`Part Ii

                    The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.
                

Amendments Consequential On The Establishment Of Housing For Wales

The Land Commission Act 1967

31. In section 56(4) of the Land Commission Act 1967 (bodies exempted from betterment levy) after paragraph (e) there shall be inserted the following paragraph—

"(ea) Housing for Wales".

The Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967

32. In Schedule 2 to the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 (departments etc. subject to investigation) after the entry "Housing Corporation" there shall be inserted—

"Housing for Wales".

The Income And Corporation Taxes Act 1970

33. In section 342 of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970 (disposals of land between Housing Corporation and housing societies) and in section 342A of that Act (disposals by certain housing associations) after the words "Housing Corporation" in each place where they occur there shall be inserted "or Housing for Wales".

The Land Corporation Act 1973

34. In section 32(7B)(b) of the Land Compensation Act 1973 (supplementary provisions about home loss payments) after the words "Housing Corporation" there shall be inserted "or Housing for Wales".

The House Of Commons Disqualification Act 1975

35. In Schedule 1 to the House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975, in Part II (bodies of which all members are disqualified) there shall be inserted at the appropriate place the following entry—

"Housing for Wales".

The Statutory Corporations (Financial Provisions) Act 1975

36. In Schedule 2 of the Statutory Corporations (Financial Provisions) Act 1975 (bodies corporate affected by section 5 of that Act as to their power to borrow in currencies other than sterling) after the entry "The Housing Corporation" there shall be inserted—

"Housing for Wales".

The Development Of Rural Wales Act 1976

37. In section 8(2) of the Development of Rural Wales Act 1976 (assistance to the Development Board for Rural Wales from public authorities and others) for the words "The Housing Corporation" there shall be substituted "Housing for Wales".

The Rent (Agriculture) Act 1976

38. In section 5(3) of the Rent (Agriculture) Act 1976 (no statutory tenancy where landlord's interest belongs to Crown or to local authority etc.) after paragraph (d) there shall be inserted the following paragraph—

"(da) Housing for Wales".

The Rent Act 1977

39. In section 15(2) (a) of the Rent Act 1977 (landlord's interest belonging to housing association etc.) after the words "Housing Corporation" there shall be inserted—

"(aa) Housing for Wales".

40. In each of the following provisions of that Act, that is to say, sections 86(2) (a) (tenancies to which Part VI applies), 93(1) (increase of rent without notice to quit) and Schedule 12 (certificates of fair rent) in paragraph 12 (meaning of "secure tenancy"), after the words "Housing Corporation" there shall be inserted "or Housing for Wales".

The Criminal Law Act 1977

41. In section 7(5) of the Criminal Law Act 1977 (authorities who may authorise occupation by protected intending occupier for purposes of offence of adverse occupation of residential premises) after the words "Housing Corporation" there shall be inserted—

"(ba) Housing for Wales".

The National Health Service Act 1977

42. In section 28A(2) (e) of the National Health Service Act 1977 (power to make payments towards expenditure on community services) at the end there shall be added the following sub-paragraph "and

(vii) Housing for Wales.".

43. In section 28B(1) (b) (v) of that Act (power of Secretary of State to make payments towards expenditure on community services in Wales) for the words "the Housing Corporation" there shall be substituted "Housing for Wales."

The Local Government, Planning And Land Act 1980

44. In Schedule 16 to the Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980 (bodies to whom Part X of that Act applies) after paragraph 9 there shall be inserted the following paragraph—

"9a. Housing for Wales."

The Finance Act 1981

45. In section 107(3) of the Finance Act 1981 (exemption from stamp duty in case of sale of houses at discount by local authorities etc.) after paragraph (c) there shall be inserted the following paragraph—

"(ca) Housing for Wales."

The Housing Act 1985

46. In the Housing Act 1985 for the words "Housing Corporation" in each place where they occur there shall be substituted "Corporation".

47. In Part I of that Act (introductory provisions—authorities and bodies other than local housing authorities) after section 6 there shall be inserted the following section—

"6A. In this Act "the Corporation" has the meaning assigned by section 2A of the Housing Associations Act 1985."

48. In section 57 of that Act (index of defined expressions: Part II) after the entry relating to "compulsory disposal" there shall be inserted—

"the Corporation

section 6A".

49. In section 117 of that Act (index of defined expressions: Part IV) after the entry relating to "co-operative housing association" there shall be inserted—

"the Corporation

section 6A".

50. In section 188 of that Act (index of defined expressions: Part V) after the entry relating to "co-operative housing association" there shall be inserted—

"the Corporation

section 6A".

51. In section 238 of that Act (index of defined expressions: Part VII) after the entry relating to "clearance area" there shall be inserted—

"the Corporation

section 6A".

52. In section 459 of that Act (index of defined expressions: Part XIV) after the entry relating to "building society" there shall be inserted—

"the Corporation

section 6A".

53. In section 577 of that Act (index of defined expressions: Part XVI) after the entry relating to "co-operative housing association" there shall be inserted—

"the Corporation

section 6A".

The Landlord And Tenant Act 1987

54. In section 58(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 (exempt landlords) after paragraph (e) there shall be inserted the following paragraph—

"(ea) Housing for Wales".

The Income And Corporation Taxes Act 1988

55. In section 376(4) of the Income and Corporation Taxes act 1988 (qualifying borrowers and lenders) after paragraph (k) there shall be inserted the following paragraph—

"(ka) Housing for Wales."

56. In section 560(2)(e) of that Act (persons who are sub-contractors or contractors for the purposes of Chapter IV of Part XIII of that Act) after the words "Housing Corporation" there shall be inserted "Housing for Wales".'.— [Mr. Waldegrave.]

Clause 115

Short Title, Commencement And Extent

Amendments made: No. 379, in page 72, line 35, after `110', insert—

`(Schemes for payments to assist local housing authority tenants to obtain other accommodation)'.

No. 380, in page 72, line 39, after '110', insert—

`(Schemes for payments to assist local housing authority tenants to obtain other accommodation)'.—[Mr.Waldegrave.]

New Clause 21

Compensation For Misrepresentation Or Concealment

`Where a landlord obtains an order for possession of a dwelling-house let on an assured tenancy on one or more of the grounds in Schedule 2 to this Act and it is subsequently made to appear to the court that the order was obtained by misrepresentation or concealment of material facts, the court may order the landlord to pay to the former tenant such sum as appears sufficient as compensation for damage or loss sustained by that tenant as a result of the order.'— [Mr. Waldegrave.]

Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 29

Duty Of Housing Corporation And Housing For Wales In Relation To Racial Discrimination

`At the end of section 75 of the 1985 Act (general functions of the Corporation) there shall be added the following subsection—

"(5) Section 71 of the Race Relations Act 1976 (local authorities: general statutory duty) shall apply to the Corporation as it applies to a local authority.".'. —[Mr. Waldegrave.]

Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 30

Guidance As To Management Of Accommodation By Registered Housing Associations

`. After section 36 of the Housing Associations Act 1985 there shall be inserted the following section—

"Issue Of Guidance By The Corporation

36A.—(1) In accordance with the provisions of this section, the Corporation may issue guidance with respect to the management of housing accommodation by registered housing associations and, in considering under the preceding provisions of this Part whether action needs to be taken to secure the proper management of an association's affairs or whether there has been mismanagement, the Corporation may have regard (among other matters) to the extent to which any such guidance is being or has been followed.

(2) Guidance issued under this section may make different provision in relation to different cases and, in particular, in relation to different areas, different descriptions of housing accommodation and different descriptions of registered housing associations.

(3) Without prejudice to the generality of subsections (1) and (2), guidance issued under this section may relate to—

(a) the housing demands for which provision should be made and the means of meeting those demands;

(b) the allocation of housing accommodation between individuals;

(d) standards of maintenance and repair and the means of achieving these standards; and

(e) consultation and communication with tenants.

(4) Guidance issued under this section may be revised or withdrawn but, before issuing or revising any guidance under this section, the Corporation—

(a) shall consult such bodies appearing to it to he representative of housing associations as it considers appropriate; and

(b) shall submit a draft of the proposed guidance or, as the case may be, the proposed revision to the Secretary of State for his approval.

(5) If the Secretary of State gives his approval to a draft submitted to him under subsection (3)(b), the Corporation shall issue the guidance or, as the case may be, the revision concerned in such manner as the Corporation considers appropriate for bringing it to the notice of the housing associations concerned.".'.— [Mr. Waldegrave.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

I beg to move, that the clause be read a Second time.

It will be for the convenience of the House to discuss Government new clause 47—Consents to disposal of housing stock and application of receipts.

I shall deal first with new clause 47 and then with new clause 30.

The purpose of new clause 47 is to clarify the criteria which I may consider when deciding whether to give consent to local authority applications for the disposal of housing, and the conditions that I can impose on such consent. Local authorities may dispose of property with my consent under sections 32 or 43 of the Housing Act 1985 and, if the disposal involves a gratuitous benefit given to the purchaser by the local authority, section 25 of the Local Government Act 1988. When a local authority wishes to dispose under section 32, the most commonly used power, my consent is given by virtue of section 34 of the same Act. The existing consent powers are silent as to the basis upon which such consent may be given.

A number of local authorities are considering selling their entire housing stock, subject to being given consent under section 32 of the 1985 Act. New clause 47 is intended to remove any doubt about my powers to adopt such criteria and impose such conditions as I consider relevant, particularly in relation to large-scale disposals, Subsection (2) amends section 34 and 43 of the 1985 Act by specifying that I may take into account the independence of the purchaser from the council, the extent to which the disposal results in the purchaser becoming the main or a substantial landlord in the area, the terms of the disposal, including the financial terms, and whatever else is considered relevant. Subsection (3) applies the new clause to Scotland. Subsections (4) to (6) are amendments to the legislation consequent to the power in subsection (2) to direct authorities in the use of proceeds.

Subsection (8) makes the clause effective from the date of publication. There is no retrospectivity. We are responding to an initiative from local authorities who wish to dispose of their stock before the Bill becomes law. I must clear away some misconceptions. This is not a major new Government policy, but the Government responding to a local authority initiative.

The clause does not dispose of council housing stock. It does not extend local authority powers to dispose of property, nor does it compel any local authority to dispose of its housing. Any disposal in that context will be a voluntary one, initiated by the local authority. Local authorities already have powers to dispose of property where my consent is already required. The clause simply clarifies those powers.

Large-scale disposals such as are being mooted now were not considered as possible when the existing consent powers were drafted. It is clear that there are considerations which apply to large-scale disposals which are not less likely to apply to the smaller scale. What is not clear is whether we have the powers to take some of those considerations into account as things stand.

For example, we are concerned not to perpetuate large monopolies of rented housing. As we want to provide a wider choice of rented housing and improve housing management, we believe it would be inappropriate—

It being Ten o'clock, the debate stood adjourned.

Ordered,

That, at this day's sitting, the Housing Bill may be proceeded with, though opposed, until any hour.—[Mr. Lennox-Boyd.]

Question again proposed, That the clause be read a Second time.

As we want to provide a wider choice of rented housing and improve housing management, we believe that it would be inappropriate to allow a stock of, say, 20,000 to transfer in a single block. There are other criteria, such as the need to ensure that the terms of the transfer are acceptable and the purchaser is independent.

If a council comes to us now for consent, we must be in a position to take into account every factor which we believe to be important and relevant. These applications will not wait until enactment of the Bill. They are being prepared now.

New clause 30 would give effect to the policy of the tenants' guarantee to tenants of registered housing associations. It enables the Housing Corporation and Scottish Homes and Homes for Wales to issue guidance to registered associations on the management of their housing stock. In exercising its duties and powers under part I of the Housing Associations Act 1985, in relation to the proper management of an association's affairs, the corporation would be able to have regard to the extent to which the association had followed the guidance.

Such guidance would apply to large-scale voluntary transfers, as in new clause 47, as well as to tenants' choice transfers. It will cover, broadly speaking, those for whom housing should be provided—for example, those who are inadequately housed, or homeless—and where housing requirements cannot be met, at prices within their means or at all, elsewhere in the local market. Groups with special difficulties such as members of ethnic minorities and the disabled should get special attention.

The guidance will also cover what terms should be offered. In addition to the statutory assured tenancy requirements, I would expect the corporation to insist on the incorporation of a number of contractual rights within the tenancy agreement. I do not suggest that these would replicate the existing secure tenancy provisions, but some elements familiar from the old tenants' charter—rights to exchange, to take in lodgers, to carry out improvements and so on—will certainly reappear.

The guidance will also cover clear policies, procedures, targets and responsibilities for maintenance and repair and tenant relations. Above all, associations must communicate to tenants in intelligible terms what their rights are and how they are seeking to meet their needs.

I believe that the new guidance that the Housing Corporation will bring forward, after consultation with the associations, for approval by me will meet the needs that have arisen in the debate to give the proper control which the House seeks and which has been debated earlier.

We are concerned about both the new clauses. I shall deal first with new clause 30.

The Government need to come clean on their intentions for the Housing Corporation. The Government are handing over to the corporation duties which, in the past, would have been carried out, at least to some extent, by local authorities. We all know that the Government are intent on strangling local authorities, and they have made it clear that they want an end to the provision of local authority housing. The Minister has said that several times. We do not yet know what role they see for the Housing Corporation, but we are told that there is some underlying guarantee. It would be wrong of me to go through the debates that have taken place today, but I reiterate that there is no guarantee. There is not even a published charter. There is a great vacuum, and everyone knows it.

The Housing Corporation is being told that it can turn its attention somehow to what landlords are doing, but no one has any real power. Tenants have no real power unless they have the force of a great deal of money to pay for bright and able solicitors to represent them, and even then their power will be limited. In effect, the Government are saying to the corporation, "We shall give you generalised powers that can be used in an unspecified way over a period." In effect, the Minister is saying, "We may add to or subtract from those powers from time to time."

The Minister for Housing and Planning has said already that, if the corporation becomes too large or bureaucratic, the Government may have to reconsider its position. We are not even sure whether the corporation has a secure future. I suspect, however, that, because its present leadership is to a considerable extent falling into line with the Government—perhaps it has no alternative—it will continue in being. To some extent, it will pay the Government to keep the corporation acting as it is and to give it rather vague and unspecified powers. That is not in the interests of the rented sector, either public or private.

It was new clause 47 which so much angered us last week and which so badly wrong-footed the Government. The Secretary of State rightly says that local authorities already have the power to transfer properties. The new and dramatic features of the clause were its contents and the way in which the Government proceeded with it. I shall describe the effect that we believe that it will have on housing and the way in which we believe the Government intend to use it.

