Clause
6
Heading
Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
3.30
pm
Alistair
Burt:
The debate provides for a short comment from myself
and an opportunity for the Minister to give us some sense of how
regeneration powers are going to be used. I shall bring to the
Committee’s attention some of the briefings that we have had
from outside bodies that are concerned that the housing element will
dominate the regeneration element of the new agency and worried that,
in the pursuit of targets and numbers, other things may be lost. I will
mention two or three of those
things.
The
British Urban Regeneration Association does great work, and I am sure
that it is already known to the Minister. It has a particular concern.
It
says:
“The
new agency appears to be only concerned with physical regeneration with
only passing aspiration to furthering community
development...The primary objective is physical regeneration
(housing and infrastructure, including premises necessary to provide
social and economic services)...Accordingly, all planning and
financial powers are oriented to land assembly, remediation, provision
or infrastructure, and development...It seems a missed opportunity
for an integrated approach to regeneration, where powers and planning
of physical regeneration are joined up community support services and
providers.” Perhaps
I could flesh this out a bit. In my own work in regeneration, both in
the past with city challenge and more recently in my current role, I
have been concerned—as I am sure the Minister and the whole
Committee are—with the problem that endemic poverty and
difficulties in some of our poorest estates are not necessarily
relieved simply by changing the physical infrastructure. Yes, one can
create bright, new houses, but a number of the people who have been in
the most impoverished housing have all sorts of
issues—typically, relationship breakdown, addiction, problems
with children, poor educational achievement, low aspiration and a sense
of hopelessness. Merely moving them out, reconstructing the housing and
moving them back in again will not solve those
problems.
I
have looked at the work done by my right hon. Friend the Member for
Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr. Duncan Smith). His work
with the Centre for Social Justice has looked at breakdown issues and
to what extent some of the things revealed can be tackled through
existing regeneration projects. One does not have to accept everything
that my right hon. Friend has put forward in his analysis of
“Breakdown Britain” and “Breakthrough
Britain” to recognise that objective evidence of a series of
problems suggests that physical regeneration is not
sufficient.
I
wanted to task the Minister with the issue raised by BURA. What can he
tell us about the clause 6 powers for regeneration being taken in the
broadest sense, rather than in the narrowest sense of powers purely for
land assembly and dealing with the physical aspects of regeneration?
Will the Homes and Communities Agency be able to work in an integrated
manner with other—social and community—aspects of
regeneration or are the powers and objectives of the agency solely
confined to physical regeneration? In the latter case, we would have to
look for other mechanisms to work with the agency to tackle the
problems that I have just mentioned. BURA is interested in that and
thinks that if the agency is not going to do that, it would be a missed
opportunity. I am sure that the Minister would not want to miss that
opportunity.
Mr.
Love:
The hon. Gentleman has touched on an incredibly
important point. All the evidence on urban regeneration projects for
the last 40 years has been that physical regeneration by itself will
almost inevitably fail. Does he accept that one of the best ways to
intervene to reduce the level of what is called
“residualisation” on some estates, is to provide new
housing whereby people can be moved physically from those estates to
create a more rounded community, thereby helping in the very way that
he is talking
about?
Alistair
Burt:
Absolutely. There is no question of disagreement
about that. The hon. Gentleman is right. In some of the best examples,
a combination of
changes in land use and sometimes in density can make things work
better—there can even be high density with the right sort of
public squares and open spaces—and the provision of new housing
can be the key in that respect; some terrific places are being built in
some urban areas. Manchester, and other places in the north-west, are
great examples.
The point
that the hon. Gentleman made at the beginning of his intervention is
important. More and more we are coming to realise that it is the
combination of the two things we have discussed that is crucial.
Outside bodies, who wanted us to scrutinise the creation of the agency
in the manner to which I referred at the start of the sitting,
expressed some worry, but that is not to deny that it could work very
well. However, to ensure that it concentrates on the right thing it
must bring together, within its existing terms and objectives, personal
and social regeneration and physical regeneration
The second
matter arises from one or two different sources. Again, we are not the
only ones who worry about the agency pursuing targets and the numbers
game being paramount. The brief from the Royal Institution of Chartered
Surveyors
states:
“It
is essential that a strong commitment to regeneration is retained by
the new ‘superquango’. The RICS has concerns that the
regeneration aspects of the new body could be lost in the
Government’s push to increase house building levels
significantly.”
In its
submission to the Committee, the Federation of Master Builders,
said:
“Genuine
concerns about unmet housing needs and house price inflation have meant
that the emphasis is on housing numbers. Whilst we acknowledge the need
to provide more homes there is also a risk of a return to the numbers
game which characterised housing policy in the 1950s and the
1960s.”
My
third and final point on the clause is that the federation also raises
the interesting matter of how much the new agency will be able to get
involved in improving the quality of existing housing, so that the
answers to our housing policy are based not just on the provision of
new homes. There is no doubt that new homes are needed, but there is
still the opportunity to do more with existing homes and existing areas
and the federation’s submission talks a lot about that. It
says:
“Existing
neighbourhoods, villages and towns can solve the housing crisis by
offering an estimated 18 million family sized homes, empty and
underused buildings, ready infrastructure and other small underused
spaces that have the capacity to meet the Government’s projected
housing
need.”
