Agricultural Holdings Bill [H.L.] (Hansard, 7 February 1984)

HL Deb 07 February 1984 vol 447 cc1082-7 1082

§ Report stage resumed.

§ Clause 3 [Amendment of provisions relating to statutory succession in cases not excluded by section 2]:

§ Lord Belstead moved Amenment No. 26: Page 7, line 23, leave out ("subsection") and insert ("subsections").

§ The noble Lord said: With the agreement of your Lordships I should like to move Amendment No. 26 but to speak also to Nos. 27, 28 and 29 my Lords.

1083 Amendment No. 27: Page 7, line 25, leave out ("unit" means a unit") and insert ("unit of agricultural land" means a unit of agricultural land"). Amendment No. 28: Page 7, line 29, at end insert ("; and, in so far as any units of production for the time being prescribed by an order under subsection (3B) below are relevant to the assessment of the productive capacity of a unit of agricultural land when farmed as aforesaid, the net annual income which that unit is capable of producing for the purposes of this subsection shall be ascertained by reference to the provisions of that order. (3B) The Minister shall by order made by statutory instrument subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament—

(a) prescribe such units of production relating to agricultural land as he considers appropriate, being units framed by reference to any circumstances whatever and designed for the assessment of the productive capacity of such land; and
(b) for any period of twelve months specified in the order, determine in relation to any unit of production so prescribed the amount which is to be regarded for the purposes of subsection (3A) above as the net annual income from that unit in that period.

(3C) Where a survivor of the deceased is, by virtue of a direction of the Tribunal under section 20 of this Act, for the time being entitled (whether or not with any, other person) to a tenancy of the whole or part of any agricultural holding held by the deceased at the date of death other than the holding, he shall for the purposes of paragraph (c) of the definition of "eligible person" in subsection (2) above, be deemed to be in occupation of the land comprised in that holdng or (as the case may be) in that part of that holding.") Amendment No. 29: Page 7, line 38, leave out from ("landlord") to ("and") in line 7 on page 8 and insert ("and in relation to any agricultural land which is—

(a) occupied by any such person; or
(b) the subject of an application made under section 20 of this Act by any such person;

(in each case whether that person is the person making the request or not) determine by reference to the provisions of any order for the time being in force under subsection (3B) above the net annual income which, in his view, the land is capable of producing for the purposes of subsection (3A) above, and shall issue a written statement of his view and the grounds for it to the person making the request. The reference above to any agricultural land which is occupied by a person includes a reference to any agricultural land which is deemed to be occupied by him by virtue of subsection (3C) above. (6A) Where—

(a) for the purposes of any proceedings under this Part of this Act the Minister has issued a statement to any person containing a determination under subsection (6) above made by reference to the provisions of an order under subsection (3B) above; and
(b) before any hearing by the Tribunal in those proceedings is due to begin it appears to him that any subsequent order under that subsection has affected any matter on which that determination was based;

he shall make a revised determination under subsection (6) above and shall issue a written statement of his view and the grounds for it to the person in question. (6B) Any statement issued by the Minister in pursuance of subsection (6) or (6A) above shall be evidence of any facts stated in it as facts on which his view is based; and any document purporting to be such a statement").

§ The purpose of this group of amendments is to revise the machinery for the assessment of income of a commercial unit for the purposes of determining eligibility for succession. Perhaps I could just say, before going further, that we have tried in these amendments to deal with the assessment of income for the commercial unit test and that is all really that we have done here, as I will explain. So far as the question of eligibility is concerned—a matter in which the noble Lord, Lord Northfield, has, I know, taken a close interest and on which many noble Lords spoke—I wish that we could have brought forward the eligibility amendments that we have been working upon. But we have simply not been able to do so in the time 1084 available. All I can say is that I have written to the noble Lord. No doubt, he will say a word or two about that.

§ So far as the amendments before the House are concerned, the Bill as presently drafted changes the definition of a commercial unit from that contained in Part II of the Agriculture Act 1967 which was a unit capable of providing full-time employment for two people. The new definition in the new subsection (3A), lines 24 to 29 of this page of the Bill, depends upon the assessment of income from the unit which we believe is a fairer and more sensible basis. Your Lordships will recall that in response to Amendment No. 42 of my noble friend Lord Sandys, in Committee, I undertook to consider the possibility of describing the method of income assessment in a statutory instrument. That is substantially what these amendments do.

