§ Mr. Corfield
I beg to move Amendment No. 24, in page 15, line 28, after "years", to insert:(or such other period as may be prescribed)".With this Amendment, the Committee could conveniently take Amendment No. 26, in Clause 16, page 16, line 27; Amendment No. 30, in Clause 17, page 17, line 30; Amendment No. 32, in Clause 18, page 19, line 25; Amendment No. 33, in line 30; Amendment No. 39, in Clause 19, page 21, line 9; Amendment No. 40, in line 18; Amendment No. 44, in Clause 21, page 23, line 35; Amendment No. 45, in line 43; Amendment No. 46, in Clause 22, page 24, line 30; Amendment No. 51, in page 25, line 9; Amendment No. 57, in Clause 23, page 26, line 16; Amendment No. 59, in Clause 24, page 27, line 20, and Amendment No. 60, in line 22.
§ Mr. Corfield
These Amendments fulfil an undertaking that I gave in Committee in reply to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Aston (Mr. J. Silverman). It was suggested during that debate and on other occasions that the period a two years within which a local authority must follow up action under Part II of the Bill by the service of an improvement notice was unnecessarily long. Similarly, it was thought that perhaps the one year allowed for carrying out the work in compliance with an operative improvement notice might again be over-generous. I took the view in Committee, which I think was generally welcomed, that these periods could properly be regarded as experimental and that it would be right to take power to alter them in the light of experience.
The same applies to the period of one year within which a local authority may serve a final improvement notice at the expiration of the five-year period from the date of the declaration of the improvement area where the tenant has not consented. I should point out that the regulation-making power by which the alternative period could be prescribed, if experience shows this to be desirable, arises under Section 168(2) of the Housing Act by which this Bill by virtue of Clause 40(3) is to be construed.
§ Amendment agreed to.