Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

Lord Lucas: As I believe my noble friend Lord Gisborough has realised, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State is not at all amused at the thought of having to spend his time in the way that my noble friend suggests that he should. My right honourable friend believes, and I think quite rightly, that his input should be restricted to the code of practice that he will have to approve using powers under Clause 74. That code will be evidential in court proceedings. We believe that it is appropriate for the court to decide on individual cases which are brought before it. With that thin comfort I hope that my noble friend will be able to withdraw his amendment.

Lord Gisborough: I thank my noble friend for that answer which does not answer the fact that planning applications and building controls do not involve the court system. However, it is too late to dispute it now. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 74 agreed to.

Clause 75 agreed to.

Clause 76 [Minor amendments]:

Baroness Hamwee moved Amendment No. 242A:

Page 49, line 30, at end insert ("or unless the individual is to take up residence in order to care for a person residing in it who requires such assistance.").

The noble Baroness said: Clause 76 deals with Section 355(1) of the Housing Act 1985, which is a direction limiting the number of occupants. This amendment proposes that in the case of a carer who comes into the premises to care for someone who already resides there and who needs assistance, the carer is deemed not to exist for the purposes of calculating the number of occupants. I imagine that the number of times when this situation arises must be very limited indeed and these matters are always something of a balance. It has been put to me that in this case the interests of the individual requiring care should override the general proposition. I beg to move.

Lord Lucas: We feel that if premises are suitable for only 10 people then they are suitable for only 10 people. If one introduced an eleventh to care for one of the others the person being cared for might gain some net benefit, but only at the expense of other residents' convenience and, more importantly, safety. We believe

11 Jun 1996 : Column 1705

that the limits on the population in HMOs are important and should be respected, although we understand the concerns expressed by the noble Baroness.

Baroness Hamwee: I believe that this is a matter of balance, and sometimes it is a difficult balance. I will not pursue the matter at this stage. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 76 agreed.

Clause 77 agreed.

[Amendment No.242B not moved.]

Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish: I beg to move that the House do now resume.

11 Jun 1996 : Column 1706

Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

House resumed.

Arbitration Bill [H.L.]

Community Care (Direct Payments) Bill [H.L.]

Returned from the Commons agreed to with amendments; it was ordered that the Commons amendments be printed.

        House adjourned at twenty-seven minutes past eleven o'clock.

Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page