§ The income will be assessed in terms of units of production which we intend would be set out in a statutory instrument. I am speaking to Amendment No. 28 at the moment. These units reflect the average income that can be expected to be obtained from a comprehensive range of agricultural and horticultural enterprises. They are, in fact, the enterprise earned income figures produced annually by the Ministry of Agriculture presently used for the purposes of determining eligibility for the agricultural and horticultural development schemes. Consultations with both sides of the industry and the professions has established that this is the most appropriate method of assessing the earned income of the unit. That is all contained in subsection (3B) of Amendment No. 28.

§ In Amendment No. 29, it is further provided that the Minister shall give on request an assessment of the income which, in his opinion, the unit is capable of producing using the units of production set out in the statutory instrument extant at the time when the assessment is made. If there is a change in the statutory instrument before the tribunal hearing, the Minister will provide a revised determination. Finally, the assessment of income is to be evidence only and may be questioned by the parties to the tribunal hearing. However, it is only the choice of which units are in the Minister's opinion appropriate to the particular holding that may be treated as evidence in this way, for instance, if the Minister said that what ought to be used are the units relating to beef farming instead of to cereal growing and this is at issue. Once that has been decided, the units themselves will not be open to question.

§ There is one further important factor that I should explain. This concerns the new subsection (3C) to be inserted in Section 18(3) of the 1976 Act. This is the second part of Amendment No. 28. As I shall try to explain when we come to Amendment No. 65, a limitation that we propose is going to be placed on the number of tenancies to which a successor may succeed.

§ I am now moving closer to the matters raised so cogently by the noble Lord, Lord Northfield, in committee. The intention will be—I am back on Amendment No. 28—that having had the benefit of a direction of the agricultural land tribunal in his favour in relation to one or more tenancies, which, singly or together, make up a commercial unit, the applicant will not be entitled to a further direction under Section 1085 20 of the 1976 Act. The new subsection (3C) provides that where a direction is granted in this way, the applicant will be deemed to be in occupation of the holding to which the direction relates for the purposes of determining his eligibility to succeed to any further holdings. I beg to move.

§ Lord Sandys
My Lords, I should like to take this opportunity of thanking my noble friend Lord Belstead for his strenuous efforts to improve Clause 3. As he has already advised your Lordships, these alterations relate to a chain of amendments. My noble friend has referred particularly to Amendment No. 28. I should like to say how much we appreciate the alterations, which go a very long way towards meeting the points raised in Committee. I listened closely to what my noble friend said in regard to (3C) and, as I understand him, the arrangement is that the proposals would be arranged towards the stopping of multiple successions. If this is the case, may I ask him one further point of elucidation—whether the applications for succession will be heard one at a time as suggested in the schedule to which he referred in Amendment No. 65? Perhaps it would be preferable to refer to it later when we reach Amendment No. 65, in which case I would be more than happy.

§ Lord Northfield
My Lords, may I say that I was grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Belstead, for writing to me to explain that he had not yet been able to sort out the mass of problems—I agree that they are horrific—that surround the problem of eligibility to succession and that he would be trying to complete his discussions in time for an amendment on Third Reading. I accept very much what the noble Lord has said. I am grateful to him. I am glad that what he proposes is an important step along that road and that more will follow at Third Reading. Meanwhile, I express warm thanks to the noble Lord.

§ Lord Bishopston
My Lords, I endorse the comments made by my noble friend Lord Northfield. The matters that the Minister has put before the House in these amendments are indeed welcome. We appreciate the amount of work that has gone into the amendments that we are now considering.

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, I am grateful to noble Lords. If I may reply to my noble friend Lord Sandys about applications when we get to Amendment No. 65, I would prefer to do that if I may, and I shall not say any more about these amendments. I wish that we could have brought forward the full battery of eligibility amendments. I think, however, that when we come, as we shall soon, to Amendment No. 31, which is linked to Amendment No. 82, on retirement—an amendment that extends to nine pages of the Marshalled List—it will be clear that that is the reason, as the noble Lord, Lord Northfield, saw and so generously said, why those who have been involved on the Bill have been up to their eyes in work. We shall continue to press ahead on this difficult area of eligibility. We believe that we can find our way through it. If we do, then, as I understand the sense of your Lordships' replies this evening, we shall have a new commercial unit test which is acceptable, which I 1086 have moved now. We shall have a new deeming arrangement to make sure that, at a particular given moment, a candidate for a commercial unit either may or may not be allowed to benefit from another Section 20 direction. Then we shall just need the eligibility amendments. Those we still await.