HL Deb 05 June 1989 vol 508 cc585-6

Lord Boyd-Carpenter asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether in the case of individuals or families occuping more than one home it is intended to issue guidance to local authorities as to the application of the community charge.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment (Lord Hesketh)

My Lords, we have produced jointly with local authority associations Practice Note No. 9 which gives advice on determining a charge payer's main residence and Practice Note No. 13 which gives more general guidance on the standard community charge. Copies of practice notes which will be distributed to all charging authorities are available in the Library.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. Is he aware that the admirable documents to which he refers do not make clear, in the case of a citizen with more than one home, who decides which is his principal and which his second home; nor is it clear whether he alone is liable to pay the special charge for a second home or whether the members of his family are also liable?

Lord Hesketh

My Lords, in the circumstances the individual would have to pay the charge only in the area where he was first registered. He would appeal against one or further registrations. The appeal would then be to an evaluation and community charge tribunal.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, on the assumption that the Question of the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter, refers to individuals or families owning more than one home, since they cannot occupy more than one home at the same time, does the Minister agree that his second answer is quite unsatisfactory? Ought not guidance to be given to indicate the original submission that individuals and families should make? Will he agree that decisions should not simply be left to appeals and tribunals but that clear guidance should be given in the first place?

Lord Hesketh

My Lords, initially it will be up to the individual to decide. It is to be hoped that he will then achieve a satisfactory agreement with the CCRO. It is only in the third set of circumstances that he would in fact go to an appeal.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that, contrary to the belief of the noble Lord opposite, it is perfectly possible to occupy more than one home; indeed, it is a very frequent occurrence? Will my noble friend also answer my second supplementary question? Where a charge is in respect of a second home, is it payable only by the owner or is his family also liable for it?

Lord Hesketh

My Lords, my noble friend asks about the criteria for considering someone resident, essentially above and beyond someone who has a second home and who is paying a standard charge. No definition of sole or main residence is laid down in the Act. Length of stay will be a relevant factor but no precedents have yet of course been set. It will be up to the CCRO to judge and assess individual cases. Case law will be built up on that basis.

Lord Grimond

My Lords, will the Minister say whether it is still the Government's contention that this is a tax not on property but on the use made of services? Will he confirm that the decision therefore depends not on who owns, or does not own, the home but on what use is made of the local services? Is that not the whole basis of the Government's case for this tax?

Lord Hesketh

My Lords, whether people use them or not, the fact is that there are services which benefit every property, such as the fire service, highways and many others. As a result, everyone should make a contribution to those services which are fundamental to the infrastructure.

Lord Tordoff

My Lords, will the Minister explain who is "everyone" in this circumstance? Surely, that is the basis of the original Question put by the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter.

Lord Hesketh

My Lords, to answer that question, "everyone" means those who are paying the community charge.

Back to