View report page

2
be analysed.
It is stated that the development is bad, the building hurried,
the workmanship not of the best; that the houses will not stand
the test of time, and that forty to sixty years hence they will be unfit
for human habitation and constitute veritable slums.
I am afraid that I do not subscribe to the view-point of these
pessimists.
The new houses of Enfield have been built at a specified number
to the acre and site overcrowding has, therefore, been prevented.
The lay-out of the new estates has been far superior to that of 50 years
ago, wide streets, small gardens and air space being apparent everywhere.
Each house contains a damp-proof course, a concrete covering
to the site, sufficient window space, a bathroom, a suitable kitchen
and a certain amount of tiling.
I am told that a lot of this is window dressing which masks hasty
erection, cheap material and faulty construction, defects that although
not apparent now will show themselves in the years to come, and
that the sound workmanship of pre-war days is no longer seen.
One wonders if it is not owing to the sound construction of the
houses of 100 years ago that we possess slums to-day. I refer to
houses, erected on overcrowded sites, with no bathrooms, small
windows and bad construction, whose external walls are so sound
to-day that their demolition is impracticable. Although they have
outworn their period and do not conform to modern standards of
housing they remain, improved and repaired from time to time, yet
never reaching modern ideals, and above all, never becoming a home
of which the housewife can be proud.
I would stress the importance of this particular factor.
Whatever may be the faults of these mass production houses
with their so-called superficial window dressing, they are, nevertheless,
homes of which the housewife can be and is proud. To realise this
one need but stroll round new housing estates to see how quickly
the gardens are put in order, and how frequently the brass knocker
is polished. There is in my opinion a steady improvement in the
mental outlook of the family that moves from old dwellings into these
new houses, be they built by private enterprise or by the Council,
and there is, moreover, a steady gain in health.
If in forty to sixty years time these houses have decayed and
must of necessity be pulled down, they will be replaced by property
which future generations may erect according to their improved
outlook on housing; they will not remain as their predecessors,
out-of-date, yet unlikely to be demolished. Just as we consider early
Victorian houses ugly, inconvenient, dark and damp, so may our