[Report 1947] / Medical Officer of Health, Christchurch Borough.
- Christchurch (Dorset, England). Borough Council
- Date:
- 1947
Licence: Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
Credit: [Report 1947] / Medical Officer of Health, Christchurch Borough. Source: Wellcome Collection.
18/52 page 14
![bounds and I think it is to be greatly regretted that the Govern ment has not yet seen its way to permit landlords (other than local authorities who already have that power) to increase their rents, as was done after the 1914-18 war, to cover increased costs of repairs.” These remarks still hold good, and if anything such an increase is more warranted now than at any other period, as there have been further sharp rises in wages and costs of materials. Practically every notice calling for repairs was taken under the Public Health Act, and when one considers the high costs of repairs, the fact that in only 53 out of 261 cases was it found necessary to ask for statutory powers is a sign of the good will and co-operation shown by the property owners in the town. Such co-operation greatly facilitates the task of the department and makes for greater efficiency. 220 houses received substantia] repairs during the year. 3. HOUSING—OVERCROWDING: There has been a further increase in the population, and this has added to the difficulties already confronting the Council. A constant watch is maintained on this aspect of the housing situa- tion, and during the year 237 houses were inspected to ascertain “permitted numbers,” 728 rooms being measured and the neces- sary records prepared. Of the houses so far inspected, none have proved to be severely overcrowded. This, however, is due to the fact that all rooms, with the exception of those not normally used either as living rooms or as bedrooms, are, in accordance with the Housing Act, 1936, counted as bedrooms. This method of assessing the permitted numbers is very much disliked by public health officers who realise that even the poorest family insists upon reserving at least one room as a sitting or living room, with the result that bedrooms are frequently overcrowded. Is it reasonable to expect a family to live and entertain their friends and relations in a room in which .they have to sleep 1 I call to mind the case of a married couple who, because of the present system of assessing Permitted Numbers, had to sleep in the dining room. This couple could not go to bed till the rest of the family had had supper, and had to rise before six every morning in order that breakfast could be prepared and served to members of the family who commenced work at 7 a.m. The wife who was pregnant, had a miscarriage, and the family doctor attributed this to lack of proper rest. Yet, this house was NOT overcrowded. Needless to say, this family has now been found other accommodation. This is by no means an isolated case, and I think this is conclusive evidence of the fact that “Permitted Numbers” should be based on the number of “bedrooms” and not on the number of “rooms” as defined in Section 68 of the Housing Act, 1936. Then, and only then, will it be possible to obtain a true picture of the housing requirements of the Country](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b29111675_0018.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
