POWER TO GIVE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE (Hansard, 27 June 1988)

§ Mr. Nigel Spearing (Newham, South)
With the leave of the House, I recall that on 14 June the House was discussing amendment No. 313, which I had moved some time before. We now revert to that important topic, which relates to housing action trusts.
When we hear about housing action, we all think that the Government are about to make some great improvements, but, as the House knows, HATs are statutory pawns in the Bill that will enable large areas of municipal estate to be transferred to a so-called housing action trust nominated directly by the Secretary of State. HATs will not only take over properties on favourable terms—probably about half price—but will have planning powers.
I am fortunate in having been selected by you, Mr. Speaker, to move further amendments. We shall proceed to those at a fairly rapid rate. It was a pity that the Leader of the House interrupted proceedings as early as 7 pm on 14 June, which prevented us from making progress. If he had not, I would have been making this speech at about the time that he was speaking to the House. Why the Government moved the closure is a mystery. Had we continued, we could have made more progress, and I am sure that the House, including Ministers, would have been happy to do so.
Amendment No. 313 relates to HATs' powers to make grants. HATs will be able to acquire large areas of municipal property at half price without proper consultation with those whose tenancies are to be transferred. Early in the morning during the debate last week, the Secretary of State said that he would be sending letters to people in HAT areas and that they would have a chance to reply. Moreover, the Bill states that whatever action we took would be legalised by the House as consultation. We had a dispute about whether that was retrospective legislation; Opposition Members said that it was, but he said that it was not because there was fair warning. We said that would not be fair warning because we did not know what he would say in his letters to prospective tenants of the HATs, nor did we know the information that he would give or the offers that he would make.
HATs not only take over property, have planning powers and powers of a public health authority, but are empowered by the Bill to do almost anything they Bike. Clause 58 defines the primary objects of a housing trust as the effective management of housing and 23 to encourage diversity in the interests by virtue of which housing accommodation in the area is occupied"—․ in other words, to increase the range of ownership and management. Under clause 58(3)(d), a HAT can carry on any business or undertaking". HATs can acquire land compulsorily or by agreement. The HAT is acting only under the authority of central Government and replacing not only the local authority but local authority councillors' accountability to the local authority and their constituents. Because HATs can carry on any business or undertaking, they can make grants to any business or undertaking under the terms of clause 66, subsection (1) of which states: For the purpose of achieving its objects a housing action trust may, with the consent of the Secretary of State, give financial assistance to any person. My amendment deletes "person" and substitutes statutory authority or registered charity". The enormous powers wielded by a housing action trust can be used as patronage. It is clear that a trust, the members of which do not necessarily have to reside in the area and which will, in a way, be a central Government-appointed oligarchy, will have tremendous powers. It will have the powers of planning and compulsory acquisition of land and will be able to hand out money for virtually any purpose that it believes will improve the environment. A housing trust will have the power, under clause 58(1)(d) generally to secure or facilitate the improvement of living conditions in the area and the social conditions and general environment of the area. These bodies have considerable scope to display patronage.
I hope that, even if the Secretary of State cannot agree to the amendment, which he may consider too restricting, he will give some thought to amendment No. 399, which has not been selected. It requires a housing action trust to keep publicly available a register detailing grants and moneys made available. Some days ago, I dealt with the way in which the London Docklands development corporation had handed out money left, right and centre to ease its task. We feel that much of that money has not been properly distributed. This approach displaces the local authority, which is strapped for money, and introduces an undemocratic, unaccountable body which is wholly dependent on the Secretary of State and wholly under his control. The purpose of amendment No. 313 is to ensure that wide-scale handouts are confined to statutory authorities or registered charities. I hope that a register of such assistance will be made available for public inspection.

§ Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North)
This continuation of the Housing Bill debate will be of particular interest to a number of people because tonight "World in Action" will reveal the activities of one of the most notorious private landlords, Mr. Nicholas van Hoogstraten, who has been charged a number of times with violent offences against tenants. This obnoxious landlord—one of the worst—has been quoted in the press as saying, and it will probably be repeated tonight on television; I am probably ruthless and I am probably violent. That is the type of landlord who will undoubtedly come to the fore because of the Bill.
The amendment's aim is to tighten the moneys and grants made by a housing action trust. The formation of 24 HATs is undoubtedly a blow to democratic local government. Their members will be appointed by the Secretary of State and will not be subject to any form of election. Tenants will be transferred to HATs from local authority ownership without the need for them to vote or give their approval. There will be no system of voting, as is provided for in other parts of the Bill. Local authorities will simply be told by the Secretary of State that a certain number of their properties are to be transferred to housing action trusts. Tenants will have no say whatsoever. If such bodies are to be established, they should be under some control and the money should be made available to statutory bodies and registered charities.
I may be asked why I referred to Mr. van Hoogstraten. Although such people will not be involved in housing action trusts, they will be very much involved in all aspects of the privately rented sector.

§ Mr. Rhodri Morgan (Cardiff, West)
Does my hon. Friend intend to ask the Secretary of State whether Mr. van Hoogstraten has signed the anti-social landlords' charter that the Secretary of State and his departmental officials have been so anxiously trying to draw up during the last 12 weeks?

§ Mr. Winnick
That will be an interesting question to put to the Minister who is to reply to the debate. Our warnings about the type of private landlords who are likely to come to the fore—the type of gangsters and ruthless people who did not die when Rachman died in the early 1960s—are highlighted once again by the case of this notorious thug and gangster—I repeat, thug and gangster—who has probably become a millionaire by exploiting tenants. He uses violence now. He will have even more of an incentive to use violence when the Bill becomes law.
If hon. Members doubt my words and believe that I am exaggerating, they ought to watch "World in Action" this evening. It reveals the type of ruthless, gangster landlord who will be willing to exploit every possible measure in the Bill when it becomes law to harass and intimidate his tenants and use thuggery and violence against them.

§ Mr. George Howarth (Knowsley, North)
There is one way in which private landlords could become involved in housing action trusts. It may not be deliberate; it could almost be by accident. If owner-occupation, which is to be promoted by housing action trusts, fails—it will certainly fail in some of our urban areas—that will provide an opportunity for private landlords to become involved. There is a serious case in my area, involving the Stockbridge village trust. A private landlord is trying to move in, precisely because owner-occupation has failed.

§ Mr. Winnick
My hon. Friend has dealt with the very essence, in many respects, of housing action trusts. Housing action trusts will not be permanent. Properties will not be kept under their permanent management and control. Within two or three years, or even less, such properties will be transferred, but they will not be returned to local authorities, as they ought to be. They will be sold off for owner-occupation or they will be sold to various organisations or private landlords.
The Minister ought to give guarantees about the grants that are to be made by housing action trusts. They have to ensure that the type of abuses to which I have referred will not occur. However, I do not believe that any Minister can 25 give such a guarantee, bearing in mind the incentives for the type of thuggery and violence that landlords such as Mr. van Hoogstraten are only too pleased to use. The Minister has a great deal to reply to on this amendment. That applies to other amendments that are to be debated later.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mrs. Marion Roe)
I have to admit that I find it hard to imagine what more can be added to the extremely wide-ranging debate that we had a few days ago when we discussed this amendment. When I replied to the points raised by hon. Members then, I explained that housing action trusts will be able to use their power to give financial assistance only with the consent of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment.
My Department will issue a financial memorandum to the housing action trusts setting out in detail the principles and circumstances in which assistance will be given. There are many worthy purposes for which I envisage the housing action trusts offering financial assistance. These are, for example, the grant-aiding of environmental works to help to set up workshops or training schemes and improvements by householders to their homes. I cannot believe that Opposition Members do not want to see useful activities such as those being actively promoted and encouraged by the housing action trusts. As provided in schedule 6, which the House recently agreed to amend, full details of all financial assistance given by each housing action trust will be set out in the annual report submitted to Parliament.

§ Mr. Winnick
Will the Minister give way?

§ Mrs. Roe
No. I have already replied in detail to these points and think that we should get on.
I hope that the House will agree that the attempt by the amendment to restrict the housing action trusts' financial assistance to statutory authorities and registered charities is pointless. As I have explained, statutory authorities and registered charities are covered in general terms in clause 66. I invite the House to reject the amendment.