First, the new clause is retrospective. The Government constantly lecture us about the undesirability of retrospective legislation, yet subsection 8 states:

"This section shall be deemed to have come into force on 9th June 1988."

That is virtually the day on which the Government published it. That is retrospective legislation by any standard. The factor that angered so many Scottish Members—rightly, in my judgment—to the extent that they were ready and willing after an all-night sitting to take the House through a second night, was the Government's decision to amend the Housing (Scotland) Bill by introducing a new clause to the Bill that is before us, without taking it through consideration in Committee.

Subsection (3) of the new clause refers to

"Section 13 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987"

and the 1988 Bill is proceeding through Parliament. The Government could have amended the Bill in this Parliament by introducing an amendment in another place, but they chose not to do so. They decided instead to introduce—to slip through—a new clause to the Housing Bill, which had been considered in Committee by hon. Members representing only English or Welsh constituencies. The Committee membership did not include a Scottish Conservative Member or a Scottish Opposition Member. Scottish Members are right to be angry about the way in which the Government have proceeded.

There are three of them here.

There would have been more of them present the other night if the Government had not drawn stumps and surrendered by giving us this additional day.

What do the Government intend to do about housing with the new clause? Why is it that they chose to introduce it at the last moment? We are told that they did so because about 100 local authorities—most of them Conservative—wanted to transfer all their stock. That is the reason that was given. Although no doubt that explanation is part of the reason, the real reason for that is that the Government realised that, even with the grossly distorted voting system for transferring local authority stock, the vast majority of tenants are deeply angry and offended by the voting system.

Now that the Secretary of State is in the Chamber, perhaps he can tell us whether the Prime Minister was right to say on Thursday that the voting system should be carried out by a majority of those voting. That is what she said, although the Secretary of State will know that that was wrong and the system operates with the minority. It would be helpful if we could clear up that division within the Government.

Leaving that matter aside—although I hope that the Secretary of State will consider it, as he has an opportunity to put the record straight tonight—it is obvious that the Government want to find a new way to get local authorities to give up their housing. We have no doubt that the Government will continue to screw down the financial assistance from central Government to local government. There will come a point when all local authorities will not be able to manage their housing. That is precisely what the Government want. At that stage the Government hope that the local authorities will do their job for them and say that they cannot manage any more, but must hand the properties over to someone else. If the Government would come clean and admit that that is what they are doing, there would at least be some honesty in the Bill. There is no honesty in the new clause.

One reason why I object so strongly to the proposal is that we have a Committee system in the House designed to look at legislation in detail, not just at legislation over which there is agreement or disagreement between the parties, but all legislation in a way that enables any Government to avoid some of the pitfalls of the unintended consequences of legislation. We all know that the more superficial the attention that we give to legislation, the greater the risk of mistakes.

New clause 47 is a classic example of a disaster area. What did the Government do? They introduced new clause 47 and surreptitiously slipped out a short 10-page document which deals with the

"Large-scale voluntary transfers of local authority housing to private bodies."

It was not given to anyone in advance, not even to me as Opposition spokesman. It was placed in the Vote Office on virtually the same day that the new clause was tabled, almost immediately before Report.

The new document says:

"it would be acceptable for the council to enter into contracts with landlords in order to fulfil statutory duties to secure accommodation, primarily for those accepted as homeless."

The local authority will have statutory responsibility not just for the homeless, but for the disabled and certain other groups. However, authorities will no longer have any houses with which to supply those people.

According to the guidance document—this is not in the Bill—local authorities are told that they must continue to fulfil their other statutory responsibilities and do that by entering into a contract with other landlords. However, a problem arises because neither the Bill nor the document tell us anything about what will happen if the landlord says, "I'm sorry, I'm not taking in homeless people." We do not know what will happen if the only landlord who chooses to take in homeless people decides to charge the earth. We are told nothing about what will happen to homeless people who have been taken in for a short period by a landlord. What will happen to them? The local authority has a statutory responsibility for them, but no way of delivering that. All this is being slipped through on Report with the minimum debate.

I believe that the Secretary of State does not even know the answers to the questions that I am posing. I am sure that the Secretary of State has no idea what he will do if only one landlord decides to take homeless or disabled people and then says that he will charge a certain amount of money and people can take it or leave it. The Secretary of State will have no idea what will happen if one landlord accepts people and then says that people will be out after two months. No local authority has received any guidance about that. That is what is so wrong about the proposal in parliamentary terms and why it is suicidal for housing.

10.15 pm

On another page of the guidance notes, there is the statement:

"The Secretary of State would normally expect councils to obtain undertakings from the purchaser that he would …normally relet housing which became vacant, at rents set and maintained at levels within the reach of those in lower-paid employment."

One can see what the Government are worried about. They have twigged rather late in the day that there has been a drastic decline in the supply of low-cost rented accommodation in both the private and public sectors. Yet there is only the hope that those organisations to which local authority housing will be transferred will re-let it at rents which those on low incomes can afford. What happens if they do not do so? That question has not been asked in Committee, and the matter has not been subjected to the scrutiny that it would normally receive there.

Conservative Members had better ask themselves that question because, initially, the consequences will hit them much harder than they will hit my hon. Friends, because most Conservative local authorities will he transferring their housing stock. All of a sudden, the Association of District Councils, which is Tory-dominated, is saying that the situation is crazy. Councils will find themselves trying to deal with the statutory responsibilities of homelessness, and trying to contain the financial aspects of that, while not having a clue how they are supposed to cope with the situation—never mind whether or not they will be helped by the Government.

The local authorities' continuing statutory housing obligations are mentioned on other pages of the guidance notes. Again, there is a reference to local authorities entering into contracts with landlords in respect of section 28 of the Rent (Agriculture) Act 1976. That too should worry Conservative Members. The notes comment:

"It would be inconsistent with the independence of the new landlord for the council to retain nomination rights."

If the local authority is unable to nominate, what will it do if someone turns up saying, "You have a statutory obligation to house me, and please do so"? Presumably there will be an information officer on duty, because there will be no housing department left. He will have to reply, "Go and see this housing association. If that doesn't work out, we'll try to enter into a contract with a landlord on your behalf." There remains the question where that homeless person is to go in the meantime, and who is to pay for them.

This is a disastrous and stupid new clause, and it is an appalling way of legislating. This is what we mean by legislating on the hoof. It will create a disastrous situation for those local authorities which decide to adopt this course of action. I can understand local authorities under any political control saying, "The Government will drive through their Housing Bill, so we will get rid of our housing stock," and being driven into that trap, although my advice to them is not to panic yet. Although matters are coming to the crunch, we are not at that stage yet.

Local authorities should be looking at ways in which they can meet their statutory responsibilities, nominate, and do other things of that nature. None of those aspects has been addressed or debated in Committee. We have only the Government's single-minded determination to make local authorities give up their housing stock. They will continue to turn the financial screw on councils until they have to give up. When local authorities do so, they will be unable to fulfil their statutory responsibilities without all the risks I have described. As other local housing associations and private organisations fail to make up the difference in the provision of low-cost rented accommodation—the figures show that housing association provision is already frozen and that the private sector is declining very dramatically—there will be a catastrophic housing crisis in this country.

Does my hon. Friend not agree that one of the points the Secretary of State has failed to explain—either here or at Harrogate a week or so ago—is why, in a free-market economy of the kind he advocates, and which the Bill is now releasing, any housing association or private landlord should fix rents for local authority homeless or for anybody else at something below the then market rates?

There is no reason why housing associations should want to take that on. The Government have managed to divide the housing association movement, and that is another crisis.

This is an appalling way of legislating, and an insult to the procedures of the House. It will accelerate the decline in the supply of low-cost rented accommodation in this country. As long as that decline continues, there will be an increasing crisis in house-price inflation affecting those who seek to buy.

We strongly object to the new clause. It is ill thought out and ill conceived. It is at best irrelevant to the housing crisis, and, at worst, will make it dramatically worse.

I welcome Government new clause 47. I am amazed by the blinkered attitude of the hon. Member for Hammersmith (Mr. Soley). I suppose that he is taking every part of the Bill, looking at it in narrow terms and drawing the worst possible conclusion from it. The reality is very different. The new clause will be welcomed in the rural areas where work has been going on for many months on the new housing associations that will take over local authorities' housing role. That is especially true in Salisbury, where we have taken an advanced look at housing in the new Chequer housing association.

I should like to know what my right hon. Friend means by large-scale disposal. He talked about 20,000 houses. My point relates to those local authorities that have always had small municipal housing stocks—in my area about 8,000. I do not think that it would make sense—I hope that he will agree—that when such local authorities hand over their small housing stocks to housing associations, they should be forced to break up a stock of 8,000 into several smaller units simply on grounds of management costs and efficiency. I hope that when my right hon. Friend talks about large-scale disposal as the criterion, he does not mean that just because a small housing stock constitutes 100 per cent. of a local authority's housing stock, he will turn down its application. I hope that he will encourage small housing stocks when they wish to become housing associations.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that subsection (3) applies the new clause to Scotland and thereby amends the Housing (Scotland) Bill 1987? That will be regarded as incredible by Scots, as it is being done in the context of a housing Bill relating to England and Wales. It is all the more incredible because the Housing (Scotland) Bill is still going through its parliamentary stages and is currently being debated in the other place. In fact, Lord Sanderson of Bowden, who has responsibility for it on behalf of the Government in the other place, described the Bill as a purely Scottish measure. It is a major Bill, probably the most important Scottish housing Bill since the Tenants' Rights, Etc. (Scotland) Act 1980.

Although the Housing (Scotland) Bill has gone through its Commons stages and is now in the middle of its Lords stages, the Government still have not got it right for Scotland. They are having to tag on the back end of a Bill for England and Wales a major new clause affecting the people of Scotland, and that new clause cannot properly be debated by the representatives of the people of Scotland in this place.

I sat through part of our earlier debate on the Bill on the so-called "zombie amendment", when my hon. Friends referred to the rigged ballots, by which the Government will allow large-scale transfers of council housing stock into private ownership. It appeared from that debate that the dead will have more democratic control over housing than the people of Scotland. Not only are the people of Scotland not able to vote for the Bill, but they are not being given the opportunity to have it properly debated and examined in this Chamber or in any part of Parliament. That is a democratic nonsense and an outrage.

The Government have said that the new clause does not represent a major new Government policy and that it is a response to local authority initiatives. I hope that, when the Minister replies, he will tell us which Scottish local authorities asked for the measure to be applied to Scotland. He should specify them and state whether he is responding to initiatives from Scotland.

New clause 47 does not give new powers to local authorities; it gives significant new powers to the Secretary of State for Scotland for the disposal by local authorities of their housing stock. The new clause states that the Secretary of State will be able to take into account

"the extent … to which 'the intending purchaser' is … dependent upon, controlled by or subject to influence from the local authority".

During the debates on the Housing (Scotland) Bill, the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, who is now sitting next to the Secretary of State for the Environment, clearly said that housing associations would have an important role in taking over control of former local authority housing stock. There is a close relationship between housing associations and local authorities in Scotland—they get on with each other very much better than they get on with the Government. They could probably reach some arrangement to allow for letting policy, for the rights of councils to nominate property, for eviction policies on rent arrears and so on. The new clause gives the Secretary of State for Scotland a veto in such arrangements. He has only to say that he is not satisfied that the housing associations are sufficiently independent of local authorities. That is an important concern with which the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland must deal when he replies to the debate.

The proposals are sinister, because new clause 47 provides that the Secretary of State for Scotland can take into account

"the terms of the proposed disposal; and … any other matters whatsoever".

The right hon. and learned Gentleman will have wide-ranging powers to decide whether he approves of the way in which a local authority disposes of its housing stock to a housing association or some other body. Any arrangements to cover the outstanding capital debt owed by local authorities on their housing could be overriden by the Secretary of State because he will not be satisfied until the last council house is removed from the control of a local authority.

The new clause also states that the Secretary of State

"may give directions as to the purpose for which any capital money received by the authority in respect of the disposal is to be applied".

We know that the Government do not want local authorities to spend money on housing. That is proved by a simple statistic—in 1986 Scottish local authorities built only one quarter of the number of houses that they built in 1979. The Government have deliberately imposed policies to prevent local authorities from providing housing. The Secretary of State for Scotland is being given a significant new power. He can direct local authorities how to spend the money from the sale of council houses. My hon. Friend the Member for Hammersmith (Mr. Soley) said that local authorities could even be asked to contract out provisions for the homeless.

This significant new clause affects housing in Scotland, of which 50 per cent. is still under local authority control. We have not been allowed to debate it properly; it has not been given proper scrutiny, either in this or another place. It is symptomatic of the way that the Government have treated Scotland during the past year—they have written it off. They think that because Scotland did not vote for them they can forget about it until the next election. The unity of the United Kingdom is under threat not because of the Scottish National party or the Opposition, but because of the Government's activities.

I apologise to the Secretary of State for not being present at the beginning of his speech. It was the first time that I had left the Chamber since 3.30 pm—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh dear."] I am not asking for sympathy.

I wish to make a few brief points about new clause 30. We must be reassured that the rents will be affordable and judged regionally. I do not know whether the Secretary of State has yet accepted the need for a regional system for adjudicating what is affordable. Any such system and any guidance from the Housing Corporation must take into account the enormous regional variations, which must be specifically reflected in the rents.

Secondly, the danger of new clause 30 is that it merely enhances the powers of the Housing Corporation. The Housing Corporation will become a monster quango and it is perhaps not premature to press the Secretary of State to say whether he is to move towards devolution of power within the Housing Corporation in England, as indicated by the Minister of State in the press briefing last week. It has already been announced that the Housing Corporation in Wales is to be devolved to Tai Cymru, and rightly so. Unless there is to be a huge quango, the same should happen in England.

10.30 pm

My third point on new clause 30 has not been adequately dealt with so far. I hope that the Secretary of State will give us some idea of his thinking on special needs issues, which clearly will have to be covered within the remit of new clause 30. A consultation paper on hostel deficit grant has long been promised. It was foreshadowed in consultation papers at the end of the last year, but it still has not seen the light of day. I wish to press the Secretary of State with some urgency for that consultation paper to be made available soon and for the new grant to be extended to self-contained housing. People working in that sector seek assurances that the budget for special needs housing grant, as it is to be called, will meet not only existing needs and schemes but future developments, as one of the key areas of acute need is clearly special need. Among all the categories, especially of the single homeless and the single vulnerable, those with special needs are perhaps the most in need of protection under the clause.

