The problem of preventing people from reoccupying land
not required for development when its occupants are moved
into permanent housing is indeed a difficult one. The
optimum solution is, of course, to provide sufficient
permanent accommodation for all, thereby making it
unnecessary for people to squat but I appreciate that it
will be some time before this position can be reached.
I notice that in your figures you do not specifically
mention the boat people who I understand total some 100,000
persons. I assume that you have included these people in
the urban squatter population of 500,000 and I should be
interested to know whether my assumption is correct.
You mention that many squatters are more concerned with
increased amenities in these areas than with the quality
of their houses. This may well provide an opportunity
of improving to an acceptable level the standard of accommo-
dation in areas where the squatters live in reasonable
buildings and thereby obviate the necessity of including
such squatters in the re-housing programme.
Another major problem besetting the early solution of the
re-housing of such a large proportion of the population
is the load which would be placed on the already over-
taxed building industry to which you referred in your
letter of 17 September 1970 to the Secretary of State.
You state that the building industry generally is stretched
to the limit over existing plans and I assume that this
has been taken into consideration by the Housing Board in
making their recommendations for new housing for the
next six year period.
A further point is, the effect of the massive Government
-2-
NOTHING TO BE Written IN THIS MARGIN