HL Deb 24 June 1993 vol 547 cc530-1

7.25 p.m.

Viscount Goschen rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 12th May be approved [30th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Viscount said: My Lords, in moving the first Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper I should like to speak also to the Castle Vale Housing Action Trust Order. These orders seek to designate two further housing action trusts (or HATs) following on the success of those in Hull, Waltham Forest and Liverpool. These projects demonstrate that HATs have come of age as vehicles for tackling the problems of our very worst estates. These orders, the fourth and fifth, establish HATs for Castle Vale in Birmingham and Tower Hamlets in London. Tenants in Castle Vale and Tower Hamlets voted by clear majorities of 92 per cent. and 65 per cent. respectively for the establishment of the trusts.

Housing action trusts are important mechanisms for tackling the very worst estates by adopting a comprehensive and integrated approach. dedicated to the task in hand. They are flexible and adaptable. They can alleviate the problems of inner city estates such as Tower Hamlets and estates like Castle Vale, located on the outskirts of a city yet isolated from it. That is because the trusts are about much more than improving the fabric of the buildings, important though that is. They will improve housing, manage housing effectively, encourage diversity of ownership and tenure and facilitate the improvement of living conditions in the area through employment, training and environmental initiatives. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 12th May be approved [30th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Viscount Goschen.)

Lord Graham of Edmonton

My Lords, I may have the advantage over the Minister to the extent that when the issue of the creation of HATs was before the House two or three years ago I spoke from these Benches on housing matters. I can recall—and no doubt those who guide the noble Viscount can recall—that the initial reaction of the Labour Party to the principle of HATs was very much one of hostility. We felt that way for the simple reason that in our view the local authorities had been starved of the money required to do that which the HATs now do—to improve wretched housing—and we felt that the money ought properly to have been made available through the normal HIPs and in other ways to allow local authorities to do the work. A fierce political battle was fought, but from my experience as a former constituency member, and having watched these matters for years, the wretchedness of the housing conditions has at the end of the day won.

I would say only that the Government have learnt over the period to adapt, to bend and to accept in reality changes which are designed to make the HAT more acceptable not just to the Labour Party but to many other individuals. The principle which the Minister has raised—local people having the right to have a big say in what they do—is one thing. But I can assure the Minister that the overwhelming imperative of local people is not necessarily to be able to decide what they do but to get their hands on the resources so that someone, whether it is the council or the created bodies—I have read the documents and the Government have moved from a limited representation of those who are affected to a larger representation—can do the work.

I should like to point out that the Government's mood changes. When the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Bill was before the House two or three weeks ago the Labour Party sought strenuously to give council tenants the same right and ability to determine their landlord as that which has been created here. It was not to be. But this is not the occasion to fight old battles.

The people who are to benefit and gain advantage from the money that the Government are making available are not concerned about the niceties which as politicians we in this Chamber and another place seek to add to or imprint on legislation. In my view the wretched conditions in which many people live will be improved by the action of HATs. We shall watch very closely to see whether there are lessons not just for the Labour Party but for the way in which the housing stock of this country is managed. We certainly have no objection to these two orders.

On Question, Motion agreed to.