Assurances were given in Committee that 100 per cent. housing association grant for special needs housing would be retained, but there has been no clarification of whether it applies to self-contained special needs housing as well as to shared housing. I therefore seek clarification of that important point, which affects a large number of people. As I understand it, the Department of the Environment now has two proposals for housing association funding —either block grant to be used in conjunction with private finance, or risk-sharing between the Housing Corporation and the housing association—but so far there have been no proposals for a third procedure of 100 per cent. housing association grant. The housing association movement has been arguing strongly for this, and a specific pool of 100 per cent. HAG earmarked for special needs housing is earnestly sought.

A matter that was raised briefly at an earlier stage was whether the Government had yet responded to the proposals for a housing association licence. Ministers will be aware that in special needs cases a tenancy is not usually the most appropriate form of occupation, a licence being generally more suitable.

Clarification is also needed on the subject of nominations, which was raised at the beginning of the debate. We need a guaranteed procedure for special nominations in relation to move-on housing for people coming out of short-term housing—for example, people rescued from complete homelessness such as those whom I saw at the Thames Reach hostels the other day—who may not stay in the accommodation for very long.

With regard to new clause 47, I do not oppose the principle of housing being devolved from a local authority to other agencies, as is being contemplated in Salisbury. The hon. Member for Salisbury (Mr. Key) will be aware that those proposals have received some attention in the press. An article by Rosalind Bayley in the April edition of Housing bore the headline:

"Salisbury District Council joins the housing association movement".

Two things have come out of that. First, rents are likely to rise. Secondly, and more importantly, the biggest unknown is the tenants themselves. In Salisbury, in Rochford, and now in Gloucester and everywhere else, the great fear stems from the fact that in most cases there has so far been no consultation whatever with the tenants.

The House must therefore seek an assurance—to be passed on to council tenants, especially in areas of Conservative control—that there will be a proper voting system in this case and not just a veto. If whole-stock transfers of thousands of council properties are to take place, it is vital that there should be full consultation with tenants and full communication of ideas between local authorities and tenants at all stages and that things do not happen in secret. In Rochford there were some nasty goings on in which the people running the council set up their friends to run housing associations which they had set up. The who-you-know idea of handing over into a self-perpetuating oligarchy without consultation with tenants and which is independent of the council is entirely unacceptable.

I certainly approve of transferring to different agencies, if the tenants agree. But tenants must be consulted throughout the process and there must be a positive vote, in which the majority of tenants approve of what is being put to them.

If what the hon. Gentleman said were true I would join him, but I must say that in Salisbury and other district councils there has been a great deal of publicity, and I can reassure him that in Salisbury the policy was agreed between the political parties on the council.

I said explicitly that I do not oppose the idea, if it is what the local authority wants and if it is done in consultation with tenants who vote that it should happen. That is a proper way to take a local decision about the management of local housing stock. It is necessary that there is proper consultation and a fair voting decision. Only if those guarantees are written in can we be assured that we, in the House of Commons, are providing a fair, democratic system for the moving from one authority to another of the council housing in England and Wales.

rose——

I apologise to the Minister, who is not going to get away quite as easily as he thought.

I join my hon. Friends the Members for Hammersmith (Mr. Soley) and for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion) in objecting very strongly to the way in which the Scottish Office and Scottish Ministers have been party to the new clause in what is essentially an English and Welsh Bill. It is typical of the Government's arrogance and the contempt with which they treat Scotland, despite their overwhelming rejection by the people of Scotland. As my hon. Friend the Member for Dundee, East said, that leads to such great pressures and tensions in Scotland, that, if the Government are not careful, they, the party of the union, may well be the party that breaks up that union. They must learn to treat Scotland as part of the democratic unit of the United Kingdom and accept the will of the Scottish people.

Why have the Government introduced this new clause into this English Bill at such a very late stage? In a letter written by J. S. B. Martin, assistant secretary at the Scottish Development Department, to chief executives of district and island councils, he said:

"The new clause, which will also apply to England and Wales, appears in the (Great Britain) Housing Bill, rather than in the current Housing (Scotland) Bill, as the latter has already reached an advanced stage of consideration in Parliament."

That is a new concept. I have never heard of the (Great Britain) Housing Bill.

What about Ireland?

I have to say to my hon. Friend that Great Britain does not include Ireland.

The Housing (Scotland) Bill has not reached an advanced stage of consideration in Parliament. The Housing (Scotland) Bill has received its Second reading in the other place and has been committed to a Committee. As far as I am aware, that Committee has not met, so the Government have plenty of opportunities to table any amendments relating to Scotland in the other place, which, if passed by the other place, would come back here for debate when the Housing (Scotland) Bill comes back. Of course we would take the opportunity to debate it.

So why have the Government done it? It is obvious. Having introduced rather generalised powers, they will table further amendments in the House of Lords to the clause when it has been included in the Housing (Scotland) Bill. The Government will take greater powers. I do not understand why the Government could not introduce the whole thing in the other place as one amendment. They have made a complete mess of the whole thing.

There are two matterrs in particular that worry Scottish tenants and hon. Members representing Scottish constituencies. First, we are concerned that the amendments in the other place will give the Secretary of State the powers to impose the same phoney consultation and balloting that will exist in England and Wales. That does not exist at present and will basically mean no consultation with tenants before selling off large blocks of houses.

Yet again, the words that the Government have uttered about introducing choice in Scotland will be seen to be nonsense. The Government are not introducing choice. In fact, there is a lack of choice. Lots of Scottish Special Housing Association and new town tenants in Scotland have said that they want to go to the local authorities. The Government have said, "No way can they do that." That is what the Government mean by choice.

Secondly, for the first time, the Secretary of State will have the power to use the money from sales and direct it as he chooses. Until now, unlike England and Wales, Scottish local authorities have received all the money that has been gained from sales and have been able to use it for housing. Now, the Secretary of State will be able to direct the money, and we find that objectionable.

I disagree marginally with my hon. Friend the Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion): I do not believe that the Minister will direct local authorities to use the money outside housing. He will direct them to use it to improve existing housing stock to make it ready for sale to private companies. Rather than using the money to build sheltered housing, special amenity housing and shelter for those who really need council houses, it will be spent to improve council housing for sale to the private sector—[HON. MEMBERS: "Good idea."]. The Scottish people do not fir nk that it is a good idea. They have consistently rejected the Government, and so they should.

The new clause will do nothing to improve Scottish housing. It is a shabby strategem by the Government. The Minister is not renowned for making a sensible case at the Dispatch Box, but perhaps he will be able to do so on this occasion.

The hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton) is incorrect in saying that the other place has not yet completed the Committee stage. The Bill has completed its Committee stage and is awaiting Report and Third Reading.

In reply to the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion) I should say that we are strongly committed to the housing association movement in Scotland and we have given it an extra £40 million in capital investment this year.

Hon. Members have asked, fairly, why the new clause applies to Scotland. We are including Scotland in the scope of the new clause, not through any wish to hide the measure or avoid discussion of it, but for precisely the opposite reason. We want to allow sufficient parliamentary time for the measure to be discussed fully by both Houses. By proceeding in this way, the total time available for consideration of the provision will be substantially longer.

It has been suggested that, with the delay last week in the other place in proceeding with the Report stage of the Housing (Scotland) Bill, we could introduce amendments there which would give effect to our policy by way of the Scottish Bill. I should like to put it on the record that we intend to bring forward amendments to the provisions before the House. The first will preserve the right to buy for all tenants involved in disposals of this type. The second will require tenants to be consulted, and the majority of tenants to be in favour of disposal, before approval to large-scale disposals can be given.

As the hon. Member for Cathcart acknowledges, these are important amendments. In large-scale disposals, although a majority of tenants would have to be in favour before the Secretary of State could agree to an authority's proposals to dispose of the stock concerned, it is possible that a minority might have to transfer against their will. It is therefore desirable that the rights of those tenants should not be prejudiced, which is why we shall introduce amendments to preserve the right to buy for tenants involved in large-scale disposals. The housing Acts that apply south of the border already contain such provisions, but the Housing (Scotland) Acts do not.

10.45 pm

Why, when the Housing (Scotland) Bill was going through the House, were not the Government aware of that fact, and why did they not introduce their proposal at that time? Why cannot the Government introduce the Scottish provisions in the other place rather than in the Bill?

This matter was brought forward because many local authorities in England were interested and made applications. As yet, there have been no applications from Scottish local authorities. The hon. Member for Cathcart should be aware that the district council has made large-scale disposals at Castlemilk to the Scottish Special Housing Association. Many disposals have been made by district councils in favour of co-operatives.

The amendments necessary to preserve the right to buy and to require consultation with tenants could be lengthy and complex. We want to ensure that we get their wording right. The Housing Bill is behind the Housing (Scotland) Bill in its progress through Parliament. We believe that it is right to take extra time to prepare such amendments properly.

The new clause is intended to clarify the Secretary of State's powers under section 12 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987. Section 13 of that Act says that the Secretary of State may impose such conditions as he thinks just in giving approval. Clarification will be of assistance to local authorities proposing to dispose of stock, to potential purchasers, who will more readily know what the likelihood is of a disposal being allowed, and to the tenant, who will be more aware of the relevant issues. As the Secretary of State has already said, the considerations that will be taken into account are the extent to which the receiving body will be independent of the disposing council, of the extent to which the interested purchaser would become the predominant or substantial owner of housing to let and of the terms of the disposal.

The hon. Member for Cathcart asked about receipts from sales. Receipts from the sales of substantial parts of a local authority's housing stock should be used to repay outstanding loan debt of the housing revenue account. There are powers under the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 to ensure that receipts are used to repay loan debts.

The hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion) asked about the number of applications from Scottish authorities. This is not an immediate matter in Scotland, but it may suddenly arise if a local authority wishes to apply. In those circumstances, we want to ensure that the interests of tenants are properly safeguarded.

Will the Minister explain why capital receipts must be used to repay loan debts and why local authorities must disregard what everybody in Scotland regards as the priority of getting decent housing and carrying out the repairs programme? The Minister may not be aware that Glasgow suffers from much debt and that 40 per cent. of its income is spent on repaying loan charges because of the vast home-building programmes necessary to clear the slums and create housing after the second world war. Given that councils such as Glasgow are already spending a vast amount of their income on repaying debt, why do the Government insist that they spend more money on repaying debt rather than dealing with the housing crisis in Scotland?

The answer is that, if loan charges were not repaid from receipts, the amount of debt per house would increase significantly, thus pushing rents up, which is not what the hon. Lady wants.

Although few local authorities in Scotland have shown any definite interest in making large-scale disposals of their stock, it will be helpful to them to know where they stand, should they wish to pursue sales of this type. The provisions in the new clause in no way compel local authorities to sell their stock. We are talking about voluntary sales. The Government are sympathetic to the concept of large-scale disposals, provided sales take place on the right terms. The Scottish Development Department has written to all local authorities in Scotland. In the summer, guidelines will be formulated and circulated to local authorities, giving details of the ways in which the Secretary of State will exercise the powers in section 12(7) of the 1987 Act and the new clause.

The guidelines will make it clear that new landlords will be expected to allocate houses to those most in need. They will be expected to give disadvantaged groups special attention. Before approval is given, the Secretary of State will have to be satisfied that the receiving landlord is a stable and responsible organisation with a long-term commitment to the provision of rented housing for those who need it. Councils will be expected to obtain undertakings from the purchaser that he would normally relet housing which becomes vacant at rents set and maintained at levels within the reach of those in lower-paid employment.

The Minister said that the Government would be sympathetic to large-scale disposals of housing stock by local authorities. That was not mentioned during the passage of the Housing (Scotland) Bill. Lord Sanderson of Bowden repeatedly said that that legislation did not contain a word of compulsion affecting tenants. The Minister has just explained that, in future, with the amendments that will be attached to the new clause, tenants must either accept a majority decision to have a private sector landlord or buy their house. They will not be allowed to remain as local authority tenants or tenants of Scottish Homes if they so desire. By any standard, that is compulsion.

We are talking about voluntary disposal by local authorities. As I said, no Scottish local authorities have come forward, but, if they do, we want to be certain that the powers are clarified so that they know the position. The hon. Gentleman knows that tenants' choice under part III differs from large-scale disposals, with which we are dealing in the context of the new clause.

We shall bring forward amendments at a later stage requiring the Secretary of State to give consent to first subsequent disposals of stock transferred from local authorities in this way. Such consent would again normally be given only to disposals where the housing continues to be available for rent.

I hope that those points will reassure the House that the new clause does not represent a substantial change in the law. It will ensure that the terms of any disposals approved are right and that tenants' interests are safeguarded.

Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:

The House divided: Ayes 241, Noes 172.

