International Marxist Group Archive

Magazines, bulletins and booklets of the IMG and its forerunners, 1961–1984

1970 Housing Plan Unlikely to Be Met

The Week Vol. 6, No. 14, c. 20 October 1966 · p. 8 of the scan · 541 words

The scan: The Week v6 no14.pdf (PDF, Marxists Internet Archive, opens at this page)

Uncorrected machine reading. This text was read by machine (Tesseract OCR) from a scan of a stencilled typescript and has not been corrected. Expect misread words; titles in particular are often garbled where the issue printed no contents list. Quote from the scan, not from this page.
How this article was cut and titled: capitals heading; heuristic; title from the OCR of the heading.

from a special correspondent **

own's National Plan was published, the target of 500,000 ne oe “A 1970 was considered to be ludicrously low in relation to Britain's housing shortage. However, it seems even this acta? inadequate target will not be met. The Building Materials employers organisation, in a statement issued on October 16th said that housepuilding completions in Britain this year are unlikely to show much change from the 1965 total and may even decline in 1967. Moreover, the Government is very wmlikely to hit its target of 500,000 dwellings a year by

In the report, the National Council of Building Material Producers asks that private enterprise housing be helped in the following ways:- 1. An immediate statement must be issued about the mortgage interest relief scheme, and the date from which it will operate. 2, A more explicit statement should be made about the levy on the development of land held by private builders on the day "appointed" under the Land Commission legislation. 3. Local authorities should be permitted to provide loans without restriction for house purchase, in order to offset the building society mortgage "famine" = and they should be allowed to borrow from the public for this purpose. Where public authority building is concerned, the council suggests that encouragement should be given authorities to build as many houses in traditional - as opposed to industrialised - construction as local labour resources permit. In this way the "bonus" promised from industrialisation in Ministerial statements would really be felt. “It is only by quick and effective action along these lines that the resources of the small and medium-sized builders, and of the building materials industries, can be harnessed," the council claims, "It is only by such action that the 1970 programme can be achieved. The question remains - is the Government serious when Ministers state that the 1970 programme still stands? The answer will be seen not in three years' time but during the next few weeks," The council describes the house=building record since 1964 as "a pretty strong indictment of a housing programme that never was." It estimates that total completions this year will fall within a range of 380,000 to 390,000, compared with 382,000 last year and 374,000 in 1964. Of this year's likely total, 175,000 to 180,000 will be in the public sector (168,000 in 1965; 156,000 in 1964) and the private sector will account for 205,000 to 210,000 (214,000 in 1965; 218,000 in 1964). Preliminary forecasts by the council for next year put completions at between 370,000 and 385,000 with the private sector's contribution dropping to between 185,000 and 195,000. Where starts are concerned, the council estimates this year's total at 370,000 to 385,000 (392,000 in 1965; 426,000 in 1964). Private builders will account for between 190,000 and 200,000 starts, compared with 211,000 last year and 247,000 in 1964. Next year, public authorities may start work on between 195,000 and. 200,000 dwellings, and private builders shov]d begin between 190,000 and 195,000. This would give a total by the end of 1967 of 385,000 to 395,000. ++ (Although the main aim of this report appears to be the champiloning of private enterprise building, the figures which it cme are extremely disturbing and require a Government answer

← Police Fire on 200 Young PeopleMr. Wilson's Shake-out →

Something wrong on this page?