| Housing Bill
|
|
Mr. Davey: The hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings seeks to put himself in the centre of British politics and to suggest that the Liberal Democrats have moved to the extreme right. I can assure him that that is not the case. On this situation we wish to—[Interruption.] Was the Minister wanting to say that he has the mantle of the far right on this Committee? I somehow doubt it. The purpose of amendments Nos. 217 and 218 is to encourage us to think seriously about the extra responsibilities and duties that will be placed on both local authorities and landlords. The Government propose that the review of housing conditions should take place at least once a year. I am not sure that that is right; our proposal of at least once every two years would give a better balance. It is right that we discuss this matter. In their document on freedoms and flexibilities for local government, the Government say that they are trying to remove the burdens, the regulations and the reports required, but in this case they seem to be adding a new one. If our amendments are read together, it is clear that we are suggesting that within a year of the implementation of the Bill, every local housing authority will carry out a review and produce a report, so we will make rapid progress with the new system. However, after that first report has been Column Number: 070 produced, it does not seem necessary to repeat that exercise every twelve months. I am not sure that the use of officer time and taxpayers' money and the burden that it might impose on landlords and on tenants are justified.I would like to understand why the Government have chosen that approach. We do not seek to undermine the system; we embrace it and support it. However, we ask how often the reviews of housing conditions in a local authority area are really needed. Important as they are, I do not think that they are needed once a year—that seems slightly over the top. The hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings may think that I am moving far to the right with that statement, but I am trying to occupy the centre ground. Mr. Syms: This is very important part of the Bill. With a review at least once a year, the authority will tally up everything that has happened—the number of prosecutions under the terms of the various parts of the Bill, for instance—and produce some sort of report about the condition of the licensing of the HMOs in their area. Clause 3(3) states that the authority must keep records, in particular for ''the appropriate national authority''—the Government, or the National Assembly for Wales.
4.30 pmI want to tease out of the Minister what information will be in the public domain. That is of relevance to my speech in the previous debate. When environmental health officers go into a property with score sheets and come out having done an assessment, will that be a public document? Let us say that the hon. Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale is concerned about the state of properties in her constituency. The environmental health officers of her local authority will inspect them and produce reports on all of them. As the Minister said in the previous debate, after the completion of those score sheets, conditions may be set on a particular property. They might be low-level conditions: the property might not have exposed wires, which is a high risk, or it might be cold and damp and inappropriate for young children. Would the hon. Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale be able to access through the internet or a register the inspections of all the HMOs in her constituency, or would such matters be purely between the environmental health officer and the landlord? If the latter, the documents would not be public, so somebody who was going to rent from a particular landlord would not know the precise nature of the inspection of a property or the scoring by the environmental health officer. If a system is to work in terms of risk assessment for individuals, that information must be in the public domain. If it is not in the public domain, the landlord and the busy council officers may be aware of it, and it may be in a dusty file in a dusty room in the hon. Lady's local authority, but those to whom that information may be useful—the public, the Member of Parliament, local authority councillors—will not necessarily have access. Column Number: 071 I am trying to tease out of the Minister whether there will be a big register in a local authority that contains all those reports with, perhaps at the end, a summary of what action was or was not taken. It is fairly easy to find out when enforcement action has been taken, but I presume that the point of the system is to avoid enforcement action if possible, because it is expensive and because people are in danger until that course of action is followed through, which can take a long time. What we want is somebody to go in, do the scoring and come up with recommendations, and for the landlord to say that they will immediately go away and carry them out because they are a good landlord—and because if they are not a good landlord they may be prosecuted or have conditions put on their property. The Bill sets down that there should be the annual report—which may be a nicely published document with glossy pictures—and there might be information that the Government is required to answer to questions from Members of Parliament who are interested in housing, but we do not know how the fruits of all the work of environmental health officers surveying properties will be put in the public domain or made available to those within a local community. Mr. David Kidney (Stafford) (Lab): The hon. Gentleman is making good points. It is important that the public are able to