Division No. 382]	[10. 53 pm
AYES
Aitken, Jonathan	Dykes, Hugh
Alexander, Richard	Eggar, Tim
Alison, Rt Hon Michael	Emery, Sir Peter
Allason, Rupert	Evans, David (Welwyn Hatf'd)
Amess, David	Evennett, David
Arbuthnot, James	Fallon, Michael
Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)	Farr, Sir John
Arnold, Tom (Hazel Grove)	Favell, Tony
Ashby, David	Field, Barry (Isle of Wight)
Aspinwall, Jack	Fookes, Miss Janet
Atkins, Robert	Forman, Nigel
Baker, Nicholas (Dorset N)	Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)
Baldry, Tony	Forth, Eric
Batiste, Spencer	Franks, Cecil
Bendall, Vivian	Freeman, Roger
Bennett, Nicholas (Pembroke)	Gardiner, George
Benyon, W.	Garel-Jones, Tristan
Biffen, Rt Hon John	Gill, Christopher
Biggs-Davison, Sir John	Goodhart, Sir Philip
Body, Sir Richard	Goodlad, Alastair
Bonsor, Sir Nicholas	Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles
Boscawen, Hon Robert	Gow, Ian
Boswell, Tim	Grant, Sir Anthony (CambsSW)
Bottomley, Mrs Virginia	Greenway, Harry (Ealing N)
Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)	Greenway, John (Ryedale)
Bowis, John	Gregory, Conal
Boyson, Rt Hon Dr Sir Rhodes	Griffiths, Sir Eldon (Bury St E')
Braine, Rt Hon Sir Bernard	Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)
Brandon-Bravo, Martin	Grist, Ian
Brazier, Julian	Ground, Patrick
Brown, Michael (Brigg & Cl't's)	Grylls, Michael
Bruce, Ian (Dorset South)	Hamilton, Hon Archie (Epsom)
Buck, Sir Antony	Hampson, Dr Keith
Budgen, Nicholas	Hanley, Jeremy
Burns, Simon	Hannam, John
Burt, Alistair	Hargreaves, A. (B'ham H'll Gr')
Butcher, John	Hargreaves, Ken (Hyndburn)
Butler, Chris	Harris, David
Butterfill, John	Haselhurst, Alan
Carlisle, John, (Luton N)	Hawkins, Christopher
Carrington, Matthew	Hayes, Jerry
Carttiss, Michael	Hayward, Robert
Chalker, Rt Hon Mrs Lynda	Heathcoat-Amory, David
Chope, Christopher	Heddle, John
Clark, Hon Alan (Plym'th S'n)	Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael
Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford)	Hicks, Mrs Maureen (Wolv' NE)
Clark, Sir W. (Croydon S)	Hicks, Robert (Cornwall SE)
Clarke, Rt Hon K. (Rushcliffe)	Hind, Kenneth
Colvin, Michael	Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm)
Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest)	Holt, Richard
Cope, Rt Hon John	Hordern, Sir Peter
Couchman, James	Howarth, Alan (Strat'd-on-A)
Cran, James	Howell, Rt Hon David (G'dford)
Critchley, Julian	Hughes, Robert G. (Harrow W)
Currie, Mrs Edwina	Hunt, David (Wirral W)
Curry, David	Hunter, Andrew
Davies, Q. (Stamf'd & Spald'g)	Hurd, Rt Hon Douglas
Davis, David (Boothferry)	Irvine, Michael
Day, Stephen	Irving, Charles
Devlin, Tim	Jack, Michael
Dickens, Geoffrey	Janman, Tim
Dicks, Terry	Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)
Dorrell, Stephen	Jones, Robert B (Herts W)
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James	Jopling, Rt Hon Michael
Dover, Den	Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine
Durant, Tony	Key, Robert

King, Roger (B'ham N'thfield)	Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)
Knowles, Michael	Soames, Hon Nicholas
Latham, Michael	Speller, Tony
Lawrence, Ivan	Spicer, Sir Jim (Dorset W)
Lester, Jim (Broxtowe)	Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)
Lightbown, David	Squire, Robin
Lloyd, Sir Ian (Havant)	Stanbrook, Ivor
Lloyd, Peter (Fareham)	Steen, Anthony
Maclean, David	Stern, Michael
Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin	Stevens, Lewis
Meyer, Sir Anthony	Stewart, Andy (Sherwood)
Miscampbell, Norman	Stewart, Ian (Hertfordshire N)
Moate, Roger	Stokes, Sir John
Morris, M (N'hampton S)	Stradling Thomas, Sir John
Neale, Gerrard	Summerson, Hugo
Nelson, Anthony	Taylor, Ian (Esher)
Neubert, Michael	Taylor, John M (Solihull)
Nicholls, Patrick	Taylor, Teddy (S'end E)
Nicholson, David (Taunton)	Tebbit, Rt Hon Norman
Nicholson, Emma (Devon West)	Temple-Morris, Peter
Onslow, Rt Hon Cranley	Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N)
Page, Richard	Thorne, Neil
Paice, James	Thornton, Malcolm
Parkinson, Rt Hon Cecil	Thurnham, Peter
Patnick, Irvine	Townend, John (Bridlington)
Patten, Chris (Bath)	Tracey, Richard
Patten, John (Oxford W)	Trippier, David
Pawsey, James	Twinn, Dr Ian
Peacock, Mrs Elizabeth	Vaughan, Sir Gerard
Porter, Barry (Wirral S)	Waddington, Rt Hon David
Porter, David (Waveney)	Wakeham, Rt Hon John
Portillo, Michael	Waldegrave, Hon William
Price, Sir David	Walden, George
Raffan, Keith	Walker, Bill (T'side North)
Raison, Rt Hon Timothy	Waller, Gary
Redwood, John	Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)
Renton, Tim	Warren, Kenneth
Rhodes James, Robert	Watts, John
Riddick, Graham	Wells, Bowen
Ridley, Rt Hon Nicholas	Wheeler, John
Roberts, Wyn (Conwy)	Whitney, Ray
Roe, Mrs Marion	Widdecombe, Ann
Rost, Peter	Wiggin, Jerry
Rumbold, Mrs Angela	Wilkinson, John
Ryder, Richard	Wilshire, David
Sackville, Hon Tom	Winterton, Mrs Ann
Sainsbury, Hon Tim	Winterton, Nicholas
Sayeed, Jonathan	Wolfson, Mark
Scott, Nicholas	Wood, Timothy
Shaw, David (Dover)	Woodcock, Mike
Shaw, Sir Giles (Pudsey)	Young, Sir George (Acton)
Shaw, Sir Michael (Scarb')	Younger, Rt Hon George
Shephard, Mrs G. (Norfolk SW)
Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)	Tellers for the Ayes:
Shersby, Michael	Mr. Kenneth Carlisle and Mr. Mark Lennox-Boyd.
Sims, Roger
Skeet, Sir Trevor

NOES
Abbott, Ms Diane	Bray, Dr Jeremy
Adams, Allen (Paisley N)	Brown, Nicholas (Newcastle E)
Allen, Graham	Buchan, Norman
Alton, David	Caborn, Richard
Archer, Rt Hon Peter	Callaghan, Jim
Armstrong, Hilary	Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE)
Ashley, Rt Hon Jack	Cartwright, John
Ashton, Joe	Clark, Dr David (S Shields)
Banks, Tony (Newham NW)	Clarke, Tom (Monklands W)
Barnes, Harry (Derbyshire NE)	Clay, Bob
Battle, John	Clelland, David
Beckett, Margaret	Clwyd, Mrs Ann
Bell, Stuart	Cohen, Harry
Bennett, A. F. (D'nt'n & R'dish)	Cook, Frank (Stockton N)
Bermingham, Gerald	Corbett, Robin
Bidwell, Sydney	Corbyn, Jeremy
Blair, Tony	Cousins, Jim
Blunkett, David	Crowther, Stan
Boateng, Paul	Cryer, Bob
Boyes, Roland	Cunliffe, Lawrence
Bradley, Keith	Dalyell, Tam

Davies, Ron (Caerphilly)	Meale, Alan
Dixon, Don	Michael, Alun
Dobson, Frank	Michie, Bill (Sheffield Heeley)
Doran, Frank	Michie, Mrs Ray (Arg'l & Bute)
Dunnachie, Jimmy	Millan, Rt Hon Bruce
Dunwoody, Hon Mrs Gwyneth	Mitchell, Austin (t Grimsby)
Eastham, Ken	Moonie, Dr Lewis
Evans, John (St Helens N)	Morgan, Rhodri
Ewing, Mrs Margaret (Moray)	Morley, Elliott
Fearn, Ronald	Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe)
Field, Frank (Birkenhead)	Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon)
Fields, Terry (L'pool B G'n)	Mowlam, Marjorie
Fisher, Mark	Mullin, Chris
Flannery, Martin	Murphy, Paul
Foot, Rt Hon Michael	Nellist, Dave
Foster, Derek	Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon
Foulkes, George	O'Brien, William
Fraser, John	O'Neill, Martin
Fyfe, Maria	Orme, Rt Hon Stanley
Garrett, John (Norwich South)	Patchett, Terry
George, Bruce	Pendry, Tom
Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John	Pike, Peter L.
Gordon, Mildred	Powell, Ray (Ogmore)
Gould, Bryan	Prescott, John
Graham, Thomas	Primarolo, Dawn
Grant, Bernie (Tottenham)	Quin, Ms Joyce
Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S)	Radice, Giles
Griffiths, Win (Bridgend)	Randall, Stuart
Grocott, Bruce	Reid, Dr John
Harman, Ms Harriet	Richardson, Jo
Healey, Rt Hon Denis	Robertson, George
Heffer, Eric S.	Robinson, Geoffrey
Henderson, Doug	Rogers, Allan
Hinchliffe, David	Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)
Hogg, N. (C'nauld & Kilsyth)	Rowlands, Ted
Holland, Stuart	Sedgemore, Brian
Hood, Jimmy	Sheldon, Rt Hon Robert
Howarth, George (Knowsley N)	Shore, Rt Hon Peter
Howell, Rt Hon D. (S'heath)	Short, Clare
Howells, Geraint	Skinner, Dennis
Hughes, John (Coventry NE)	Smith, Andrew (Oxford E)
Hughes, Sean (Knowsley S)	Smith, C. (Isl'ton & F'bury)
Hughes, Simon (Southwark)	Soley, Clive
Janner, Greville	Spearing, Nigel
Jones, Ieuan (Ynys Môn)	Steel, Rt Hon David
Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald	Steinberg, Gerry
Kirkwood, Archy	Stott, Roger
Leadbitter, Ted	Straw, Jack
Leighton, Ron	Turner, Dennis
Lestor, Joan (Eccles)	Wall, Pat
Lewis, Terry	Wallace, James
Livsey, Richard	Wardell, Gareth (Gower)
Lloyd, Tony (Stretford)	Wareing, Robert N.
Lofthouse, Geoffrey	Welsh, Andrew (Angus E)
McAllion, John	Wigley, Dafydd
McAvoy, Thomas	Williams, Rt Hon Alan
McCartney, Ian	Williams, Alan W. (Carm'then)
Macdonald, Calum A.	Wilson, Brian
McFall, John	Winnick, David
McKelvey, William	Wise, Mrs Audrey
McLeish, Henry	Worthington, Tony
Madden, Max	Wray, Jimmy
Mahon, Mrs Alice	Young, David (Bolton SE)
Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)
Martlew, Eric	Tellers for the Noes:
Maxton, John	Mr. Frank Hayes and Mrs. Llin Golding.
Meacher, Michael

Question accordingly agreed to.

Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 31

Succession To Assured Periodic Tenancy By Spouse

`(1) In any case where—

(a) the sole tenant under an assured periodic tenancy dies, and

(b) immediately before the death, the tenant's spouse was occupying the dwelling-house as his or her only or principal home, and

then, on the death, the tenancy vests by virtue of this section in the spouse (and, accordingly, does not devolve under the tenant's will or intestacy).

(2) For the purposes of this section, a tenant is a successor in relation to a tenancy if—

(a) the tenancy became vested in him either by virtue of this section or under the will or intestacy of a previous tenant; or

(b) at some time before the tenant's death the tenancy was a joint tenancy held by himself and one or more other persons and, prior to his death, he became the sole tenant by survivorship.

(3) For the purposes of this section, a tenant is also a successor in relation to a tenancy (in this subsection referred to as "the new tenancy") which was granted to him (alone or jointly with others) if—

(a) at some time before the grant of the new tenancy, he was, by virtue of subsection (2) above, a successor in relation to an earlier tenancy of the same or substantially the same dwelling-house as is let under the new tenancy; and

(b) at all times since he became such a successor he has been a tenant (alone or jointly with others) of the dwelling-house which is let under the new tenancy or of a dwelling-house which is substantially the same as that dwelling-house.

(4) For the purposes of this section, a person who was living with the tenant as his or her wife or husband shall be treated as the tenant's spouse.

(5) If, on the death of the tenant, there is, by virtue of subsection (4) above, more than one person who fulfils the condition in subsection (1)(b) above, such one of them as may be decided by agreement or, in default of agreement, by the county court shall be treated as the tenant's spouse for the purposes of this section.'— [Mr. Ridley.]

Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 44

Power Of Corporation To Provide Legal Assistance To Tenants After Disposal

`(1) This section applies where a house has been disposed of by a disposal falling within section 74(1A) above, and, in relation to a house which has been so disposed of, a "transferred tenant" means a tenant of it who either—

(a) was the secure tenant of the house immediately before the disposal; or

(b) is the widow or widower of the person who was then the secure tenant of it.

(2) On an application by a transferred tenant of a house who is a party or a prospective party to proceedings or prospective proceedings to determine any dispute between himself and the person who acquired the house on the disposal referred to in subsection (1) above, the Corporation may give assistance to the transferred tenant if it thinks fit to do so—

(a) on the ground that the case raises a question of principle; or

(b) on the ground that it is unreasonable, having regard to the complexity of the case, or to any other matter, to expect the transferred tenant to deal with it without assistance; or

(3) Assistance given by the Corporation under this section may include—

(a) giving advice;

(b) procuring or attempting to procure the settlement of the matter in dispute;

(d) arranging for representation by a solicitor or counsel, including such assistance as is usually given by a solicitor or counsel in the steps preliminary or incidental to any proceedings, or in arriving at or giving effect to a compromise to avoid or bring to an end any proceedings; and

(e) any other form of assistance which the Corporation may consider appropriate;

but paragraph (d) above does not affect the law and practice regulating the descriptions of persons who may appear in, conduct, defend and address the court in any proceedings.

(4) In so far as expenses are incurred by the Corporation in providing a transferred tenant with assistance under this section, the recovery of those expenses (as taxed or assessed in such manner as may be prescribed by rules of court) shall constitute a first charge for the benefit of the Corporation—

(a) on any costs which (whether by virtue of a judgment or order of a court or an agreement or otherwise) are payable to the tenant by any other person in respect of the matter in connection with which the assistance was given, and

(b) so far as relates to any costs, on his rights under any compromise or settlement arrived at in connection with that matter to avoid or bring to an end any proceedings;

but subject to any charge under the Legal Aid Act 1988 and to any provision of that Act for payment of any sum to the Legal Aid Board.'.— [Mr. Ridley.]

Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 45

Power Of Corporation To Provide Legal Assistance To Tenants In Relation To Acquisitions

`(1) On an application by the tenant of a dwelling-house who is a party or a prospective party to proceedings falling within subsection (2) below, the Corporation may give assistance to the tenant if it thinks fit to do so—

(a) on the ground that the case raises a question of principle; or

(b) on the ground that it is unreasonable, having regard to the complexity of the case, or to any other matter, to expect the tenant to deal with it without assistance; or

(2) The proceedings referred to in subsection (1) above are—

(a) proceedings to determine any question arising in relation to an acquisition or proposed acquisition under this Part; and

(b) proceedings to determine any dispute arising after an acquisition under this Part between a transferred tenant of a dwelling-house included in the acquisition and the body by which the acquisition was made;

and for the purposes of paragraph (b) above a tenant of a dwelling-house is a transferred tenant of it if he was the qualifying tenant of it at the time of the acquisition or is the widow or widower of the person who was then the qualifying tenant of it.

(3) Assistance given by the Corporation under this section may include—

(a) giving advice;

(b) procuring or attempting to procure the settlement of the matter in dispute;

(e) any other form of assistance which the Corporation may consider appropriate;

but paragraph (d) above does not affect the law and practice regulating the descriptions of persons who may appear in, conduct, defend and address the court in any proceedings.

