| Housing Bill
|
|
Mr. Davey: The Under-Secretary has totally satisfied me. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Mr. Hayes: I beg to move amendment No. 308, in
'(d) the number of occupiers that are not British passport holders'.
The amendment is designed to add to the criteria that a local authority must take into account when deciding whether an area is, or is likely to become, an area of low housing demand. I had two situations in mind when tabling the amendment. The first—it will be familiar to members of the Committee, as it affects various parts of the country—is of landlords who ''specialise'' in housing vulnerable people who may be temporary visitors to the United Kingdom. I think, for example, of people seeking asylum and others who are not UK passport holders and who may not necessarily be in a position to represent their own interests as effectively as one would wish, because they are not familiar with their entitlements. They are people with temporary permission to be here for various reasons—work is a good example. Ms Karen Buck (Regent's Park and Kensington, North) (Lab): Will the hon. Gentleman say how he would establish the numbers who would fulfil that criterion? Would he rely on the tried and tested methods of visual identification, or would he seek to establish some form of registration—something familiar from Germany before the last war—whereby people are asked to register whether they have a British passport before moving in to a local authority area. Mr. Hayes: The hon. Lady makes an important point. That difficulty is faced by various local authorities—including my own—that have to deal with large numbers of people who are not UK passport holders being brought in to their area for the purposes of temporary or seasonal work. Many are temporary workers with a right to be here, but who are often severely exploited by gangmasters—there is legislation before the House to license gangmasters for precisely those reasons. Such people are also exploited, sometimes unknowingly, by employers, and by landlords. Sometimes, there is an overlap between those groups. People buy properties, turn them into HMOs and ''specialise'' in dealing with vulnerable people, because they know such people are often unaware of their proper entitlements, and do not know what they can reasonably expect from a property or what sort of rent they can properly be expected to pay. Column Number: 265 There is a real problem. I will be attending a meeting on the matter at the weekend because of concerns felt by my local authority and others. Several hon. Members rose—
Mr. Hayes: I give way to my hon. Friend the Member for South-West Bedfordshire (Andrew Selous) first. Andrew Selous: I recognise my hon. Friend's point. Is he aware of the incident in Norfolk of which I was recently made aware, where the local fire brigade was brought to a house on fire and it was found that 26 Chinese people were living in a small terraced house and garage, with mattresses on the floor in the garage and throughout the house? There was a severe fire risk. I think my hon. Friend will agree that that illustrates his point. Mr. Hayes: Yes, I do recognise that situation. There was a case in my constituency in which a number of people, including children, were being housed in glasshouses. Luckily, working with the local authority—South Kesteven—we were able to have the matter dealt with. I went to the property following complaints from neighbours, and I found that the people with whom we were dealing were not the slightest bit interested in the welfare of the people they were housing. It was exploitation of the most savage kind. In the end it was dealt with, but many cases are not because they are not known about. The local authority in South Holland is struggling to find out where such things are happening. For the reasons made clear by the hon. Member for Regent's Park and Kensington, North (Ms Buck), the problem is often hidden. If one looks at a large house that one knows is being rented, it is not easy to know precisely how many people are occupying it. There are profound associated problems of overcrowding, but overcrowding is only one of many problems, which also include the conditions in which people are living, the facilities available to them, the rent they are paying and perhaps their employment arrangements. It would be remiss to ignore the fact that this problem is growing, particularly in parts of the country such as Norfolk, Lincolnshire, Worcestershire and other parts where there is a high demand for seasonal or occasional labour; remiss not to understand its connection with housing and HMOs in particular; and remiss not to take seriously the responsibility that we all have to address the issue. Dr. Brian Iddon (Bolton, South-East) (Lab): In my view this is a dangerous amendment. I represent a large Asian community and I know that there are many people—hundreds, if not thousands—living in that community who do not hold British passports but have indefinite permission to remain in this country. They prefer to hold on to the passport of their country of origin, but many of them have been here for a very long time and prefer for their own reasons—which I accept—not to apply for British citizenship. How would the hon. Gentleman differentiate between such people and those to whom he refers? Column Number: 266 Mr. Hayes: That is a fair point. I acknowledge that the hon. Gentleman is making a case for a different kind of citizen. Many people not living in the