HOUSING IN ENGLAND

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 71, Issue 6, 18 October 1950, Page 5

HOUSING IN ENGLAND

STRONG CRITICISM OF CONSERVATIVES MR MORRISON HITS OUT I Special Correspondent—N.Z.P. A.). (Rec. 8.30 a.m.) LONDON, Oct. 17. The Lord President of the Council, Mr Herbert Morrison, speaking at the London suburb of Lewisham, accused the Conservative Party conference of being guilty of a “cynical and irresponsible attempt” to exploit Britain’s housing difficulties.

“In response to clamour from the floor of the conference, the platform swallowed an amendment urging the Conservative Party to adopt the minimum figure of 300,000 houses annually,” said Mr Morrison. “This was coupled with a declaration almost to abolish licensing, and to permit the speculative builder freely ; to build for sale and 1 not fdr letting. This is not the way to solve the problem for people of limited means to get enough houses, to rent. Nor will this policy of anarchy be helpful for school buildings and repairs to hospital, improvement to factory or other building for employment. “However, it was not long before the minimum figure of 300,000 went west. Two days after the conference Mr Churchill, in a speech, had reduced the minimum of 300,000 to ‘a target.’ And even then he warned his followers that there might be difficulties about it. Thus the Conservatives play with the people’s sorrows.” Mr Morrison added t-hat the Labour Party would “go .bang ahead” to the maximum extent until every family had decent accommodation. If it became possible to lift the rate of building the Labour Party would do it. But is would not make reckless promises for mere vote-catching purposes without being reasonably sure that it could, live up to them.

Criticism by “The Times”

“The Times,” in a leading article, criticised the Conservatives for promising so much. “Political parties are seldom reasonable when spoiling for an electoral fight. It is not surprising that the conference, when discussing housing, should have over-ridden the party leaders’ caution and insisted, as one speaker put it, on a figure electors could grasp. Against evidently the better judgment of its leaders, the party pledged itself to give house-build-ing first call on labour and materials up to 300,000 new dwellings a yearhalf as much again as the Government's present programme for the next two years. So great an expgn; sion, to be sustained over a period of years, would indeed be difficult to achieve. It was not attained after the 1914-18 war until 1933, and it is doubtful whether there is any early prospect of returning to conditions which made possible the housing boom of the 1930’5.”*