(4) In so far as expenses are incurred by the Corporation in providing the tenant with assistance under this section, the

recovery of those expenses (as taxed or assessed in such manner as may be prescribed by rules of court) shall constitute a first charge for the benefit of the Corporation—

(a) on any costs which (whether by virtue of a judgement or order of a court or an agreement or otherwise) are payable to the tenant by any other person in respect of the matter in connection with which the assistance was given; and

(b) so far as relates to any costs, on his rights under any compromise or settlement arrived at in connection with that matter to avoid or bring to an end any proceedings;

but subject to any charge under the Legal Aid Act 1988 and to any provision of that Act for payment of any sum to the Legal Aid Board!.— [Mr. Ridley.]

Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 46

Service Of Information, Advice And Assistance

`(1) The Corporation may provide in connection with Part IV a service of information, advice and assistance to, and for the benefit of,—

(a) persons who have been approved or are considering applying for approval under section 87 above; and

(b) persons who are tenants of public sector landlords.

(2) The Corporation may make charges for information, advice and assistance provided under this section otherwise than to persons falling within subsection (1)(b) above.

(3) The powers conferred on the Corporation by this section may be exercised by the Housing Corporation and Housing for Wales acting jointly.'.— [Mr. Ridley.]

Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 47

Consents To Disposals Of Housing Stock And Application Of Receipts

`(1) At the end of subsection (4) of section 34 of the Housing Act 1985 (consent to disposals of land held for the purposes of Part II—provision of housing accommodation) and at the end of subsection (4) of section 43 of that Act (consent for certain disposals of other houses) there shall he inserted the subsections set out in subsection (2) below.

(2) The subsections referred to in subsection (1) above and subsection (3) below are as follows—

"(4A) The matters to which the Secretary of State may have regard in determining whether to give consent and, if so, to what conditions consent should be subject shall include—
(a) the extent (if any) to which the person to whom the proposed disposal is to be made (in this subsection referred to as "the intending purchaser") is, or is likely to be, dependent upon, controlled by or subject to influence from the local authority making the disposal or any members or officers of that authority;
(b) the extent (if any) to which the proposed disposal would result in the intending purchaser becoming the predominant or a substantial owner in any area of housing accommodation let on tenancies or subject to licences;
(c) the terms of the proposed disposal; and
(d) any other matters whatsoever which he considers relevant.

(4B) Where the Secretary of State gives consent to a disposal by a local authority, he may give directions as to the purpose for which any capital money received by the authority in respect of the disposal is to be applied and, where any such directions are given, nothing in any enactment shall require his consent to be given for the application of the capital money concerned in accordance with the directions."

(3) Section 13 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987 (power of Secretary of State to impose conditions in sale of local authority houses) shall be renumbered as subsection (1) of that section and after that subsection there shall be inserted as subsections (2) and (3) the subsections which are set out in subsection (2) above and there numbered (4A) and (4B).

(4) In section 153 of the Local Government Act 1972 (application of capital money on disposal of land), in subsection (1) after the words "127(4) above" there shall be be inserted "to any directions given in respect of the disposal under section 43(4B) of the Housing Act 1985".

(5) In section 430 of the Housing Act 1985 (application of capital money received on disposal of land), in subsection (1) after the word "applied", in the first place where it occurs, there shall be inserted "in accordance with any directions given in respect of the disposal under section 34(4B) or section 43(4B) and, subject thereto".

(6) In section 208 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987 (application of receipts from disposal of certain land), in subsection (2) there shall be inserted at the end the words "or has made directions under section 13(3)".

(7) In section 26 of the Local Government Act 1988 (provisions as to consents under section 25 for provision of financial assistance etc.), in subsection (5) (which excludes consent under various enactments where consent is given to a disposal of land under section 25) after the words "such a consent" there shall be inserted "then, if the consent given for the purposes of section 25 above so provides".

(8) This section shall be deemed to have come into force on 9th June 1988.'.— [Mr. Ridley.]

Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 48

Schemes For Payments To Assist Local Housing Authority Tenants To Obtain Other Accommodation

`(1) In accordance with a scheme made by a local housing authority and approved by the Secretary of State under this section, the authority may make grants to or for the benefit of qualifying tenants or licensees of the authority with a view to assisting each person to whom or for whose benefit a grant is made to obtain accommodation otherwise than as a tenant or licensee of the authority either—

(a) by acquiring an interest in a dwelling-house; or

(b) by carrying out works to a dwelling-house to provide additional accommodation; or

(2) A scheme under this section shall contain such provisions as the local housing authority considers appropriate together with any which the Secretary of State may require as a condition of his approval and, without prejudice to the generality, a scheme may include provisions specifying, or providing for the determination of—

(a) the persons who are qualifying tenants or licensees for the purposes of the scheme;

(b) the interests which qualifying tenants or licensees may be assisted to acquire;

(d) the circumstances in which a grant may be made for the benefit of a qualifying tenant or licensee;

(e) the amount of the grant which may be made in any particular case and the terms on which it may be made;

(f) the limits on the total number and amount of grants which may be made; and

(g) the period within which the scheme is to apply.

(3) The Secretary of State may approve a scheme made by a local housing authority under this section with or without conditions and, where a scheme has been approved, the authority shall take such steps as it considers appropriate to bring the scheme to the attention of persons likely to be able to benefit from it and shall take such other steps (if any) as the Secretary of State may direct in any particular case to secure publicity for the scheme.

(4) The Secretary of State may revoke an approval of a scheme under this section by a notice given to the local housing authority concerned; and where such a notice is given, the revocation shall not affect the operation of the scheme in relation to any grants made or agreed before the date of the notice.

(5) Any grant made pursuant to a scheme under this section—

(a) shall be regarded as a grant of a capital nature for the purposes of Part VIII of the Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980 (Capital expenditure of local authorities); and

(b) shall be regarded as expenditure on management for the purposes of Part II of Schedule 14 to the Housing Act 1985 (debits to the Housing Revenue Account).

(6) Where a scheme made by a local housing authority under this section has been approved, a person dealing with the authority shall not be concerned to see or enquire whether the terms of the scheme have been or are being complied with, and any failure to comply with the terms of a scheme shall not invalidate any grant purporting to be made in accordance with the scheme unless the person to whom the grant is made has actual notice of the failure.

(7) In this section—

(a) "local housing authority" has the meaning assigned by section 1 of the Housing Act 1985;

(b) "dwelling-house" has the meaning assigned by section 112 of that Act; and

Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 4

Restriction On Letting Etc, Of Certain Houses In National Parks Etc

`(1) Section 37 of the Housing Act 1985 (restriction on disposals of dwelling-houses in National Parks etc.) shall be amended in accordance with this section.

(2) In subsection (2) (the covenanted limitation) after the word "his" there shall be inserted "(a)" and at the end there shall be added "and

(b) there will be no disposal by way of tenancy or licence without the written consent of the authority unless the disposal is to a person satisfying that condition".

(3) In subsection (3) (disposals limited to persons employed or living locally) after the words "application for consent" there shall be inserted the words "or, in the case of a disposal by way of tenancy or licence, preceding the disposal".

(4) at the end of subsection (4) (disposals in breach of covenant to be void) there shall be added "and, so far as it relates to disposals by way of tenancy or licence, such a covenant may be enforced by the local authority as if—

(a) the authority were possessed of land adjacent to the house concerned; and

(b) the covenant were expressed to be made for the benefit of such adjacent land."

(5) After subsection (4) there shall be inserted the following subsection—

"(4A) Any reference in the preceding provisions of this section to a disposal by way of tenancy or licence does not include a reference to a relevant disposal or an exempted disposal."

(6) This section has effect where the conveyance, grant or assignment referred to in subsection (1) of section 37 is executed on or after the passing of this Act.'.— [Mr. Jopling.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

With this it will be convenient to take the following: Amendment (a) to the new clause, at end add—

`(8) The limitation on disposal in subsection (2)(b) shall not apply if and so long as the House remains the only or main residence of the purchaser (including any successor in title of his and any person deeming title for him or such a successor).

(9) in this section the words "only or main residence" shall have the same meaning as in section 29 of the Finance Act 1965.'.

New clause 5— Restriction on disposal of dwellinghouses in National Parks etc. acquired under the right to buy—

`(1) In Part V of the Housing Act 1985 (the right to buy), section 157 (restriction on disposal of dwelling-houses in National Parks etc.) shall be amended in accordance with this section.

(2) In subsection (2) (the covenanted limitation) after the word "his" there shall be inserted "a" and at the end there shall be added "and—
(b) there will be no disposal by way of tenancy or licence without the written consent of the landlord unless the disposal is to a person satisfying that condition".

(3) In subsection (3) (disposals limited to persons employed or living locally) after the words "application for consent" there shall he inserted the words "or, in the case of a disposal by way of tenancy or licence, preceding the disposal".

(4) In subsection (4) (alternative limitation giving landlord right to a reconveyance) after the words "relevant disposal" there shall be inserted "or disposal by way of tenancy or licence".

(5) At the end of subsection (6) (disposals in breach of covenant to be void) there shall be added "and, so far as it relates to disposals by way of tenancy or licence, such a covenant may be enforced by the landlord as if—
(a) the landlord were possessed of land adjacent to the house concerned; and
(b) the covenant were expressed to be made for the benefit of such adjacent land.".

(6) After subsection (6) there shall be inserted the following subsection—

"(6A) Any reference in the preceding provisions of this section to a disposal by way of tenancy or licence does not include a reference to a relevant disposal or an exempted disposal.".

(7) This section has effect where the conveyance or grant referred to in subsection (1) of section 157 is executed on or after the passing of this Act.'.

Amendment (a) to new clause 5, at end Add—

'(8) The limitation on disposal in subsection (2)(b) shall not apply if and so long as the house remains the only or main residence of the purchaser (including any successor in title of his and any person deeming title for him or such a successor).

(9) In this section the words "only or main residence" shall have the same meaning as in section 29 of the Finance Act 1965.'.

New clause 4 has been supported, I am glad to say, by about 65 of my right hon. and hon. Friends, and I am grateful for their support of my efforts to get this change in the law. Many of my hon. Friends have supported this proposal because they come predominantly from rural areas, and their anxiety stems from the concern and pressure in their constituencies, where people are concerned about rural housing. Many hon. Members with rural constituencies are accustomed to hearing from their constituents that in such areas, particularly the beautiful national parks, the areas of outstanding natural beauty and areas of great scenic beauty, housing is becoming increasingly unavailable, and that the prices are increasingly inflated, entirely because of the outside pressure for weekend houses and holiday homes.

For example, in correspondence, the Lake District planning board has told me:

"In the central parishes of the Lake District, second and holiday-home occupancy of existing dwellings has reached levels as high as 40 per cent. of the existing housing stock and the financial inducements to let for the holiday market are strong."

As the House will recall, this is not a new problem. That problem was clearly recognised in the right-to-buy legislation which passed through the House in 1980 and was further consolidated in the 1985 legislation. At that time, Parliament decided to take steps to ensure that council houses, having been bought by the tenant under the right-to-buy arrangements, were protected from becoming holiday or weekend homes. That proposal has the support of many of my hon. Friends. As a consequence, in the 1985 Act, two alternative restrictive covenants were allowed for local authorities to put into sale agreements to ensure that, when the former tenant wished to resell the house, it remained in local ownership.

That is what the House wanted and what I wanted, but an anomaly has now emerged, that there is nothing to stop the owner of the former council house letting it as a weekend or holiday home, rather than selling it. That could drive a coach and horses through Parliament's wise decision a few years ago to seek to ensure that former council housing remained in local occupancy.

My new clauses are designed to close that loophole. Their intention is the reason why so many of my hon. Friends have flocked to support them. I hope that the Government will be able to support the new clauses. I am glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton (Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop), whom I am glad to see here, has put down an amendment to each of my new clauses. Those amendments are entirely acceptable to me, as I understand that they seek to say that the restriction that I am proposing will not apply if the house is the principal residence of the owner. I hope that the Government will find that my hon. Friend's amendments make the new clauses even easier to accept.

My intention is solely to prevent the owner of a former council house from leaving the house, buying or renting another to live in and then letting the original council house at a substantial rate which could well cover the mortgage payments on both houses. That was never Parliament's intention and we should change the law to ensure that the loophole does not occur.

My two amendments refer to the new clauses moved so ably by my right hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Mr. Jopling). He has already given the reason for those refinements to his new clauses, which are in no sense hostile amendments, and I recommend them to the House.

I strongly support this proposal, because I represent an area that has problems similar to those of the Lake District. They are not only problems in rural Wales and the Lake District, but in East Anglia, Cornwall and many other areas where tremendous pressures are put on the limited housing stock and make it extremely difficult for local people to obtain housing.

The loophole to which the right hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Mr. Jopling) referred is open to exploitation in many areas and I hope that the Government will show that they are willing to accept the amendment. The proposal goes only part of the way to try to mitigate the considerable problems that face people in the right hon. Gentleman's area and in mine. The policy of any Government must be to try to ensure that local people can have some sort of command over the housing stock. The proposal at least deals with the sub-letting of houses that have been sold and, to that extent, is welcome.

I hope that the Government will address themselves to the generality of the problem, because it is certainly becoming worse. A cheque-book invasion in the area which I represent is making it next to impossible for local people to acquire houses to buy. The reduction of the housing stock is making it increasingly difficult to find houses to rent. There must be a mechanism that will provide an answer to the problem, and I urge the Government to give serious consideration to finding it before the problem gets out of hand.

11.15 pm

It might help the House and assist the conduct of business if I were to ask the House to take yes for an answer to the new clause. I know that it is a terrible thing to ask the House to do, but for once it might bear with me if I say that we accept the new clauses of my right hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Mr. Jopling). We shall accept also the amendments of my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton (Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop) to them. I fear, however, that in another place it will be necessary to amend the amendments while leaving the sense exactly as he would have them. The addition of "only or main residence" which he proposes has been taken from an Act which has been repealed. I do not think that we can leave that.

Secondly, the amendment to new clause 5 would not affect the operation of the clause in those instances where the landlord has reserved a right to pre-emption. Thus, it would mean that before any letting, however short, the owner of the house would have to give the former landlord the opportunity to buy it back. I do not think that that would be right. Subject to introducing those amendments in another place, the Government are happy to accept the new clauses and the sense of the amendments to them.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause read a Second time.

Amendment made: (a) in line 26, at end add—

`(8) The limitation on disposal in subsection (2)(b) shall not apply if and so long as the house remains the only or main residence of the purchaser (including any successor in title of his and any person deeming title for him or such a successor).

