MINOR AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS (Hansard, 25 February 2002)

§ Ms Keeble
I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this we may discuss Lords amendments Nos. 12 to 14.

§ Ms Keeble
The amendments are complex, so I shall introduce them with some care. I hope that hon. Members will bear with me.
During consideration in another place, attention was drawn to gaps in the existing provisions, which give the local authority the power to accommodate certain applicants pending a review by the authority of its homelessness decision and pending an appeal to the county court on a point of law.
The policy that underlies the current provisions is that pending a review by the local authority or an appeal to the county court, the authority should have the power to accommodate applicants who have a priority need for accommodation—that is, those who are most vulnerable. We think that that is the right policy, and it accords with the central thrust of the Bill; that only this group are owed the main homelessness duty to secure accommodation.
An assessment of the current provisions reveals two main gaps in the achievement of that policy, however. The first applies in respect of those applicants who have a priority need, but are considered by the authority to have become homeless, or be threatened with homelessness, 497 intentionally and who, for whatever reason, were not provided with accommodation under the section 188 interim duty pending inquiries. That will include, for example, priority need applicants who were threatened with homelessness pending the inquiries and so did not need to be provided with accommodation. Where the authority finds that they became threatened with homelessness intentionally, the applicant may request a review of that decision and may become homeless during the course of the review. However, at present the authority has no power to accommodate in such circumstances.
The second gap applies more broadly to applicants who are pursuing an appeal to the county court. The current provisions—namely, those in section 204 of the Housing Act 1996—leave some doubt as to whether there is a power to accommodate applicants if the authority has not already exercised its power to accommodate pending the review.
Amendment No. 12 will close the first gap and provide authorities with a specific power to assist applicants who the authority have decided have priority needs but have become threatened with homelessness intentionally. The power will allow the authority to take steps to prevent homelessness or, if the applicant actually becomes homeless, to secure accommodation, pending a review of the homelessness decision.
Amendment No. 14 amends section 204 of the 1996 Act and makes it clear that, pending an appeal to the county court, the authority has a power to accommodate the same categories of applicant as it has a power to accommodate pending a review. It includes a specific reference to the new power provided by amendment No. 12. Amendment No. 14 also makes it clear that the power to accommodate an applicant pending an appeal to the county court applies whether or not the power to accommodate pending a review had been exercised.
Amendments Nos. 8 and 13 amend sections 188(3) and 200(5) respectively. Those provisions give authorities the power to continue to secure accommodation for certain applicants pending a review. The concept of being able to continue to secure accommodation limits the scope of power and is unduly restrictive. Amendments Nos. 8 and 13 therefore change that to a freestanding power to secure accommodation.
The change to section 188(3) will clarify in particular that, pending a review, authorities have the power to accommodate applicants who have priority need but have been found to be intentionally homeless. Under section 190(2)(a), such applicants must be secured accommodation for such a period as will give them a reasonable opportunity to find accommodation themselves, but that duty may end before a review of the homelessness decision has been completed. There is currently some uncertainty as to whether authorities have a power to accommodate that category of applicant during the period after the section 190(2)(a) duty has ended and until the review is completed. That is because there is no explicit provision giving a power to continue to accommodate under section 190, and it is questionable whether the power to continue to accommodate under section 188 should apply in a case where the applicant is being accommodated under section 190.
498 I should add that the local authority representative bodies were consulted and are content with the thrust of the amendments. They do not add new burdens or provisions, but largely clarify, rationalise and consolidate powers that currently exist in a variety of different places.
I hope that hon. Members agree that the amendments close the current gaps and achieve the right policy, and I commend them to the House.

§ Mr. Clifton-Brown
I challenge the Minister to repeat what she just said without notes.

§ Ms Keeble
indicated assent.

§ Mr. Clifton-Brown
As she says, these are technical amendments. Although they are complex, we broadly welcome them. They clarify the powers that are available to local authorities to accommodate applicants pending review or appeal of the homeless decision, and they respond to concerns raised by the Housing Law Practitioners Association.
As this is the last time we will be able to speak on the Bill, I crave your indulgence, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to say that the official Opposition wish the Bill good speed and hope that it will be placed on the statute book with all possible alacrity. It is needed, because homelessness is a pressing problem that affects people in the greatest need of help in our society.
I press the Government to bring forward their homelessness strategy and to introduce the statutory instrument on priority need and a Bill licensing houses in multiple occupation. Those are all essential strands of the Government's strategy for dealing with this ever-increasing problem.
Finally, I pay tribute to all those who have provided the Opposition with assistance and advice, especially Shelter, which has provided invaluable advice and has made our debate much better informed—which has, I hope, contributed to a much better Bill.

§ Mr. Don Foster
I, too, welcome the amendments, which plug several gaps that were identified by the Housing Law Practitioners Association and others.
It was perhaps slightly unwise of the Minister to nod her agreement that she would be prepared to repeat everything that she said without reference to notes. I say that not least because when Lord Falconer was similarly challenged, he said that it would not be possible, because For this, one would need a wet towel and every section of the Bill in front of one."—[Official Report, House of Lords, 15 January 2002; Vol. 630, c. 1022.]
The amendments do not entirely close all the loopholes that have been identified. Nevertheless, most people are prepared to accept that they go a long way towards doing so and are therefore welcome.
Like the hon. Member for Cotswold (Mr. Clifton-Brown), I pay tribute to the many organisations that have done the House a great service by providing briefings to all parties during our lengthy deliberations on this important Bill. I, too, wish the Bill a speedy progress to the statute book. It is much needed and many people have been arguing for it for a long time. I am delighted that it can now move rapidly to Royal Assent, and rightly so.

§ Ms Keeble
When I nodded in response to what the hon. Member for Cotswold (Mr. Clifton-Brown) was saying, I was suggesting that he was making a good joke, rather than that I could repeat all that I had said without notes. He asked about the homelessness strategy; it will be out very soon. Following on from that will be the priority needs order, setting out the new categories of people who will be entitled to housing, and other broad strategies to improve the provision of social housing and the position of people in the private sector.
People have repeatedly stated—as did the hon. Member for Bath just now—that this is the last time we shall debate this Bill, but there has been a continuous process of improving the Bill in all our discussions and debates, which shows that scrutiny in this place works. It has worked to great effect, even at this late stage, to improve the position of homeless families, children and people who are not in priority need, and of groups who previously had no help from the state with their housing.
I echo what other hon. Members have said about the enormous service that all the Officers of the House have given to us. I also echo what they have said about the importance of the Bill; it will lead to a dramatic improvement in the rights of people to housing and to housing advice. Despite some of the things that have been said, there has been all-party support for the Bill, and I look forward to seeing those rights in action out in the community.