§ Mrs. MaddockI beg to move amendment No.35, in page, leave out lines 44 to 45.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Geoffrey Lofthouse)With this, it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments: No. 8, in page 95, leave out lines 1 to 17 and insert—
'(2) Unless the authority refer the application to anther local housing authority they shall secure that permanent accommodation is available for occupation by the applicant.'.No. 15, in page 95, line 4, leave out from 'authority' to end of line 20 and insert'shall take reasonable steps thereafter to secure that accommodation does not cease to be available for his occupation.'No. 34, in clause 171, page 97, leave out lines 29 to 40.No. 18, in page 97, leave out from end of line 37 to line 40 and insert
'and which it may reasonably be expected will remain available for his occupation until the authority would be entitled to carry out a review under section [Power exercisable after minimum period of duty under section 167].(2) In that case, their only duty is to furnish him with such advice and assistance as will secure that suitable accommodation is available.'.
§ Mrs. MaddockI do not intend to detain the House long. Hon. Members have been most patient, and I am most grateful for the presence of so many of them. We have rehearsed the arguments time and again. The group of amendments is about the provision of permanent accommodation for homeless people. We have already lost the vote on that issue, but if the amendments were accepted they would give priority to such provision.
If we had persuaded the Government of our case, the amendments would have provided extra ways of ensuring that the Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977 would not be undone. I realise that we are not securing Ministers' support on the issue, but what they are doing represents a retrograde step, because we are talking about homeless families.
It is amazing that, although the Government claim to represent the party of the family, what Conservative Members have voted for will mean that homeless families with children are pushed into temporary accommodation because they cannot be given permanent housing. The Minister has moved a little, and said that people can have temporary accommodation for two years; at one time the limit was one year. Nevertheless, I repeat to him and to the House what I told him in Committee: when one is two years old, two years is a long time. Moreover, survey after survey has shown the effect on young children when families have to keep moving about.
If the Government accepted our amendments, and with them the proposition that a homeless family with young children needs permanent accommodation, the position would be transformed. The housing benefit bill will soar as a result of the legislation, as more and more people are put into temporary accommodation, so the amendments, like the others that we have tabled, would be in the interests not only of homeless families but of the public purse.
1042 I shall listen with interest to the Minister, although I know that he will repeat the arguments that we have heard before. I do not doubt his sincerity. Earlier he accused me of taking too political an attitude to the issue, but the fact is that Conservative Members have been whipped through to vote against our amendments, which we consider important, especially for homeless families. I hope that when those hon. Members go home tonight they will reflect on the fact that what they have done will work against the interests of the families with young children who are some of the most vulnerable people in our society.
§ Mr. CurryI cannot accept the amendments. As the hon. Lady has acknowledged, her amendment would go against the essential purposes of the Bill. Our purpose is to create circumstances in which we can assess people's underlying needs and provide emergency help in all cases, but then provide access to secure long-term accommodation only to those who really need it, because of the benefit that that confers.
I appreciate the hon. Lady's point about families. We are concerned that their needs should be taken into account, and she will find that, in the manner in which we implement the legislation, we shall seek to bring that about. However, she will recognise the fact that she is really asking me to undo the measures at the heart of this part of the Bill. Equally, she will appreciate that I am not prepared to do that. I am sorry that we are divided on that but it is best to be honest about it.
§ Mrs. MaddockI am not at all surprised at the Minister's answer. As I said, we have rehearsed the arguments before. In the interests of moving on and because of what has been voted down, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.