164 ADDENDA TO THE MINORITY REPORT 



huts as far as possible for cottages, and we certainly 

 think that the huts may be of use in helping to bridge 

 over a difficult period. But honesty compels us to 

 say that the use of huts cannot dispose of the housing 

 problem or even affect its character very appreciably. 

 It is much better that the public should understand 

 the magnitude of the problem and come to close 

 quarters with it at once. 



We pass now to the question of the authority which 

 should be responsible for the actual building of the 

 cottages. The Rural District Councils are the bodies 

 who possess housing powers, and who, through their 

 officials, supervise and control local building. What- 

 ever fresh legislation may ensue involving State grants 

 for agricultural housing, the powers of the Councils to 

 obtain loans and build will continue after the war, 

 probably with the addition of the power to form and 

 invest in authorised Public UtiHty Societies for the 

 purpose of entrusting these societies with the carrying 

 out of housing schemes in their areas. 



Experience has shown that this proposed new power 

 would be welcome to Local Authorities. In one 

 instance a District Council keenly anxious for one 

 hundred new cottages in its district, but not willing 

 to load the rates with their total cost, arranged for 

 seven of its members to form themselves into a Public 

 UtiHty Society, and, after allowing for two-thirds of 

 the capital from the Public Works Loan Board, ob- 

 tained the outstanding third from a private investor. 

 The Council of course gave the society every facility, 

 including the services of its surveyor in connection with 

 the house plans. In this case an example is afforded 



