ESTATE AGENCY WORK (Hansard, 4 April 1979)

§ The Minister of State, Department of Prices and Consumer Protection (Mr. John Fraser)
I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this we may discuss Lords amendments Nos. 2 to 6, 12, 13, 17 to 20, 24 to 26 and 34 to 50, including amendment No. 49A.

§ Mr. Fraser
For 90 years the House has tried to put on the statute book a Bill to deal with estate agents. The House of Lords has made the Bill more comprehensive. If the Bill is helped in a final burst of speed to the finishing post I should be happy if the House took all the amendments together and agreed to them all.

§ Mr. Stephen Ross (Isle of Wight)
These amendments achieve exactly what we hoped to achieve when the Bill was before the Commons. We wanted commercial and industrial property to be included. However, we were told by the Minister that such property was outside the scope of the measure and that this was consumer legislation only. Now the Bill covers a wider area and the House deserves an explanation.

§ Mr. Fraser
The hon. Member for Isle of Wight (Mr. Ross) tabled' an amendment which was not selected because, according to our rules, it was out of order. Nevertheless, the Lords amendments cover all land transactions involving a capital value and business transactions when there is a transfer of goodwill. The Bill is now a more comprehensive measure and it goes beyond 1359 the ambit of a consumer protection measure. I welcome the changes.

§ Mr. Michael Neubert (Romford)
The conciliatory attitude displayed by the Minister to the Lords amendments should assure the Bill a speedy passage. We all welcome that—certainly those who have been engaged in both sessions on the Bill. We shall feel a weight lifted from our shoulders before very long.
The amendments, which substantially widen the scope of the Bill, demonstrate the value of a second Chamber and the dedication and diligence which the noble Lords have displayed in giving the Bill thorough scrutiny, a scrutiny which may have been extended were it not for the pressure of time during the past few days.
It was not our belief that the Bill should be widened to include all property. We recognise that primarily and essentially this is a consumer protection measure. We welcome it as such. My hon. Friends and I represent a party that is dedicated to home ownership. The Bill seeks to protect house purchasers at a stage when they are most vulnerable and inexperienced, and it should be appreciated by purchasers.
The professional institutions outside the House wanted the Bill to be extended to apply to all property. Those in another place have so amended the Bill. If the Minister of State is minded to accept the amendments in the present circumstances, we can do no better than agree with him.