(9) In this section the words "only or main residence" shall have the same meaning as in section 29 of the Finance Act 1965.'.—[Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop.]

Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

New Clause 5

Restriction On Disposal Of Dwelling-Houses In National Parks Etc Acquired Under The Right To Buy

'(1) In Part V of the Housing Act 1985 (the right to buy), section 157 (restriction on disposal of dwelling-houses in National Parks etc.) shall be amended in accordance with this section.

(2) In subsection (2) (the covenanted limitation) after the word "his" there shall be inserted "a" and at the end there shall be added "and—
(b) there will be no disposal by way of tenancy or licence without the written consent of the landlord unless the disposal is to a person satisfying that condition".

(3) In subsection (3) (disposals limited to persons employed or living locally) after the words "application for consent" there shall be inserted the words "or, in the case of a disposal by way of tenancy or licence, preceding the disposal".

(4) In subsection (4) (alternative limitation giving landlord right to a reconveyance) after the words "relevant disposal" there shall be inserted "or disposal by way of tenancy or licence".

(5) At the end of subsection (6) (disposals in breach of covenant to be void) there shall be added "and, so far as it relates to disposals by way of tenancy or licence, such a covenant may be enforced by the landlord as if—
(a) the landlord were possessed of land adjacent to the house concerned; and
(b) the covenant were expressed to be made for the benefit of such adjacent land.".

(6) After subsection (6) there shall be inserted the following subsection—

"(6A) Any reference in the preceding provisions of this section to a disposal by way of tenancy or licence does not include a reference to a relevant disposal or an exempted disposal.".

(7) This section has effect where the conveyance or grant referred to in subsection (1) of section 157 is executed on or after the passing of this Act.'.—[Mr. Jopling.]

Brought up, and read the First and Second time.

Amendment made: (a) in line 26, at end add—

`(8) The limitation on disposal in subsection (2)(b) shall not apply if and so long as the house remains the only or main residence of the purchaser (including any successor in title of his and any person deeming title for him or such a successor).

(9) in this section the words "only or main residence" shall have the same meaning as in section 29 of the Finance Act 1965.'.—[Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop.]

Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

New Clause 9

Grounds For Possession: Racial Harassment

`In Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1985 (grounds for possession of dwelling-houses let under secure tenancies) in Part I (grounds of which court may order possession if it considers it reasonable), at the end of Ground 2 (nuisance or annoyance to neighbours) add—

"or has committed acts on racial grounds against a person or persons of a different racial or ethnic origin residing within the local authority area within which the dwelling-house is located, and those acts have interfered with that person's enjoyment of the dwelling-house or have been calculated to deter the person from occupying a particular dwellinghouse.".'.—[Mr. Tony Banks.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: New clause 43—Grounds for possession: harassment—

'In Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1985 (grounds for possession of dwelling-houses let under secure tenancies) in Part I (grounds of which court may order possession if it considers it reasonable), at the end of Ground 2 (nuisance or annoyance to neighbours) add—

"or has committed acts against a person or persons residing within the local authority area within which the dwelling-house is located, and those acts have interfered with that person's enjoyment of the dwelling-house or have been calculated to deter the person from occupying a particular dwelling-house.".'.

New clause 15— Officer to deal with harassment and illegal eviction—

'(1) All local housing authorities to which this section applies, shall appoint and retain a proper officer, whose functions shall include those set out in subsection (3) below.

(2) This section applies to the following local housing authorities—
(i) district councils and London borough councils.
(ii) The Common Council of the City of London.
(iii) The Council of the Isles of Scilly.

(3) The proper officer for the purposes of subsection (1) above, shall investigate any complaint made to the local housing authority, by a person aggrieved, that an offence under this Part of this Act or under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 as amended has been committed within the area of that authority and shall prepare a recommendation in writing for that authority on whether or not that authority shall commence a prosecution or other action against any person arising from these investigations.

(4) For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby confirmed that a person aggrieved under subsection (3) above shall have a sufficient interest in the matter to bring appropriate proceedings to enforce the duties established under this section.'.

The new clauses all touch upon racial harassment. New clause 9 relates to schedule 2 of the Housing Act 1985, which sets out the grounds on which a public sector landlord can recover possession against a tenant. I am more than happy to move the new clause, but I wish that there were no need for me to do so. Racial harassment is one of the evils that unfortunately now permeates much of our society, especially within the inner cities. The boroughs of Newham—which is my part of the east end—and Tower Hamlets have found that the problem has reached crisis proportions. I am glad to be able to report that the London borough of Newham has taken a national lead in attempting to combat racial harassment, and the first case of a tenant being convicted on the ground of racial harassment occurred in the borough.

Newham commissioned a report from the Harris Research Centre as part of a crime survey. The survey examined a sample of Asian and Afro-Caribbean residents to determine their experiences and attitudes about racial harassment. A normal sample size of 1,063 people was taken and the findings were very disturbing. It showed that one in four of Newham's black residents had been victims of some form of racial harassment in the previous 12 months. Two in three victims of racial harassment were victims on more than one occasion and 116 victims reported 1.550 incidents of racial harassment. It is really worrying that it appears that only one in 20 incidents were actually reported to the police. When they were reported, 80 per cent. of black victims were dissatisfied with the police handling of the matter. The dissatisfaction largely stemmed from a feeling that the police were apathetic about the problems of black residents.

I am glad to say that, through some very intense discussions with the police, the local authority and community leaders, there has been an undoubtedly successful drive against racial harassment in the east end of London. On behalf of hon. Members on both sides of the House, I commend all those in the east end who are trying their best to stem the rising tide of unpleasantness about which all of us feel ashamed.

I am sure that hon. Members on both sides of the House deplore racial harassment. Although victim support is an essential feature of any racial harassment policy. we must concentrate our efforts on the perpetrators and the crimes that they commit. We believe that ground for possession is an essential component of that attack on the perpetrators.

The experience of local authorities is that the courts are not willing to evict tenants for racial harassment alone. They have found that a more comprehensive case including a long series of small incidents that are a nuisance or an annoyance is more likely to succeed than a case relying purely on racial harassment. For that reason alone it would be useful for Parliament to send a message to the courts that we intend that racial attacks on tenants or residents should be considered as sufficient grounds for possession. I hope that the Minister will he able to join me in sending that message out very clearly by accepting new clause 9.

New clause 15 seeks to give teeth to the Government's proposals drafted to give effect to their manifesto promise to strengthen the law against harassment and unlawful eviction. Here is a case in which the Opposition are only too happy to try to strengthen and support a Conservative party manifesto pledge. I am sure that the Minister will welcome that support.

We believe that legal protection is useless without effective enforcement machinery. New clause 15 seeks to ensure that every local housing authority has an officer called a tenancy relations officer or harassment officer who will receive complaints alleging harassment or unlawful eviction. I know that the Minister feels very strongly about these matters and I hope that he will say how delighted he is to accept the Opposition new clauses.

I associate myself and my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon and Radnor (Mr. Livsey) with new clauses 9 and 15. It is clearly important to ensure that people who are often the minority community are as secure, and feel as secure and protected by the law, as people in the ethnic majority.

One of the most disconcerting and upsetting things that can happen is for people to feel that they are perpetually persecuted even when they are behind their own front doors, in their homes. They know that they can have no escape from that. That has often been remedied only by suggesting that the victims move. It does nothing for good race relations, let alone good education and tolerance in a just and fair society, to suggest that those who are persecuted must get out of the way to allow the bullies to continue to bully. I hope that the Government will respond positively to the new clauses.

New clause 43 is in most respects similar to new clause 9, except that it deals with harassment generally, as opposed only to racial harassment. I can illustrate my point with one short tale. There was living in my constituency about one and one half years ago a lady of 79, who found that there were illegal occupants in the flat above hers. They were a large family of travellers and they lived an extremely unruly life. As the days went by, she felt herself increasingly persecuted and intimidated by them.

They caused a din all the time and she found that she could not sleep. They often damaged her property and the surrounding area and were generally a nuisance to the community. The sad truth is that six months after they moved in, she died. I can testify to the fact that, having been a strong, healthy and robust pensioner, she was forced to her grave by being harassed to death. That was not a question of racial harassment, because the family concerned was the same colour as she was. There might have been a slight racial difference in that they were first generation Irish immigrants, but they were white. She was a long-standing local resident of Bermondsey.

Harassment of whatever kind is entirely unacceptable. Normally, a local authority will offer assistance if the victim takes the matter to court. In reality, a pensioner of 79 is in no fit state to take the part of the principal moving against others who cause harassment. It is vital that tenants in that predicament are secure in the knowledge that their landlord will uphold their rights and will meet his obligations to his tenants, in ensuring that they have quiet enjoyment of their tenancies.

I agree with my hon. Friend, but does he not acknowledge that the problem is compounded and accentuated by the number of people who, through the care in the community programme, have been dumped in places where vulnerable people already are living?—[Interruption.] In my constituency, there are examples of elderly people having been left in flats and of others having been dumped alongside them without any proper follow-up care. Local allocation committees do not always provide protection from the kind of harassment that my hon. Friend described.

Some hon. Members should have listened more attentively to my hon. Friend's intervention. [HON. MEMBERS: "He has not been here."] My hon. Friend has been in and out of the Chamber throughout the whole of today, and he has voted on all the amendments. He was entitled to make his very valid point.

Those responsible for allocating housing often do so without giving due thought to the consequences for existing neighbourhoods of accommodating people who, through no fault of their own, may not be best placed there. I am sure that all hon. Members have received complaints from constituents who find unacceptable the lifestyle of somebody who may be mentally sick, but who is perfectly entitled to a home. However, such a person should not reasonably be housed together with an elderly couple, who may then find themselves persecuted as a result of that inappropriate allocation.

It is vital that tenants are protected, and it is not good enough that they should be expected to defend their own rights when they are themselves vulnerable and unable to do so. Local authorities must take the responsibility for protecting the quiet enjoyment of all our citizens. The new clauses are intended to achieve that, and I hope that the Government will be responsive to the general problem and to the new clauses in particular.

It is nice to welcome several new speakers to our debate. However, the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) has been present in the Chamber throughout and knows that these issues have been debated on a number of occasions. I join him in sending out from this Chamber the strongest possible message that it is unacceptable to harass people on racial or any other grounds, so making it intolerable for them to use their accommodation. He is right to say that Newham is a borough that has dealt with such matters in a forthright way and has achieved some successes under the present law. However, as he will know, it has also had some failures under the present law, which is schedule 2 of the Housing Act 1985.

The argument between us is whether it is the law that is wrong or, as the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) has said, the force that is put behind the law and the difficulty in getting people to come forward to give evidence. I am sure that all of us with urban constituencies—this perhaps applies to other constituencies also—will know that getting people to come forward is usually the real problem. Therefore, we would argue that schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1985 provides proper grounds and that, in attaching the right importance to the subject, we must be careful not to go so far that we create a potential new double jeopardy or hazard.

New clause 9 states that any act in the nature of racial harassment in the same local authority area could lead to the loss of a property. Such an act would probably be illegal already, and we should not use eviction as an additional form of punishment. However, eviction is rightly used if it attaches to the neighbour problems and to actions which make the use of the property intolerable.

11.30 pm

Ground 2 makes racial harassment a nuisance or an annoyance. Obviously, we want to strengthen that and to go all the way by saying that it is an out-and-out crime. When local authorities try to get possession on ground 2, the courts tend not to be prepared to accept racial harassment alone but want other evidence.

In the hon. Gentleman's own borough, as well as in Camden and Islington, there have been successes on that ground in such cases. Cases that have failed may have failed not because of any lack in the law, but because of the difficulty of collecting evidence. That is why—I hope that this will help the hon. Gentleman—my Department has recently commissioned some research from Brunel university to look into such matters and to see whether that is the problem or whether we, or experts, can help in giving guidance to local authorities to make such cases stick better.

If the research from Brunel university shows that there is a need for further legislation in this area, will the Minister undertake that he will be prepared to bring that forward?

I cannot guarantee that, but we will take seriously anything that the report, which we have commissioned, recommends. It will be published in the normal way.

I do not want to go as far as new clause 9 or new clause 43 and to lay on local authorities in every circumstance a duty to employ tenancy relations officers. Tenancy relations officers have written to us all to urge that, and I can understand why they did so. I should like to put on record my gratitude for the help that they have given in formulating several of the proposals in the Bill. I do not think that we should lay down the way in which local authorities should carry out their statutory duties, because the range of problems facing local authorities in this area is so great. However, I think that all the authorities with which we would deal would naturally employ tenancy relations officers.

On the basis that there is no argument between us, as there is further work in hand and because there have been some successful prosecutions under the present laws, I hope that hon. Gentlemen will not press their new clauses.

I had hoped not to have to contribute to this part of the debate, but I am concerned by one aspect of the Secretary of State's response. He seems to show undue equanimity about the state of the existing law in relation to harassment, which is not borne out by the research that has already been carried out by the Commission for Racial Equality. I fail to see the need to go to Brunel university to establish what the commission, together with the Association of Metropolitan Authorities, has already established—which is that one of the major causes of difficulty in prosecuting cases of racial harassment is that people are not prepared to come forward to give evidence because they simply do not believe that the law will be effective.

The CRE report "Living in Terror", which highlights the real problems currently faced by communities throughout the country, states:

"It is important to point out the difficulty of proving cases some months after the incident concerned. There is a tendency by the courts to award suspended orders rather than outright possession and individuals are dissuaded from appearing in court because of its relative ineffectiveness."

That is what the Government's own body, the CRE, had to say about that matter.

Why is it now necessary to go to Brunel? What comfort will the Minister's words bring to the Bengali, Afro-Caribbean and Asian families in our cities, who every night go in fear of what may happen to them during the night? Wives and children dare not go out to shop or to school because of the level of harassment on the major estates. What comfort can the Minister give to them? To say that Brunel is carrying out research will not make them sleep any easier in their beds or enable them to lead a full life as equal members of our community.

Question put and negatived.

New Clause 39

Limitation Of Assured Tenancies To Previously Empty Property

`A tenancy is an assured tenancy within the meaning of this Act if—

(a) the letting is or forms part of a building which at the time of the commencement of this Act was empty and had remained empty for a period of more than six months; and

(b) the landlord has obtained from the local authority a licence authorising the building or part of a building as fit to be let.'.—[Mr. Simon Hughes.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

Even at this late stage, we hope to persuade the Government to proceed slightly more carefully in the deregulation of the private sector. They legislated for a new form of assured tenancy in 1980, and our new clause would allow such tenancies in the new deregulated regime that the Government so favour, but would limit them to property that was previously empty.