inspect the records. The Bill suggests that the local authority must keep records. The present relevant Act of Parliament is the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, which will be superseded on 1 January next year by the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Those records must be made public, unless there is a reason to exempt them. I cannot think of a reason why they would be exempted: can the hon. Gentleman? While the hon. Gentleman is thinking about that, I will mention that he is supporting amendments tabled by the hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings that want to go further by making the local authority carry out a review every year and publish every action that it is going to take. I presume that he does not want there to be any exemptions to that. Mr. Syms: My hon. Friend and I are trying to tease out the Government's proposals, not ours. The proposed system is complex and we are trying to understand how it will operate—and I think that, on occasion, the Minister is trying to understand that, too. If an environmental health officer makes a report and gives it to a landlord, it is reasonable that that landlord be given time to put matters right. One would not want to put a bad or critical report on a website or in a register from day one, without the individual concerned having had time to put matters right. If one goes around looking for things, one is bound to find something wrong, even in properties managed by responsible landlords. In order to be fair to landlords and provide all the relevant information, any appropriate action taken by a landlord should, if possible, be added to the report. For example, one could say in the report, ''This is the score, these are the Column Number: 072 problems; this is what was done.'' Otherwise, people may be scared by a lot of out-of-date information that is not relevant to the property because action has been taken. We need the whole picture.I am trying to tease out of the Minister what information will be available, at what point. Will the information be available in a form that will enable one to go to the local authority office and either tap into it via a computer or look at it in a paper volume? For example, someone may want to peruse reports on 50 houses in multiple occupation in Morecambe because they want to move to a safe place with a good record. The advantage of the system is that it may become more apparent who the bad and good landlords are. That may be part a young couple's informed choice on where they live. Will the Minister tell us what information is likely to be in the public domain, and what format it will be in? What is fair both to landlords—we ought to be fair to them—and those seeking to occupy their properties? People may spend a lot of money assessing properties. If the relevant information is a big secret, the objective of the system, which is to make properties safe for families and individuals, will not be met. Keith Hill: Clause 3 is a general provision that requires local housing authorities to keep housing conditions in their areas under annual consideration, with a view to determining what action they should take. The provisions clause 3(2)(a) and (b) set out possible courses of action to deal with hazards identified under the health and safety rating system. The provisions in paragraphs (c) and (d), which declare renewal areas and provide financial assistance for home repair and improvement respectively are more general measures that stand independent of the Bill. The provisions are designed simply to ensure that local authorities consider the condition of the properties in their areas. We are eager for local housing authorities to develop housing strategies and we encourage them to have a view on which properties they ought to prioritise for inspection. We are not a regulatory Government; we are unrepentantly new Labour. I do not wish to load anything more than that on authorities in this context. Conversely, and in response to amendment No. 218, neither do I want to weaken that requirement. This is a bizarre turn of events: the Liberal Democrats, of all people, are in non-regulatory mode and the Conservatives, judging by the comments made by the hon. Member for Poole, are in passionate freedom of information mode. The succinct answer to the hon. Gentleman's question about the public availability of the assessments and documents is: I do not know. There may be data protection issues. I will come back to him and the Committee on that question. I can, however, reassure the hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings, who talked about the value of authorities publishing an annual report on housing in their district as a useful device to provide clarity for landlords, that there will be plenty of Column Number: 073 guidance to ensure that landlords understand the new system and the powers of the local authority.Amendment No. 180 requires authorities to publish details of their intentions before introducing discretionary licensing. The hon. Gentleman did not dwell on the matter, but I presume that he had in mind what the Bill calls additional licensing under part 2. I am not sure why that particular measure has been singled out for discussion from all the courses of action available to authorities. However, I draw the Committee's attention to clause 45, which requires authorities to consult those who are likely to be affected by the designation of an area, to be subject to additional licensing, and to consider any representations made in accordance with the consultation. In the light of my response, I urge the hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings to withdraw the amendments.
|
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2004 | Prepared 20 January 2004 |