conditions that I described are not British passport holders. I think he will understand that there is a major loophole in the current regulatory arrangements in respect of people who are being outrageously treated. The problem is growing. It is partly an employment problem, which is not something that we need to consider here, but it is increasingly becoming a housing problem. My hon. Friend the Member for South-West Bedfordshire has mentioned one case and I the number of examples in my constituency is growing week by week. Although it is not easy to identify where overcrowded houses are, a couple of weeks ago in my constituency, the local authority had managed identify one, where it found people housed in the most appalling conditions. Perhaps the amendment is not the best way to deal with the problem, but it is important that we raise it. Given that the problem is growing, it would have been irresponsible not to raise it. The hon. Member for Bolton, South-East (Dr. Iddon) is right. The difficulties are twofold: one is differentiating the various groups of non-passport holders; another is identifying the conditions that I have described. That was the point made by the hon. Member for Regent's Park and Kensington, North. Perhaps the local authorities do not have sufficient powers or resources to identify such problems, but it would be irresponsible to allow them to continue. It was important that I tabled the amendment, although I acknowledge the points made by the hon. Lady and hon. Gentleman. The hon. Gentleman is right to say that many people living in reasonable circumstances choose, for various reasons, not to become passport holders. Many landlords and tenants in happy, appropriate arrangements will fall into that category. However, some irresponsible landlords are deliberately targeting vulnerable groups that are least able to defend their interests. Those people are often non-English-speakers who have a slim understanding of what is a fair wage or a fair rent and are unaware of the law that exists to protect them in various ways. There are often very young people involved. This is an emerging unspoken horror. We have had a ten-minute Bill about gangmasters and now there is a private Member's Bill on the subject. They have begun to tease out some of the issues that I have mentioned today. Vera Baird rose—
Mr. Davey rose—
Mr. Hayes: I give way to the hon. Gentleman first. Mr. Davey: I am worried and may have report the hon. Gentleman to Mr. Paul Dacre, because he seems to want to give huge extra rights to the categories of people about whom he is worried. There would be a huge cost to the taxpayer from setting up a system to try to work out who are British passport holders. Will he explain to the Committee why he wants to give Column Number: 267 preferential rights to this group, and why he thinks that holding a British passport is relevant?Mr. Hayes: It is not a question of giving extra rights to people. It is not unreasonable to ensure that in a civilised, responsible country we do not have people brought in under arrangements made by landlords and gangmasters working together. They go to the country of origin where they use well established networks to bring some of the most vulnerable people to this country, where they make housing arrangements that they know are inappropriate and inadequate. This is not about extra rights—it is about ensuring that those people are not being treated appallingly badly. Surely the hon. Gentleman is not suggesting that it is appropriate for people to continue to live in glasshouses. That is the implication of what he said. It is not a matter of giving people rights—the Liberal Democrat party, not the Conservative party, is obsessed with rights—it is about ensuring that the housing provided for people is appropriate and civilised, and that they are not being exploited. Mr. Davey rose—
Mr. Hayes: The hon. Gentleman should tread carefully before thinking that we should not do any of those things. Mr. Davey: The hon. Gentleman has not grasped the point that any rights that are needed by people who are being exploited should apply to everybody, irrespective of where they come from or what passport they hold, because they are human beings.
10.45 amMr. Hayes: I acknowledge that there are different circumstances in relation to passport holders, but it is important to highlight the issue in that context, because if we do not draw attention to it in a Bill that is about ensuring that HMOs are up to a reasonable standard and licensing them appropriately, where will we deal with it? If we know that there is a major problem with HMOs in this respect—a problem that tends to be focused in areas where there is relationship with employment patterns—and we are discussing legislation on HMOs, it would be bizarre not raise to it and say that the Government need to be cognisant of it and examine ways to deal with it. The Government have acted and I am grateful to them. Just the other day, I received a letter saying that in my own south Lincolnshire area there will be a policy of targeting some of the worst activities that are, sadly, quite prevalent there, such as the exploitation of labour in the way that I have described. So the problem is recognised, but not to link it to the housing responsibilities of local authorities would be an error. That is why I raise the issue. I do not want to go on about it as I think that I have made my point.
|
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2004 | Prepared 29 January 2004 |