I
am interested in the answers to three questions: first, how will the
new agency ensure that social and physical regeneration are handled
together? Secondly, how can the Minister further reassure the Committee
and the outside bodies that made representations that it is not just a
numbers game? Thirdly, to what extent will the agency also be charged
with the need to regenerate existing neighbourhoods and communities
without new build but with existing properties, using regeneration in
that
sense?
The
Chairman:
I am probably about to make a rod for my own
back, but the hon. Gentleman referred to infrastructure. As the
provisions of clauses 6 and 7 are closely inter-related, if hon.
Members wish to refer to either or both, and to take both stand part
debates together, I shall not be too
concerned.
Andrew
George:
The circumstances have changed with your ruling,
Mr. Gale. Both the clauses deal with regeneration and
infrastructure. During the evidence sessions in December I was, as the
Minister knows, seeking evidence in the Bill that the important role
played for many years by English Partnerships would be taken forward in
this new agency. The role simply was not sufficiently spelt out. As the
hon. Member for North-East Bedfordshire said, there are concerns that
the motivation behind this is to achieve a numbers gain for the
Government with regard strictly to housing. There is a fear that,
irrespective of comments about physical infrastructure, the workshop
development role of English Partnerships and its other roles in
employment and economic regeneration will be subordinated by this Bill.
Reading clauses 6 and 7, my fear is that this remains the case. The
objectives described in clauses 6 and 7 are sufficiently vague not to
reassure me that those aspects will be
covered.
I wanted to
make a brief contribution at this point, given that I will also raise
the matter when I move amendment No. 36 to clause 54. I am concerned
that the role that English Partnerships currently plays might not be
carried forward in the Bill as presently
drafted.
Mr.
Wright:
Thank you, Mr. Gale, for that ruling,
which I think is important and shows the very close synthesis between
the two clauses. Clause 6 sets out the power of the HCA to regenerate
or develop land, to bring about the more effective use of land, and to
facilitate the regeneration or development of land or the more
effective use of land. Clause 7—which I think is one of the most
important clauses in part 1 of the Bill—enables the HCA to
provide, or facilitate the provision of,
infrastructure.
We
have had an interesting but brief debate on this, and I want to point
out that the definition of infrastructure here is the same as that used
in clause 2; that is, it includes utilities such as gas or water, and
retail or other business facilities. I expected to be criticised
because the term “infrastructure” was too wide, and so I
am pleased that we have not gone down that route. Indeed, the hon.
Member for North-East Bedfordshire has provided some welcome and
thought-provoking suggestions.
As I said
earlier, a key object of the HCA is to regenerate communities and
support their well-being. We cannot do this simply by providing the
bricks and mortar of housing. Hon. Members may recall my saying during
the oral evidence session—under threat from my boss, the
Minister for Housing, my right hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract
and Castleford—that if we simply plonk 3 million homes in a
field in the middle of nowhere, we will not have done our job. We need
sustainable communities that are inclusive, and that also have good,
sustained economic bases.
Mr.
Wright:
Ah.
[Laughter.]
Sir
George Young:
In which case, why did he reject my
amendment?
Mr.
Wright:
As soon as I said “inclusive”, I
wondered what on earth I was doing. It is a very important point that a
healthy, strong community will be sustainable. That means more than
simply homes. A range of infrastructure needs to be in
place—roads,
retail facilities and community facilities. That is why the HCA will
work with other relevant agencies to determine what infrastructure is
needed, where it is needed and when it needs to be put in place. In
most cases, the agency will facilitate the provision of this
infrastructure, but it must also be able to be a direct provider if
necessary. That is because, if the agency delivers the needed
infrastructure for a development, it may make it more viable for a
private developer to invest in the wider development area; the
agency’s provision of infrastructure would tip the development
for a private developer to provide a large element of social
housing.
I have seen
this in practice. English Partnerships has pre-funded the southern
section of the Bedford western bypass, the A41, which has opened up to
the south-west of Bedford two major development areas to which 2,250
homes have been allocated. That is exactly the sort of thing that I
imagine the agency doing.
3.45
pm
To
complement the provision of traditional transport infrastructure,
English Partnerships has also been involved in the provision of more
community-focused facilities, such as schools and health care
facilities.
Alistair
Burt:
Will the Minister use his best endeavours to
encourage English Partnerships to work with Bedford borough council to
complete the north-western section of the same bypass by using the same
skills and facilities? It goes through my constituency and it would be
a real help if the job could be done.
Mr.
Wright:
Yes, I shall move swiftly on, Mr.
Gale.
The broad
definition of infrastructure is very important and quite deliberate. It
would be unusual but not impossible for the agency to provide schools
and health care facilities to attract and ensure development. English
Partnerships has already built 11 schools, one of which, in the
Greenwich millennium village, is a primary school with an integrated
health centre. Both were operational within weeks of the first
residents moving into the village. Again, that is the sort of joined-up
thinking that the agency will be able to bring—the skills that
are necessary to provide sustainable communities that can really make a
difference to the quality of life in our country. It is exactly what I
want to see.
