NEW WAR ON SLUMS

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 85, 11 April 1933, Page 9

NEW WAR ON SLUMS

CHANGE OF A CENTFBY

HUGE BUILDING "CUT"

IT FQRCES BUSINESS

A new British campaign for slum clearance was mentioned, in a British Official .Wireless message published yesterday. This is probably explained by the recent agitation in the Old Country to drop tho State subsidy for housing the abovo-sluin-level people, and to concentrate on the slum-dwellers. Tho latest Government Bill, according to a statement made by Sir William Bay in February, dropg "the subsidy for ordinary home-building" and provides "that tho subsidy should bo limited to assisting the slum-dweller." Why? Because "there has been an enormous fall iii: the cost of building and in the/interest charges on capital." Formerly private enterprise could not build down to tho rent-paying level of tho slum-dweller. That level, is estimated at about 7s a week. Until recently tho economic rout of a house "worked out at 12s 5d a week,"'■but thanks to the "enormous fall'" it now works out at Sg a week. The difference between 8s and 7s is so slight- that it is felt that at last the slums can be cleared. But the subsidy (municipal -or State or both) must be concentrated on tho slurn>-clearanco , job. It .must no longer be devoted to "ordinary homebuilding." The latter no longer needs it. Private enterprise, without subsidy, can now build down to tho rentpaying le^el of "ordinary" people. So runs: tho argument. WHAT OF THE DEAR ONES. In passing, it is worth glancing at what this moans to homes built, at the old high .costs. An owner who is "paying off" the cost of ono of those homes, and who is under contract to pay off for many years, many find himself committod to pay hundreds moro than would be required of an owner who contracts on tho new cost basis. In the case of a tenant, he may have, the opportunity to move to a lower-rented house, and leave the municipal landlord to force a writing-down. In "The Listener" Sir Cecil Levitor, formerly chairman of the London County Council, states that councils erected more than 170,000 houses under the 1919 Act. "The average price has been placed at £1050, thus exceeding, present-day prices by about two-thirds. Some of these cottages show an annual loss of over £50 a year for sixty years, which falls to be met by rates and taxes." When a renter throws off half his, rent he thinks he is rid of it. But if tho half^rent lie discarded goes on to tho rates,, it is liable to come back and hit him again. At any rate, it hits the community, for rates aro an elo,ment in rent. Mounting rates have it in their power to discount tho saving that arises from a lower building cost.' ■Therefore there has been a chorus of protest against continuing the subsidy for ordinary home-building. To this sentimentalists reply that housing is a sacred cause. "Very well," retort the reformers,' "put tho money not into 'ordinary' homes, but into slum clearance, which, with the dip in building costs, has tho chance of the century." A PIVE-YEAR PLAN. Hence arises tho position stated in the British Official Wireless message: "All local authorities aro called upon to prepare and adopt at onco programmes for the demolition of all slums and tho rehousing of their inhabitants. All programmes must bo in tho hands of the Ministry before September 30, and be drawn up with a view to clearing air slum areas not later, than 1938." Since 1929, but rarely before, the world has regarded cheapness as an enemy. Not so long ago everybody thought prices too high. Now everybody thinks theni too low. But this cheapness, whether in building or in butter, will sooner or later revivo tho British worker, and speed up his consumption. Britain cannot fail to benefit .from the cheap services and goods now available in her market, to which flock tho producers of tho world. And what benefits tho British people will benefit in turn their suppliers. The lifting of millions out of slum conditions would be a world event.