|Previous Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, the noble Baroness will have heard my answer yesterday when I told the House the position existing in London and the investment that we are putting into accident and emergency departments. In inner London alone £14 million will be invested this year. I could go through the list but it would be tedious to repeat what I said yesterday.
Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos: My Lords, notwithstanding Mr. Abel's age, and given everything the noble Baroness has said, is it not the case that if Mr. Abel had been transferred to a neurological centre for an appropriate operation he could have been alive today?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, we are not talking about intensive care. We are talking about a neurosurgical unit. With regard to intensive care, the recent reporta very authoritative reportdid not conclude that there were not enough beds but that they were not necessarily distributed in the right places and that they were not being used in the right way.
Lord McColl of Dulwich: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that for any patient, whatever his age, on anti-coagulant drugs who has a spontaneous brain haemorrhage which is so severe as to stop him breathing, the outlook is very bad indeed? That certainly was a factor in this case. Is my noble friend aware that when I was a house surgeon in 1957 and we had double the number of beds in the National Health Service throughout the country my major problem was a shortage of beds?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Henley): My Lords, surplus properties are sold at the earliest opportunity, but not all empty properties are surplus to requirement. The majority are needed to accommodate service families in the near future.
Baroness Fisher of Rednal: My Lords, what caused the collapse of the housing trust which was appointed by the Government to manage the disposal of this type of housing? I also understand that at present 12,000 houses are standing empty. I understand that the Government appointed a chief executive and staff and provided the office equipment to put the housing trust into operation. But the trust has now folded up and a waste of government money has ensued.
Lord Henley: My Lords, I can assure the noble Baroness that the collapse of the housing trust concept has nothing to do with the number of empty married quarters, which, as the noble Baroness said, is around 12,000. In the light of the difficulties experienced in the housing trust proposalsthe trust collapsed for various technical reasonswe are looking at alternatives for achieving the underlying objective of transferring the married quarters estate to the private sector. I can assure the noble Baroness that we have had some encouraging ideas which we are certainly
Lord Williams of Elvel: My Lords, is it not the case that this trust collapsed not for technical reasons but because no one would put up the money? Is it not also the case that the chief executive was hired on a three-year rolling contract at a salary of £80,000 a year, when a housing officer in a local authority would get less than £50,000 a year? What has happened to all these people on three-year rolling contracts? Is it not time that Ministers took a grip of the Ministry of Defence and achieved proper financial discipline inside that department?
Lord Henley: My Lords, the noble Lord is totally and utterly wrong on his first point. The trust collapsed, as we made clear at the time, for technical reasons. It was nothing to do with the fact that no one was prepared to put up the money. We had not actually gone out to the market at that stage, so it was rather difficult for anyone to put up the money. We are confident that the Defence Housing Executive, which does existwe have continued some of the proposals that we developed in the housing trust into the Defence Housing Executivewill make a significant contribution to improved management of service housing, both for the benefit of service personnel themselves and the taxpayer.
Lord Henley: My Lords, some of them are still working on the Defence Housing Executive. We will continue to take those ideas forward and to develop the other plans to which I referred in my answer to the noble Baroness, Lady Fisher.
Lord Renton: My Lords, when a large aerodrome with many married quarters in good condition becomes available for general housing, are the local authorities encouraged to modify their own new building of houses so that these married quarters, which are public property, can be fully used?
Lord Henley: My Lords, we pursue various avenues in the disposal of all defence property, particularly defence housing. We would first look at trying to dispose of individual housing to ex-servicemen and provide them with the appropriate discount. We would then look to housing associations. We would, in the kind of case to which my noble friend refers, have detailed discussions with the local authority, not purely relating to housing matters but also to the general development of, as my noble friend puts it, a large aerodrome that is no longer being
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, when responding to the noble Lord, Lord Renton, why did not the Minister correct his assertion that local authorities have new build housing programmes? Does he not agree that this Government have abolished the new house building programmes of local authorities?
Lord Dean of Beswick: My Lords, in his replies the Minister has twice mentioned seeking a solution in the private sector. In another reply he referred to housing associations. Why are the Government so bitter and vicious towards local authorities that they are not trying to involve them in the operation? They may be able to provide the answer.
Lord Henley: My Lords, we look to local authorities on occasions. We are quite prepared to consider the leasing of temporarily surplus properties to local authorities. However, when they are temporarily surplus they are very often not the kind of property which local authorities want and are often in the wrong place. The local authority would have them for only a relatively short time and they might create even greater problems for the authority when we needed them back for our service requirements.
Lord Avebury: My Lords, can the Minister say how many of the very large houses which were occupied by senior officers and which were scheduled to be sold have in fact been marketed and what the losses to the taxpayer have been on their disposal?
Lord Henley: My Lords, as I think the noble Lord will know, we commissioned a review of entertainment. That obviously affects the houses to which the noble Lord refers. The review, which is being conducted by Sir Peter Cazalet, is expected to report to Ministers in my department later this month. It is looking at whether there are alternative and more cost-effective means of carrying out the obligation to entertain other than through the use of official service residences. When we have that report I shall be able to answer the noble Lord's question.
|Next Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|