Void Premises (Hansard, 27 February 1996)

§ Mr. Hartley Booth (Finchley)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to require the owners of property which has been empty for more than three months to make the reasons for the vacancy public; to make such property available in certain specified circumstances; and for connected purposes. I venture to suggest that housing need is at the top of the list of constituents' complaints and worries brought to our surgeries. I happen to believe that the housing problem goes far beyond that of the "void premises" in the Bill's title, and amounts to a scandal.

There are 150,000 homeless people in this country—92,000 are statutorily homeless, 46,000 are in short lets, 8,000 are on the streets, and 5,000 are in bedsits—yet there are 800,000 empty homes. If my modest arithmetic is correct, there are five empty homes for every homeless person. What one hears from officials is incorrect. Many of the empty homes are in areas of greatest need. We must marry the two sides of the matter. That scandal is an indictment of us all, and it is incumbent on us all to deal with it. My Bill proposes to do just that.

The Government have recognised the problem, and have introduced measure after measure to deal with it. During part of the period since 1979, the number of void premises fell. Unfortunately, in three of the past four years the number of void properties rose. Sadly, the number of Government-owned void properties—especially those owned by the Ministry of Defence—has risen faster than any other group of void premises.

My Bill addresses two parts of the problem. Among the people who own the 700,000 void properties in the private sector, we need to enhance persuasion. Through the Empty Homes Agency—an excellent body, which is partly funded by the Government—three or four local authorities, including Reading, Southampton and Brighton, have empty homes strategies. They employ an empty homes officer—that is excellent—who persuades people that their empty private homes should be used, that they are losing £5,000 a year by not using them, and that 95 per cent. of all tenancies are successful. Those persuasive techniques are working. Recently, 200 homes were brought back into use in Reading as a result, for example.

What if persuasion fails? My Bill proposes that every local authority should have a void strategy and employ an officer to deal with the disposal of voids—first by identifying them, and then by persuading people to use them.

In addition, 102,000 empty properties are owned by the taxpayer—the public sector. It is totally unacceptable to permit that. Many of those properties have been empty for a long time. My Bill—it follows a paper that was kindly published by the Adam Smith Institute two years ago, and an entirely successful Government trial project in Clapton Park estate in Hackney—proposes that people on waiting lists in local authority areas should have the right to slap a notice on the doorstep of local authority premises or Government agencies when they have spotted that the homes have been lying wasted and idle for three months or more.

That notice of negligence to public bodies should say: "We, Mr. and Mrs. Bloggs, identify your void property. We call on you to use it, start to repair it, or condemn it 737 within 21 days." If it is used or repairs are begun within 21 days, we have all succeeded. Under the Bill, if that local authority or the Ministry of Defence fails to act within the designated period, one more homeless person will have found a home. Conservative Members, who always applaud efficiency, will sigh with relief, and we especially welcome any relief of homelessness.

If the idea comes to fruition, we shall see not only how homelessness can be tackled in a new way, but that people can be trusted. Beyond the first day when the new tenants go in, they will be told that they must deal with dilapidations and repair the premises. Of course they must, and we should trust them to do that. All over the world, and in our country too, trusting the people in such policies as sweat equity, staircasing and homesteading has brought benefits and has been proved sensible and useful.

I ask the House to accept my Bill, so that all the necessary steps can be taken. Sometimes it is necessary for the House to think the unthinkable. My proposals combine the best of ingredients—common sense, trusting the people, and using national resources better for a good cause.