The hon.
Member for North-East Bedfordshire made a few important points about
the comments from the British Urban Regeneration Association. I fully
appreciate the fact that the issue is not just about physical
regeneration, and that is why the objects of the agency include the
continued well-being of communities. That is important, and it is why
the definition of infrastructure in clause 7 is broad.
I shall draw
the Committee’s attention to clause 33. I do not want to incur
your wrath, Mr. Gale, but the clause relates to community
service facilities and says that the agency
may
“encourage or develop
existing or new businesses; provide employment...provide safe and
attractive environments; prevent or reduce anti-social behaviour or
crime...provide transport services, health services, social,
religious or recreational services, or cremation or burial
services”.
There are powers already in the Bill to
ensure that we can help to produce a well-planned and sustainable
community, moving this country forward and regenerating the communities
that live in it.
Question
put and agreed to.
Clause 6 ordered to stand
part of the Bill.
Clause 7 ordered to stand
part of the Bill.
Clause
8
Powers
to deal with land
etc.
Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
Sir
George Young:
The clause gives the HCA powers to manage
and repair housing. I shall return to the point that we discussed
briefly in an earlier debate, as we are about to confer those powers on
the HCA. I must tell the Minister that if the HCA is going to be not
only the provider of resources to housing associations but a potential
competitor with them for such development, it will change the whole
relationship between the HCA and the housing association
movement.
In response
to the earlier debate, the Minister said—I hope that I am
quoting him correctly—that it would not be a prime objective of
the HCA to provide housing. I am not sure whether it should be any
objective—prime, secondary or at all. Then, under pressure, he
described a scenario in which the HCA might have to intervene, but I
was not wholly convinced, and it does not deal with the powers in
clause 8. Is it really true that the HCA will manage and repair housing
when we have the most well-developed and efficient housing association
movement of probably any country in the world?
Clause 35
specifically relates to the HCA acquiring, constructing and converting
buildings into such accommodation. The Minister needs to make it clear
exactly what the role of the HCA is. Will it be in the business of
developing, constructing, managing and repairing, or are those powers
only to be used as a last-ditch emergency when all else has failed? If
he does see the HCA as a developer, provider and landlord, that gives a
totally different complexion to the whole debate about the role of the
HCA.
I
hope that in replying to clause 8 stand part, the Minister can go a
little further than just say that it is not a prime objective of the
HCA to provide housing, and make it absolutely clear that the local
housing associations will do that, apart from in some exceptional
circumstances which he is about to
describe.
Mr.
Wright:
I think I am getting older and my knees are not
what they were. In order to catch your eye quickly, Mr.
Gale, I may need to have a knee replacement operation soon. However, I
shall do my
best to be quick. [
Interruption
.
] I was
going to say that perhaps the HCA could provide
that.
Let
me try to reassure the right hon. Gentleman and clarify what the agency
will actually do in respect of housing and regeneration. I expect that
it will do several things. It will help local authorities to develop
expertise, so that they have the concentration of skills that will
allow them to step up to the plate to ensure that they can deliver what
is necessary. It will be in a position to lever in private sector
finance and to take a strategic view of how and on which sites national
needs will be best met. It will acquire land and remediate it to the
point at which it becomes viable for a developer to take on further
development of it. It will be able to determine what needs to be done
on the ground to encourage private sector investment, and to facilitate
the appropriate action for providing
infrastructure.
However,
where the circumstances demand, the agency will be able to take a
direct role if it so wishes. Forgive me for using the same language,
Mr. Gale—I know that this might not reassure the
right hon. Gentleman—but the main thing will be to work in
conjunction with local authorities, housing associations and others to
bring forward the objects of the agency, rather than to do the work
directly itself. However, the option is there should it so
wish.
I
do not think that I have convinced the right hon. Gentleman, but, to
move on to a wider point, clause 8 is about how the HCA can work with
land, including buildings. The clause also gives the agency power to
reclaim land, which is something that English Partnerships has actively
undertaken with a great deal of success. Due to the range of activities
that the agency can undertake in respect of land, housing, plant and
machinery—for example, acquiring, improving, managing or
disposing—it will be able to adopt an innovative approach to
delivery.
Those
powers will give the agency the best incentive to make the best use of
the assets that it acquires, and there is a range of models to help it
do that. In order for the agency to fulfil its objects of improving
housing stock and regenerating or renewing areas in England, it will
need all of those
powers.
Sir
George Young:
Mr. Gale, we may have an
opportunity on clause 35 to go into this matter in more detail, but I
have to say that I do not think that such activities should be an
option for the HCA. There might be work that it has to do if there is
simply no other agency, but we will need to return later in the Bill to
its role. I hope that between now and then the Minister will be able to
go back to base and see whether he can go a little further than he has
been able to go today towards reassuring the Committee and me about the
role of the
HCA.
Question
put and
agreed to.
Clause
8
ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Further
consideration adjourned.—[Liz
Blackman.]
Adjourned
accordingly at six minutes to Four o’clock till Tuesday 15
January at half-past Ten
o’clock.
| 