The problem with the Bill is that, no matter what sort of property, once someone takes a new tenancy he will not have the same security as he enjoyed previously. He cannot carry his security with him. He will move to a regime where his rights are fewer and his rent greater. He will have no facility to seek regulation of that rent because the fair rent system will disappear. He will be paying market rent and, if not in receipt of benefit, will be substantially financially disadvantaged.

We are bringing to the House a matter that we argued in Committee. We want to ensure that, rather than the Government taking a shot in the dark and arguing the theory that deregulation will solve the housing problem, they take a more common-sense approach. The Government have identified empty properties in the private sector that might be held back from the market because only the market will give the landlord the revenue that the landlord requires. However, no such argument applies to other properties. Property currently let in the private sector does not suddenly need the benefit of deregulated market rents and fewer rights for tenants. That property is already let. The Government should not suddenly sweep away all the present structures and introduce all the uncertainty of the future.

The greatest concern of tenants is that they have secure homes at rents that they can afford. The new clause would ensure that the security of thousands, possibly millions, of tenants is not put at risk because many of the new homes that become available are priced out of the market for all but a handful of people.

The new clause would give at least some protection to the many thousands of people now in secure rented dwellings in the private sector. The Bill states that they will continue to be protected, but we know that Rachmanism arose because Mr. Rachman and other undesirable and unscrupulous landlords were aware that, under the Rent Act 1957, once the tenants were out, the places could be relet with no control whatever.

The ITV "World in Action" programme today dealt with the notorious activities of Mr. Nicholas van Hoogstraten, who describes his tenants as "scumbags", admits to spitting at them and makes no secret of the fact that he would use any method whatever—violence, gangsterism and the rest—to get rid of them. He described the Bill as a step in the right direction, and it will greatly assist people of that type.

The hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) is absolutely right: if there is to be real security—not just on paper, but real and effective security—for existing private tenants, the most effective way to achieve it within the framework of this undesirable Bill is through the provision in the new clause that assured tenancies will arise only when the property has been empty for six months.

If the Minister seriously wished to ensure that private tenants were protected, he would accept the new clause.

I need not detain the House long to point out the absurdity of the new clause. The result would be to penalise landlords who have continued to let their property notwithstanding all the constraints and difficulties associated with the Rent Acts, and to reward those who have kept their property off the market. If that is what the House wants, I shall he amazed.

The Minister may be more greatly amazed that, despite all his promises, the consequence of his legislation will be that the needs of the large number of people looking for decent, cheap rented housing will remain unmet. The new clause would have been a redeeming feature of the Bill, but the Minister is clearly beyond seeking redemption.

Question put and negatived.

New Clause 49

Protection Of Right To Buy

`(a) Where a secure tenant of a non-fully mutual housing co-operative has claimed to exercise his right to buy, no subsequent change in the rules or status of the co-operative shall have the effect of negating that right to buy.

(b) This section shall be deemed to have come into force on 1st March 1987.'.

Brought up, and read the First time.

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

The new clause deals with a fairly narrow point arising from the problems of my constituent, Mr. J. Croxford, whose right to buy has been denied as a result of retrospective and capricious action by the Northborough housing co-operative, of which Mr. Croxford is a tenant.

In February 1987, Mr. Croxford made a right-to-buy application to the Northborough housing co-operative. In May 1987, the co-operative admitted his right to buy, albeit nine weeks later than it should have done. Mr. Croxford was concerned at the slow progress of his application, and wrote to me on 27 July 1987. He knew that the section 125 notice was due, but suspected that it would not arrive. I wrote to my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning, who replied to me at the end of August 1987 based on information supplied to the Department by the housing co-operative.

The co-operative claimed that it had instructed a surveyor to inspect the flat in preparation for the issue of a section 125 notice, but the co-operative's claim that it was progressing the application turned out to be a cynical lie. On 30 March 1987—before admitting Mr. Croxford's right to buy, and before supplying that information to my hon. Friend the Minister—the co-operative had changed its rules and registered as a fully mutual co-operative, thereby depriving all its tenants of their status as secure tenants and of their right to buy.

It was not until 3 February 1988 that the co-operative wrote to my constituent—almost a year from the date of his initial application—advising him that his right to buy had been retrospectively extinguished by the devious action that the co-operative had taken in changing its rules. I wrote again to my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning. My hon. Friend replied explaining that the action taken by the co-operative appeared to be in accordance with the law, although I submit that it was certainly not within the spirit of the law as enacted by Parliament.

My new clause seeks to remedy the wrong suffered by Mr. Croxford and perhaps by other people in similar circumstances. It renders void any action by a non fully mutual housing co-operative to change its rules or status so as to remove the right to buy from a tenant who was a secure tenant at the time he claimed his right to buy.

I have made the effective date of the new clause 1 March 1987. I realise that there would normally be an objection on the grounds of it being retrospective legislation, but it is justified in this instance as it is designed to provide a remedy against the retrospective action of the housing co-operative to remove a right which had been conferred by legislation.

11.45 pm

I shall not be surprised if my hon. Friend the Minister finds some technical defect in the drafting of the new clause—indeed, I should be surprised if that were not the case. However, if he cannot accept it, I hope that he will give me an undertaking that he will look again at this problem and consider whether it would be possible to introduce an amendment in another place to remedy the wrong which my constituent has suffered.

I cannot believe that it was the intention of the House, when it created the right to buy, that it should be negated by cavalier retrospective action by a mischievous housing co-operative. The House should stand by the right to buy which it conferred on tenants such as my constituent Mr. Croxford.

The right to buy raises a number of very important issues, not least for some 500 or 600 of my constituents who exercised the right to buy and, unfortunately, bought a pup. They bought BISF steel-framed properties. Those properties cannot be sold on, even when willing buyers are found, because building societies do not make mortgages available because of alleged structural defects.

Rather than take up the time of the House any further, when the Minister replies to the debate, either on the new clause or on Third Reading, will he give some comfort and some hope to those people who, under the Conservative right-to-buy policy, are lumbered with houses which are impossible to sell on and which do not qualify for any grant under the structurally defective properties legislation? Will he seek at least to review the case of 500 or 600 of my constituents in Nottingham, North, so that at some point in the future they can either sell their houses or have them brought up to a reasonable standard?

My hon. Friend the Member for Slough (Mr. Watts) has been in correspondence with me about the individual case that he mentioned. I am glad to say that the only such case that has come to our attention is the one that he described. The Housing Corporation, which deals with such matters, has also heard of no other such case. I doubt whether it would be wise to legislate on the basis of a single case.

It is not clear to me that it would be right in principle to make the changes which my hon. Friend proposes. A member of a co-operative is bound by its decisions. I understand that the procedure for changing the status of the housing co-operative to fully mutual was correctly followed, including making sure that all the members of the co-operative were aware that by changing from a non fully mutual housing co-operative to a fully mutual one they would lose the right to buy. If there were any doubt About the way the procedures were followed, doubtless recourse to the courts is available. The Housing Corporation, however, has undertaken to ask housing co-operatives when they apply to be registered as fully mutual whether there are any right-to-buy claims outstanding. If there are, the corporation will seek to ensure that they are cleared up satisfactorily and that no tenant who wishes to exercise the right to buy and has claimed it will lose that right.

I do not know whether that will help my hon. Friend with his case, but it will deal with the problem in future, and I hope that he will withdraw the new clause on that basis.

On the basis of my hon. Friend's reply, I will he able to get in touch with the Housing Corporation to ascertain the facts of the case.

I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.

Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.

Schedule 13

Enactments Repealed

Amendments made: No. 64, in page 119, line 32, column 3, leave out 'Section 68' and insert—

'Sections 68 and 69'

No. 65, in page 119, line 47, column 3, at end insert—

`Schedule 12.'

No. 251, in page 120, line 17, column 3, at beginning insert—

	'In section 3(2) the words "of housing associations maintained under this section".
	In section 18(3) the words from "and the Corporation" onwards.'.

No. 66, in page 120, line 51, column 3, at beginning insert—

'Section 7.'

No. 252, in page 120, line 58, column 3, leave out '15 and' insert '14 to'.

No. 253 in page 121, line 28 at end insert—

'1988 c.00.	The Housing (Scotland) Act 1988.	Section 4(4)
		Schedule 3.
		In Schedule 9, paragraph 5(b).'.
		—[Mr. Waldegrave.]

Title

Amendment made: No. 239, in Title, line 3, after '1976', insert—

`to establish a body, Housing for Wales, having functions relating to housing associations'.—[Mr. Waldegrave.]

Order for Third Reading read.

[Queen's Consent, on behalf of the Crown, and Prince of Wales's Consent, on behalf of the Duchy of Cornwall, signified.]

11.50 pm

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.

This is one of the most important of the Government's Bills and one with which I am exceedingly proud to be associated—[Interruption.] The normal squeaks and groans of a party being dragged slowly into the latter half of the 20th century are all too clearly audible from Labour Members. We have already noticed the Leader of the Opposition dragging along behind our chariot. He is already moving. In due course he will take the trouble to explain matters to some of his hon. Friends who listen with their mouths.

Everyone knows that it is a scandal that there are 500,000 or so empty properties in the private sector in Britain and that a large number of the properties are empty because of the workings of the Rent Acts, one of the other unpleasant aspects of which are the practices of the sort of person to whom the hon. Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) referred. The people about whom the hon. Gentleman bellowed are products of the legislation that the hon. Gentleman supports. In conditions of scarcity and black markets, such people are produced.

At last we are introducing a sensible measure to bring private rented accommodation back into use, to drive the bad money out with proper investment in good housing by serious investors who will manage their housing properly. That will help the mobility of labour and the homeless about whom the Labour party claim to be so full of care. It will help the young and all those who are excluded by the present failure of the housing market.

We are bringing the housing association movement into a new system whereby it will be able to borrow on the markets the money that is available to provide more social housing. That is absolutely right and is supported by all those who have thought about the matter for a moment.—[Interruption.]

The cause of all the noise and uproar from the Labour party and which has the Labour party running scared is that we will be going into some of the badly managed council estates with the housing action trusts and we will be showing the council tenants that it is possible to manage the properties properly and that there are better ways of managing housing than they are used to in boroughs such as Southwark, to which the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) referred. After a forthright programme of improvements on arrears, that borough has managed to increase them by 35 per cent. Another campaign like that and the borough's housing bill will be enormous.

The Labour party has made the most racket and least progress in its arguments about the fact that we are giving a new right to tenants. What frightens the Labour party most is that the tenants who want to escape will be allowed to do so. That is not my phrase; it is from a paper produced in the London borough of Lambeth. It said, "If we are not careful and do not start looking after property properly, we may find the tenants escaping to housing associations." That will be satisfactory for those tenants.

I make one prediction. When the Bill has been on the statute book for a while, in spite of all the witty remarks from the hon. Member for Brent, South (Mr. Boateng), all the sedentary interventions from the hon. Member from Walsall, North, the puns from the hon. Member for Cardiff, West (Mr. Morgan) and the rest of the battery of deterrents that have been used against the Bill, the Labour party will find that there are good things about it. After a year or two, the Transport and General Workers Union will accept it and it will become Labour party policy.

The hon. Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen) expressed his understandable concern about BISF houses not being designated as defective. I sympathise with him as I have similar problems with houses, though not of that design, in my constituency. I am perfectly willing to discuss the problem with him, but I do not want him to believe that we shall easily add anything to the defective housing list. There may, however, be other ways of giving help, and I should be glad to talk to him about housing investment programe allocations.

We are sending to the House of Lords—I hope for their Lordships' approval—one of the flagship Bills of this Parliament. It is a Bill of which, in the long term, the House will be exceedingly proud.

11.56 pm

The Government will regret the Bill. They are dragging housing back into the 19th century. They have forgotten that local authorities built us out of the slums of the 19th century and the housing crises after the two world wars.

The Bill has broken the consensus on housing and threatens to divide the housing association movement. It has put private tenants at risk. I warn the Government that they are putting many private tenants at risk, and they know it. They have put public tenants at risk. They have frightened them with their proposals to undermine local democracy and the way in which the voting system operates. They have made a mockery of any claims about the democratic process of giving people a right to choose a different landlord. When they first floated this idea, we said, "We do not mind tenants having a right to choose a different landlord, but if that is a right it should apply to the private sector and where there is a non-resident landlord." The argument should be about the standards of management of housing.

In the small print of the Bill one finds that there is a voting system that allows the dead to vote and allows empty properties to be counted as a vote in favour of a transfer. Need we wonder why people are angry about the Bill's proposals?

At best, the Bill is irrelevant to the housing needs of this country; at worst it is catastrophic and will create a crisis to which even this Government will have to respond.

The Government have talked about choice. What choice does a person have who is living in a cardboard box barely a few hundred yards from here? What choice have people who have been taken in as homeless by local authorities—whose number has doubled since the Government took office? What choice does a child have who spends two or three years in bed-and-breakfast accommodation? Bed-and-breakfast accommodation hardly existed in anything like its present form until the Government took office. It did not exist under previous Conservative or Labour Governments, but, by God, it exists under this Government in a far worse form than ever before.

What chance does anybody have, with the present house price inflation, to get a house that they can afford if their salary is relatively low? What chance do they have to trade up if they have had children and need a larger home? While house price inflation rockets out of control, what chance does anybody have of renting at market rents when in certain areas they are known to be at least £100 per week and rising? All that the Government can say is that they will increase housing benefit. We know that they have cut it eight times already and propose to do so again.

The Bill will be a Rachman's charter. One saw panic on Minister's faces when the business enterprise scheme was introduced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in a desperate attempt to get more private money into the private sector, but with no safeguards worth mentioning. Just as in 1957, when the controls were taken off and Rachman emerged, so these days there has been a dramatic loss of private property. Half a million homes have gone from the private rented sector in the past eight years—more than at any other time, except for just after 1957. I sadly predict that the people will regret the Bill and ultimately, thank heavens, so will the Government. That may be one of the few good things to come from it.

12 midnight

When the numbers of the homeless in Britain were at their highest ever, the Government came to the House with a Bill that did not once mention the homeless. Since November, we have spent a long time trying to make a bad Bill a little better. There have been more amendments than the House could properly cope with on Report. The Government resisted and said, "We do not need time. It can be rushed through. It will be all right." Even now, we have only just begun to expose the weakness and feebleness of the Government's position.

