To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will extend to Knowsley borough council the same assistance as he has given to the London borough of Ealing to keep clown the level of increase of council house rents.

Any application from Knowsley borough council or from any other authority for a special determination of subsidy would be considered on its own merits.

Does the Minister agree that the housing subsidy system is ridiculously complex and in a mess, and that the Government's attempts to bring council rents into line with market values have failed dismally, so that in the case of a borough such as Knowsley, which has significantly high rents and a high take-up of housing benefit, the inclusion of the cost of benefits in the calculation for housing subsidy has the effect of increasing those rents?

On the contrary, the housing subsidy system is extraordinarily simple and any difficulties that arise in Knowsley have nothing to do with the Government and everything to do with the incompetence of Knowsley borough council, whose record of housing mismanagement is bad even by the appalling standards of Labour-controlled authorities. On 1 April last year, more than 5 per cent. of Knowsley's housing stock was empty—the seventh worst performance out of 366 housing authorities. Its record of collecting rents was not much better. Last year it was the 28th worst authority out of the 366. Filling those voids and collecting those rents would help its housing revenue account. Instead of criticising the Government, the hon. Gentleman should advise his constituents to vote for a Conservative council on 2 May so that it can start cleaning up the mess, just as the newly elected Ealing Conservative council did last May.

My hon. Friend has put his finger on the answer. Is not the way to keep down the level of rents to make a determined effort to collect them in the first place?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Following our introduction of a ring-fenced housing revenue account last April, there is an enormous incentive for authorities to be efficient. I am glad to say that the vast majority of Conservative councils are responding extremely well.

I think that the Minister should be aware that many of his successors in that job, of which there have indeed been many, met Knowsley workers and are well aware that, by agreement with the Department, the number of voids are high because they are being held for improvement. Without throwing any bricks at the Minister for Housing and Planning, the hon. Member for Ealing, Acton (Sir G. Young), if every authority in the country, irrespective of political control, had been subject to the same arrangements as the Conservative-controlled borough of Ealing, the level of increase in council house rents would have been far smaller throughout the country. The Minister cannot evade that fact. The Government are being highly selective about whom they help and whom they do not help. It will not buy them any votes—certainly not in Knowsley, or in Ealing.

I should explain to the House that my hon. Friend the Minister played no part in discussions held in the Department regarding Ealing borough council—discussions which, incidentally, led to our refusal of Ealing's request for additional subsidy. Ealing faced the problem of inheriting exceptionally difficult conditions from the Labour council in May last year—a projected housing revenue account deficit of £25 million. Even after we allowed the council to bring forward £5 million from 1992–93 into 1991–92—money which will have to be repaid in the following year—its rent increase exceeds the guideline rent increase by more than any other local authority in the country.

As a former Ealing councillor, may I ask whether my hon. Friend finds it strange that the Labour Front Bench wants the increase to be even greater?

My hon. Friend is perfectly right. If it were not for how highly we value his services in this place, I dare say that he would still be doing a valuable job on Ealing borough council.