HL Deb 28 May 2002 vol 635 cc1218-21

7.25 p.m.

The Minister of State, Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (Lord Falconer of Thoroton)

rose to move, That the draft regulatory reform order laid before the House on 13th December 2001 be approved [19th Report from the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee].

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, the order amends local authorities' powers to provide grants and other financial assistance to homeowners for the improvement, repair and renovation of their homes. These existing powers are discretionary but the legislation, contained principally in the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, is highly prescriptive. It provides that assistance must be primarily in the form of grant and subject to a long list of eligibility conditions.

The order repeals most of this prescription and replaces it with a general power, enabling local authorities to provide assistance for the purpose of improving living conditions in their area. It will therefore give local authorities much greater discretion over designing a policy for the renewal of private sector housing which addresses the needs and problems of their area. It will also enable housing policy to be linked more closely with other policy initiatives such as neighbourhood renewal.

The power will enable authorities to consider forms of financial assistance other than grant. This may be in the form of a loan, either at market rates or at preferential rates, or by taking an equity stake in the property in return for providing help with renovation. The type of package available together with any other eligibility criteria will be determined at local level to reflect local housing market conditions. The assistance may be provided directly by the local authority or with others so it will be possible for authorities to enter into partnerships with RSLs, other non-profit-making bodies or private lenders.

Authorities will also be able to provide assistance to help home owners relocate to another home where in the opinion of an authority this represents better value for money than repairing or adapting the existing dwelling.

The order also makes it easier for authorities to declare and operate renewal areas where poor housing conditions and other social problems are concentrated in a particular locality or neighbourhood. The assistance is not limited to private homeowners, so, for example, in the case of area renewal, assistance could be provided across a whole range of tenures.

The order retains some essential regulatory safeguards. In particular, it requires local authorities before offering assistance to have regard to the ability of the homeowner to make any repayments demanded as part of the package of assistance. It also requires the authority to satisfy itself that any recipient of financial assistance has received proper advice on what is being offered.

The order also provides that the new power cannot be used until local authorities have published a policy which sets out how they intend to use it. That will ensure that the policies are transparent and that under the spirit of best value they have been carefully considered, including full consultation with all interested parties.

Producing a new policy in the light of these changes will take time and the order therefore contains important transitional provisions. Local authorities can use the new power once the order has been made and they have published a policy. However, the existing grant-making provisions in the 1996 Act will remain in force for one year from the date of commencement of the order, thus giving authorities adequate time to prepare their new policies.

The legislative provisions in the 1996 Act concerning mandatory disabled facilities grant are being left largely unamended. The Government regard this grant as an important right to help disabled people to continue to live as independent a life as possible in their own homes. Discretionary disabled facilities grant, which is used by authorities to top up the mandatory grant, will, however, be repealed, but the new general power introduced by the order can be used for this purpose. The department will shortly be issuing guidance to local authorities on how they should develop their new policies for housing renewal in the light of the order.

This is an important and helpful order which went through all the stages of the regulatory reform process without suggestions of amendment and has wide support among housing practitioners. I commend it to the House. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft regulatory reform order laid before the House on 13th December 2001 be approved [19th Report from the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee].—(Lord Falconer of Thoroton.)

Viscount Astor

My Lords, I thank the noble and learned Lord the Minister for bringing forward the order. There is little good news from his department but this is a small piece. We welcome the order, as do most local authorities.

It has been an extraordinary day for the Minister. Presumably, the noble and learned Lord is now the senior Minister in the department. After all, Stephen Byers has finally gone but I am afraid that the damage he has done to our roads and railways will last for years. As the noble and learned Lord knows, we have been calling for his resignation for months. Sadly, he has been a dreadful Minister, and has gravely undermined the Government's reputation for the truth. However, I wish the noble and learned Lord good luck in the reshuffle. Perhaps he will be promoted in the morning to the role of Secretary of State. Who knows? We hope that he will certainly be in his place. Perhaps the fact that he is here this evening indicates that he has finally managed to do a deal on the Dome. If he has, we look forward to him coming forward and making a Statement on that.

To return to the order, it is a good order and we welcome it. I have one brief question. Presumably the order was signed by the Secretary of State, who has now resigned. Does that mean that it is still valid? As it goes through this place, is it still a valid order? Perhaps the noble and learned Lord could answer that question. However, we shall certainly do all that we can to assist its passage through this House.

Baroness Maddock

My Lords, I shall resist the temptation to talk about matters other than the order. I, too, welcome the order, as do my colleagues on these Benches. Interestingly, not only does it give more sensible powers to local authorities, consolidating what has gone before; it gives local authorities more freedom to deal with disrepair.

The last time that I spoke about an order that was before the House, I was very critical of the way in which the consultation had been carried. This time, it seems to have been exemplary. Where possible, in the advice accompanying the order, the Government have taken on board much of what was said.

I particularly welcome the fact that park homes are included in the provision. I feel strongly that they provide a very good form of housing for elderly people. It has been a problem that those living in such homes have been unable to get things done that others have been able to do. This is a good sign. I should like to see park homes treated much more as a part of mainstream housing.

One of the issues raised in the consultation was that although the permissive powers are very good, the resources to carry them out are not huge and have been reduced in recent years. In 1979, subsidies for building and refurbishment were £11 billion; by 1999, they had been reduced to £3 billion. The reverse was the case for housing benefit. We need to consider carefully how to deal with this matter.

To return to an "old chestnut", if VAT were to be reduced on refurbishment, the money that local authorities had to carry out their responsibilities in assisting with the refurbishment and repair of properties would go a good deal further. It is a point worth making. Some 2 million homes in this country—mostly privately owned—are in urgent need of repair. That would be a useful thing to do.

With the proviso that I want to see ways of getting more money into this area—admittedly the loan facility will mean better use of the money—I welcome the order. However, when the Minister has an input into the spending review, will he bear in mind the issue of the funding of repairs; and will he again take the opportunity to raise the issue of VAT on repairs?

Lord Falconer of Thoroton

My Lords, I thank the noble Viscount and the noble Baroness for their support for the order. On the point raised by the noble Viscount, the order has yet to be signed. It will not be signed until the process has ended, on 6th June. It will be signed by the Minister of State and by the Secretary of State for Wales, so I am quite sure that it will be valid.

I particularly endorse the noble Baroness's reference to the park homes issue. I am sorry that the noble Lord, Lord Graham, is not in his place to hear it mentioned. On the point that she made in relation to the spending review, she will know that I cannot comment on those issues.

The noble Viscount referred to the Secretary of State's resignation today. It was done with considerable courage and dignity—which is more than can be said for the remarks that the noble Viscount has just made.

Viscount Astor

My Lords, the noble and learned Lord said that the order would be signed by the Secretary of State for Wales. Does his remit also cover England in this matter?

Lord Falconer of Thoroton

My Lords, at the bottom of the order reference is made to Wales as it also covers Wales. Therefore, the Secretary of State for Wales has to sign it.

On Question, Motion agreed to.