For private tenants who seek security, the Government will give them less security and higher rents. For the housing association movement which wanted a guarantee of independence, free from the public sector and from the private sector, we see a Government ever more determined to push it into the private sector's arms. With housing action trusts, local authorities that are battling to deal with the needs of past and future tenants are told by the Government, "We are coming in. We shall take over what property of yours we want and, if necessary, you will pay us to do so, even if you have no say."

The Government say that they are giving council tenants a choice. The only way they can do that is by producing a voting system that does not exist even behind the iron curtain. Last Thursday, the Prime Minister naively said:

"I thought that we arranged that it was a majority of those voting".—[Official Report, 23 June 1988; Vol 135, c. 1257.]

But the Secretary of State and the Department of the Environment had blinded the Prime Minister with their science. They have gone back on her word of last June. They have put into the Bill a provision that clearly means that people can find their property taken away from them, even though no one may have voted for that to happen.

In the year when the Budget gives to the rich, when the poll tax saves thousands of pounds on the houses of Cabinet members and when the Government's legislation screws the homeless and those dependent on social security, giving them less money, people at the bottom of the housing ladder hear the Government say, "Trust us, because we trust the market." We would rather trust people to tell us what they want. The opportunity for agreement on how we house our nation should have been taken. After the Bill, the people will be as before—two nations, the well housed and the rest—and the Government will have increased the numbers of the rest, their pain and suffering. We shall vote against this disgraceful Bill because it is a legacy of an uncaring, unsympathetic and callous Government.

Question put, That the Bill be read the Third time:—

The House divided: Ayes 231, Noes 168.

Division No. 383]	[12.03 am
AYES
Aitken, Jonathan	Franks, Cecil
Alexander, Richard	Freeman, Roger
Alison, Rt Hon Michael	Gardiner, George
Allason, Rupert	Garel-Jones, Tristan
Amess, David	Gill, Christopher
Arbuthnot, James	Goodhart, Sir Philip
Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)	Goodlad, Alastair
Arnold, Tom (Hazel Grove)	Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles
Ashby, David	Gow, Ian
Aspinwall, Jack	Grant, Sir Anthony (CambsSW)
Atkins, Robert	Greenway, Harry (Ealing N)
Baker, Rt Hon K. (Mole Valley)	Greenway, John (Ryedale)
Baker, Nicholas (Dorset N)	Gregory, Conal
Baldry, Tony	Griffiths, Sir Eldon (Bury St E')
Batiste, Spencer	Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)
Bendall, Vivian	Grist, Ian
Bennett, Nicholas (Pembroke)	Ground, Patrick
Benyon, W.	Grylls, Michael
Biffen, Rt Hon John	Hamilton, Hon Archie (Epsom)
Boscawen, Hon Robert	Hampson, Dr Keith
Boswell, Tim	Hanley, Jeremy
Bottomley, Peter	Hargreaves, A. (B'ham H'll Gr')
Bottomley, Mrs Virginia	Hargreaves, Ken (Hyndburn)
Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)	Harris, David
Bowis, John	Haselhurst, Alan
Boyson, Rt Hon Dr Sir Rhodes	Hawkins, Christopher
Brandon-Bravo, Martin	Hayes, Jerry
Brazier, Julian	Hayward, Robert
Brooke, Rt Hon Peter	Heddle, John
Brown, Michael (Brigg & Cl't's)	Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael
Bruce, Ian (Dorset South)	Hicks, Mrs Maureen (Wolv' NE)
Buck, Sir Antony	Hicks, Robert (Cornwall SE)
Budgen, Nicholas	Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L.
Burns, Simon	Hind, Kenneth
Burt, Alistair	Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm)
Butcher, John	Holt, Richard
Butler, Chris	Hordern, Sir Peter
Butterfill, John	Howarth, Alan (Strat'd-on-A)
Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)	Howell, Rt Hon David (G'dford)
Carrington, Matthew	Hughes, Robert G. (Harrow W)
Carttiss, Michael	Hunt, David (Wirral W)
Chalker, Rt Hon Mrs Lynda	Hunter, Andrew
Channon, Rt Hon Paul	Irvine, Michael
Chope, Christopher	Jack, Michael
Clark, Hon Alan (Plym'th S'n)	Janman, Tim
Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford)	Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)
Clarke, Rt Hon K. (Rushcliffe)	Jones, Robert B (Herts W)
Colvin, Michael	Jopling, Rt Hon Michael
Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest)	Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine
Cope, Rt Hon John	Key, Robert
Couchman, James	King, Roger (B'ham N'thfield)
Cran, James	Knowles, Michael
Currie, Mrs Edwina	Latham, Michael
Curry, David	Lawrence, Ivan
Davies, Q. (Stamf'd & Spald'g)	Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark
Davis, David (Boothferry)	Lloyd, Sir Ian (Havant)
Day, Stephen	Maclean, David
Devlin, Tim	Meyer, Sir Anthony
Dickens, Geoffrey	Miscampbell, Norman
Dicks, Terry	Moate, Roger
Dorrell, Stephen	Morris, M (N'hampton S)
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James	Neale, Gerrard
Dover, Den	Nelson, Anthony
Durant, Tony	Neubert, Michael
Dykes, Hugh	Nicholls, Patrick
Eggar, Tim	Nicholson, David (Taunton)
Emery, Sir Peter	Nicholson, Emma (Devon West)
Evans, David (Welwyn Hatf'd)	Onslow, Rt Hon Cranley
Evennett, David	Page, Richard
Fallon, Michael	Paice, James
Farr, Sir John	Parkinson, Rt Hon Cecil
Favell, Tony	Patnick, Irvine
Field, Barry (Isle of Wight)	Patten, Chris (Bath)
Fookes, Miss Janet	Patten, John (Oxford W)
Forman, Nigel	Pawsey, James
Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)	Peacock, Mrs Elizabeth
Forth, Eric	Porter, Barry (Wirral S)

Porter, David (Waveney)	Taylor, Ian (Esher)
Portillo, Michael	Taylor, John M (Solihull)
Price, Sir David	Taylor, Teddy (S'end E)
Raffan, Keith	Tebbit, Rt Hon Norman
Raison, Rt Hon Timothy	Temple-Morris, Peter
Redwood, John	Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N)
Rhodes James, Robert	Thorne, Neil
Riddick, Graham	Thornton, Malcolm
Ridley, Rt Hon Nicholas	Thurnham, Peter
Roberts, Wyn (Conwy)	Townend, John (Bridlington)
Roe, Mrs Marion	Tracey, Richard
Rost, Peter	Tredinnick, David
Rumbold, Mrs Angela	Trippier, David
Ryder, Richard	Twinn, Dr Ian
Sackville, Hon Tom	Vaughan, Sir Gerard
Sainsbury, Hon Tim	Waddington, Rt Hon David
Sayeed, Jonathan	Wakeham, Rt Hon John
Scott, Nicholas	Waldegrave, Hon William
Shaw, David (Dover)	Walden, George
Shaw, Sir Giles (Pudsey)	Waller, Gary
Shaw, Sir Michael (Scarb')	Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)
Shephard, Mrs G. (Norfolk SW)	Warren, Kenneth
Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)	Watts, John
Shersby, Michael	Wells, Bowen
Sims, Roger	Wheeler, John
Skeet, Sir Trevor	Whitney, Ray
Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)	Widdecombe, Ann
Soames, Hon Nicholas	Wiggin, Jerry
Speller, Tony	Wilkinson, John
Spicer, Sir Jim (Dorset W)	Winterton, Mrs Ann
Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)	Winterton, Nicholas
Squire, Robin	Wolfson, Mark
Stanbrook, Ivor	Wood, Timothy
Steen, Anthony	Woodcock, Mike
Stern, Michael	Young, Sir George (Acton)
Stevens, Lewis	Younger, Rt Hon George
Stewart, Andy (Sherwood)
Stewart, Ian (Hertfordshire N)	Tellers for the Ayes:
Stokes, Sir John	Mr. David Lightbown and Mr. Peter Lloyd.
Stradling Thomas, Sir John
Summerson, Hugo

NOES
Abbott, Ms Diane	Cousins, Jim
Adams, Allen (Paisley N)	Crowther, Stan
Allen, Graham	Cryer, Bob
Alton, David	Cunliffe, Lawrence
Archer, Rt Hon Peter	Dalyell, Tam
Armstrong, Hilary	Davies, Ron (Caerphilly)
Ashley, Rt Hon Jack	Dixon, Don
Ashton, Joe	Dobson, Frank
Banks, Tony (Newham NW)	Doran, Frank
Barnes, Harry (Derbyshire NE)	Dunnachie, Jimmy
Battle, John	Dunwoody, Hon Mrs Gwyneth
Beckett, Margaret	Eastham, Ken
Beith, A. J.	Evans, John (St Helens N)
Bennett, A. F. (D'nt'n & R'dish)	Ewing, Mrs Margaret (Moray)
Bermingham, Gerald	Field, Frank (Birkenhead)
Bidwell, Sydney	Fields, Terry (L'pool B G'n)
Blair, Tony	Fisher, Mark
Blunkett, David	Flannery, Martin
Boateng, Paul	Foot, Rt Hon Michael
Boyes, Roland	Foster, Derek
Bradley, Keith	Foulkes, George
Bray, Dr Jeremy	Fraser, John
Brown, Nicholas (Newcastle E)	Fyfe, Maria
Buchan, Norman	Garrett, John (Norwich South)
Caborn, Richard	George, Bruce
Callaghan, Jim	Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John
Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE)	Gordon, Mildred
Cartwright, John	Gould, Bryan
Clark, Dr David (S Shields)	Graham, Thomas
Clarke, Tom (Monklands W)	Grant, Bernie (Tottenham)
Clay, Bob	Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S)
Clelland, David	Griffiths, Win (Bridgend)
Clwyd, Mrs Ann	Grocott, Bruce
Cohen, Harry	Harman, Ms Harriet
Cook, Frank (Stockton N)	Healey, Rt Hon Denis
Corbett, Robin	Heffer, Eric S.
Corbyn, Jeremy	Henderson, Doug

Hinchliffe, David	O'Neill, Martin
Hogg, N. (C'nauld & Kilsyth)	Orme, Rt Hon Stanley
Holland, Stuart	Patchett, Terry
Hood, Jimmy	Pendry, Tom
Howarth, George (Knowsley N)	Pike, Peter L.
Howell, Rt Hon D. (S'heath)	Powell, Ray (Ogmore)
Howells, Geraint	Primarolo, Dawn
Hughes, John (Coventry NE)	Quin, Ms Joyce
Hughes, Sean (Knowsley S)	Radice, Giles
Hughes, Simon (Southwark)	Randall, Stuart
Janner, Greville	Reid, Dr John
Jones, Ieuan (Ynys Môn)	Richardson, Jo
Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald	Robinson, Geoffrey
Kirkwood, Archy	Rogers, Allan
Leadbitter, Ted	Rooker, Jeff
Leighton, Ron	Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)
Lestor, Joan (Eccles)	Rowlands, Ted
Lewis, Terry	Sedgemore, Brian
Livsey, Richard	Sheldon, Rt Hon Robert
Lloyd, Tony (Stretford)	Shore, Rt Hon Peter
Lofthouse, Geoffrey	Short, Clare
McAllion, John	Skinner, Dennis
McAvoy, Thomas	Smith, Andrew (Oxford E)
McCartney, Ian	Smith, C. (Isl'ton & F'bury)
Macdonald, Calum A.	Soley, Clive
McFall, John	Spearing, Nigel
McKelvey, William	Steel, Rt Hon David
McLeish, Henry	Steinberg, Gerry
Madden, Max	Stott, Roger
Mahon, Mrs Alice	Straw, Jack
Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)	Turner, Dennis
Martlew, Eric	Vaz, Keith
Maxton, John	Wall, Pat
Meacher, Michael	Wallace, James
Meale, Alan	Wardell, Gareth (Gower)
Michael, Alun	Wareing, Robert N.
Michie, Bill (Sheffield Heeley)	Wigley, Dafydd
Michie, Mrs Ray (Arg'l & Bute)	Williams, Rt Hon Alan
Millan, Rt Hon Bruce	Williams, Alan W. (Carm'then)
Mitchell, Austin (G't Grimsby)	Wilson, Brian
Moonie, Dr Lewis	Winnick, David
Morgan, Rhodri	Wise, Mrs Audrey
Morley, Elliott	Worthington, Tony
Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon)	Wray, Jimmy
Mowlam, Marjorie	Young, David (Bolton SE)
Mullin, Chris
Murphy, Paul	Tellers for the Noes:
Nellist, Dave	Mr. Frank Haynes and Mrs. Llin Golding.
O'Brien, William

Question accordingly agreed to.

Bill read the Third time, and passed.

Volume 136: debated on Monday 27 June 1988

Amendments Consequential On The Establishment Of Housing For Wales

The Land Commission Act 1967

The Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967

The Income And Corporation Taxes Act 1970

The Land Corporation Act 1973

The House Of Commons Disqualification Act 1975

The Statutory Corporations (Financial Provisions) Act 1975

The Development Of Rural Wales Act 1976

The Rent (Agriculture) Act 1976

The Rent Act 1977

The Criminal Law Act 1977

The National Health Service Act 1977

The Local Government, Planning And Land Act 1980

The Finance Act 1981

The Housing Act 1985

The Landlord And Tenant Act 1987

The Income And Corporation Taxes Act 1988

Clause 115

Short Title, Commencement And Extent

New Clause 21

Compensation For Misrepresentation Or Concealment

New Clause 29

Duty Of Housing Corporation And Housing For Wales In Relation To Racial Discrimination

New Clause 30

Guidance As To Management Of Accommodation By Registered Housing Associations

"Issue Of Guidance By The Corporation

New Clause 31

Succession To Assured Periodic Tenancy By Spouse

New Clause 44

Power Of Corporation To Provide Legal Assistance To Tenants After Disposal

New Clause 45

Power Of Corporation To Provide Legal Assistance To Tenants In Relation To Acquisitions

New Clause 46

Service Of Information, Advice And Assistance

New Clause 47

Consents To Disposals Of Housing Stock And Application Of Receipts

New Clause 48

Schemes For Payments To Assist Local Housing Authority Tenants To Obtain Other Accommodation

New Clause 4

Restriction On Letting Etc, Of Certain Houses In National Parks Etc

New Clause 5

Restriction On Disposal Of Dwelling-Houses In National Parks Etc Acquired Under The Right To Buy

New Clause 9

Grounds For Possession: Racial Harassment

New Clause 39

Limitation Of Assured Tenancies To Previously Empty Property

New Clause 49

Protection Of Right To Buy

Schedule 13

Enactments Repealed

Title