is
where there is a critical mass, where there is a whole block of
new executive homes that are sold off in a very small area and
go to people outside who are well off and that changes the whole
balance of prices in that area. That is what I was saying we need
to be cautious about and I was making some suggestions as to how
that might be dealt with but, again, you would never guess that
from the way it was reported. It is a serious issue. I think we
need to be careful in over-personalising it not to see it out
of proportion.
(Mr Morley) Can I just say on the issue of agricultural
accommodation, it is a serious problem because, of course, farm
houses and farm cottages are a considerable capital asset and
many of them have been disposed of. Local authorities, as you
probably know, do have the power to make exemptions in relation
to planning and building for agricultural use but it is important
that is not abused because there have been cases where it has
been abused in the past and also, as you know, there can be conditions
applied to houses which mean they cannot be sold on unless it
is for agricultural use. I know local authorities, including my
own, do apply that. In terms of people starting off, the county
council smallholdings is a very important step on the ladder and
as a Government we have supported that very strongly. Some of
the capital incentives to actually sell them off in the past,
that were introduced in the past, no longer apply under this Government.
Mrs Ellman
533. Do you feel that issues of social exclusion
and economic exclusion in rural areas are ignored?
(Mr Meacher) I think, again, this is a serious issue
which governments in the past, and it is no reflection on the
colour of government, I think all governments, have failed satisfactorily
to come to grips with. We tend to do surveys that are based on
large aggregates and, as I have already indicated, in rural areas
these pockets are sometimes extremely small and not caught up
in these surveys. We do need, therefore, to take particular account
of the special circumstances in rural areas. The PIU Report, again,
I think was quite innovative. They suggested that the use of ICT
based methods—information communication technology—could
be brought to bear. They looked at mobile outlets, they looked
at sharing of premises and, frankly, all of those are sensible
ideas to make services more accessible and viable. They also looked
at market towns as being a new focus of rural regeneration. I
take that idea very seriously. It does mean moving from very small
villages into market towns but it does not mean that you have
to go on a day's journey into the nearest big city. I think there
is a role for quite small market towns to become the new focus
to try to counter social exclusion.
534. Does the Social Exclusion Unit intend to
look at rural issues?
(Mr Meacher) Yes, it certainly does. In our Department
we shall be discussing with them in the preparation of this White
Paper their provisional conclusions on this area.
535. What are your views on the implications
for rural sub-post offices and the transfer or change of benefit
payments from post offices to bank accounts?
(Mr Meacher) We have already provided rate relief
for small village shops, some of which include post offices. The
Government has, as you know, issued a White Paper in which we
have committed ourselves to a national network of post offices.
That certainly includes rural areas. The White Paper also drew
attention to access criteria so that nobody should be more than
a certain distance from the nearest post office. These are lifelines
in rural areas and it is extremely important that they should
be preserved and, indeed, enhanced.
536. What do you want the review of local government
finance to deliver for rural areas?
(Mr Meacher) The review of local government finance
is not an issue for me but for my colleague in DETR, Hilary Armstrong.
I would certainly want it to take account of this particular issue
that you are referring to and to ensure that its conclusions are
consistent not only with the preservation but with an increase
in post offices and making it easier for people to draw payments,
which perhaps is what you are referring to.
537. Do you think that local government finance
should be the same per capita in rural areas as it is in urban
areas, the part that is grant aided by Government?
(Mr Meacher) I am not briefed on that. This is not
an issue that I have dealt with but it certainly will be for Hilary
Armstrong and rather than taking a stab at an answer I think I
would prefer to consult her and reply to you by letter.
(Mr Morley) There are some sparsity issues which I
think are recognised by Government that do have to be addressed
in any kind of reform of local government.
Chairman
538. Oldham Metropolitan District Council gets
huge benefits from the sparsity factor for all of those empty
Pennine Hills where there are no schools or anything.
(Mr Meacher) As a former citizen of the said Metropolitan
Borough Council, Chairman, I hope you were not suggesting any
change in the current arrangement.
Mr Olner
539. Just briefly on the assurance you gave
about the rural sub-post offices, which I think is very good,
will that assurance still be given to urban and suburban areas
as well that equally rely on post offices as a lifeline?
(Mr Meacher) My view would certainly be that the same
rules ought to underlie both. Even in rural areas there are certainly
people who have difficulty getting access to the post office,
even where the population density is considerably higher. The
access criteria should certainly apply irrespective of location
in the country.
| 
