§ 3.48 p.m.
§ THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES (LORD MITCHISON)My Lords, with your Lordships' permission I should like to repeat a Statement on leasehold enfranchisement which my right honourable friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government has just made in another place. Perhaps your Lordships will allow me to use his words. He said:
"This is a subject which is causing concern to many people. The Government have already announced their intention to introduce legislation to enable householders with an original lease of more than 21 years to purchase the reversion of their leasehold interest. By giving this matter priority in their legislative plans they have shown the importance they attach to it.
"But the provisions required raise important issues of policy and also some complex problems of a technical nature. For these reasons, and because of the other demands on Parliamentary time, it will necessarily be some time before a Bill can be introduced.
"Meanwhile, anxiety has been expressed by those living in houses where a long lease is due to expire. They 32 fear that they may lose the opportunity of purchasing the freehold of their homes if the lease expires before the new legislation comes into force.
"The Government sympathise with the anxieties of those whose leases are due to expire shortly; and I can give an assurance that in framing the new legislation the Government will ensure that whatever enfranchisement rights are conferred on a leaseholder whose lease is still running will similarly be conferred on a leaseholder whose lease expires after December 8,1964, and is still in occupation, on whatever terms, when the legislation comes into force.
"This assurance cannot apply, of course, to those who have lost possession of the property before the Bill comes into force. But most occupying lessees are already entitled to remain in possession when their leases expire. They cannot be displaced save on specified grounds which are examined by the county court. It is therefore likely that when the new Bill comes into effect a leaseholder whose lease has expired will still be living in his old house though the terms of his tenure will be different.
"What I have said does not apply to Scotland where the land law is very different. The Government are not aware of any anxiety in connection with house property held on long term leases in Scotland. But Scottish interests will be kept in mind while legislation for England and Wales is being prepared."
§ LORD HASTINGSMy Lords, we are much obliged to the noble Lord for giving this Statement to the House. It is, of course, a most important and significant Statement. It makes quite clear the Government's decision to proceed with the legislation which, admittedly, was promised in the gracious Speech at the beginning of this Parliament. On the other hand, I had rather hoped that, after mature consideration, this would be one of those cases where the Government would come to the conclusion that discretion was the better part of valour, and that they might, perhaps, change their mind in this respect. But we are grateful for small mercies, in that the Government have at least 33 recognised the very important issues of policy which are raised by their proposal and that there are very complex problems of a technical nature to be solved. I directed attention to one or two of these problems when I spoke during the debate on the humble Address, and I do not propose to say any more about them at the moment.
Turning to the latter half of the statement, it is made quite clear that the Government intend to preserve the rights of existing leasholders who may find their leases expiring before the Act comes into force; and since the Government have made it clear that they propose to introduce a Bill compulsorily to enfranchise these long leases of over 21 years, I would not dissent from the intention indicated in the Statement. I agree that it is a perfectly logical thing to do. Therefore, so far as that part of the Statement is concerned, I do not propose to criticise it in any way.
In the last paragraph or two, however, the Government point out the very considerable protection already afforded to leaseholders, but remind them that they can be displaced, on specified grounds, by order of the county court. That raises in one's mind the question as to whether the Government propose to alter in any way the terms of this sort of protection, which, I would remind your Lordships, is a protection for the landlord as well as for the lessee. It makes one wonder how much tampering there will be with the rights of private ownership, with the necessities for redevelopment and, of course, with the basic laws and rules of private contract. These are matters which we shall have to consider and to discuss very thoroughly when we see what legislation is brought forward. I thank the noble Lord for his Statement.
§ LORD MITCHISONMy Lords, may I thank the noble Lord for the tone of his comments and for his readiness to accept that complex legislation of this kind does require careful consideration and preparation. That is what is going on at the moment, and I think it would be unwise to say anything about how far amendment of the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1954, will be required. I would add that we make a practice of keeping our Election promises.
§ Several Noble Lords: Oh! Oh!
§ LORD SILKINMy Lords, might I ask whether the proposed interim protection will require legislation?
§ LORD MITCHISONMy Lords, I do not so understand the Statement. I think this is a warning that rights which are to be given in the future will be extended in the future in certain circumstances.