| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mrs. Maddock: I listened to the Minister's remarks with interest--he always smiles pleasantly when responding to one's suggestions. It is interesting to note that local independence seems to depend upon whether the Government think that they have any money. I have said before that local authorities should be independent.
However, it is important to have national standards in certain areas. This is such an area--particularly as we are discussing saving money in the health service, which is funded nationally.
I hope that the guidance notes to local authorities will stress the importance of the issue, so that they will treat it seriously. The hon. Member for Greenwich (Mr. Raynsford) pointed out that a major problem with the Bill is that it does not increase resources for grants to deal with property renovations or anything else: it simply moves the goalposts. The Minister's reply demonstrated that clearly--I do not recall his exact words, but I think he said that he could not find any more money. The Government are not really prepared to provide funding even though they have highlighted the dangers. On the radio this morning, even though there has been no statement today, they highlighted the importance of the matter. They have said that it is important in their great scheme for considering people's health and environmental matters. The Minister says that it is so important that he is not going to give any money to deal with it. I am very disappointed.
Will the Minister ensure that during the next year he considers how many grants are taken up, how much information is put out by local authorities and whether what the Government do, particularly in respect of the forthcoming statement on health, has any effect? We, too, will watch the matter and will question him again if we consider that what happens is unsatisfactory. It seems that it is down to money. It is dishonest to say on radio that they want to do something about the problem and then to tell the House that they will not put up any money for it. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.
Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.
Mr. Clappison:
I beg to move amendment No. 16, in page 3, line 7, at end insert--
Madam Speaker:
With this, it will be convenient to discuss Government amendments Nos. 119, 46, 121, 57, 59 and 60.
Mr. Clappison:
Under the current regime, NHS authorities and trusts are prevented from applying for grant by direction of the Secretary of State. In Committee, the hon. Member for Greenwich tabled an amendment that would have added such bodies to the list in clause 3(2) of applicants who cannot apply for grant. We agreed to consider that amendment, and, as a result of our deliberations, we have tabled amendment No. 16, which we believe achieves that.
Amendment No. 46 ensures that such bodies are also excluded from participating in group repair schemes as assisted persons. Amendments Nos. 119 and 121 achieve the same effect for police authorities established under section 3 of the Police Act 1964. The lists of ineligible applicants in clauses 3 and 64 also include new town corporations and housing action trusts.
Clause 3 also refers to urban development corporations. However, clauses 141 to 143 provide for those bodies to be dissolved and successor bodies created. We have therefore tabled amendments Nos. 57, 59 and 60, which provide that references to such bodies in part I should also be construed as references to their successor bodies. These are sensible amendments, which will ensure that grant goes only to appropriate persons.
Mr. Raynsford:
As the Minister said, some of the amendments build on amendments that we moved in Committee and we welcome them. I congratulate him on the exemplary speed with which he lucidly explained so many technical amendments. I hope that he will follow that path during the remaining proceedings, and that he will continue to be as positive in accepting Opposition amendments.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment made: No. 119, in page 3, line 7, at end insert--
Mr. Clappison:
I beg to move amendment No. 120, in page 3, line 15, at end insert--
Madam Speaker:
With this, it will be convenient to discuss Government amendments Nos. 122 and 123.
Mr. Clappison:
In Committee, we debated the powers in clause 3 that enable the Secretary of State to make regulations excluding certain categories of applicant from grant entitlement. As I explained then, the purpose of clause 3(2) is to prevent public sector bodies from applying for grant.
Clause 3(3) enables the Secretary of State to exclude applicants of certain descriptions. On commencement of part I, we intend to exercise clause 3(3) to exclude certain persons from abroad who have limited leave to remain in the United Kingdom while their applications to remain are dealt with. Under Home Office immigration rules, such persons are not to have recourse to public funds while they are in Britain. In previous debates, the hon. Members for Greenwich and for Littleborough and Saddleworth (Mr. Davies) were concerned about the implications of the new provisions.
It was suggested that references to those categories should be included in the Bill. I explained that there is no power in the legislation for the Secretary of State to specify certain applicants who are to be excluded from applying for grant. We have therefore been unable to make provision in the subordinate legislation to reflect changes in this area made to benefit regulations, which, as hon. Members know, the grant regulations mirror. Subsection (3) provides a regulation-making power to exclude certain categories of applicant. It is not appropriate that specific categories should be included in the Bill. The rules themselves may change, and it is appropriate that there is flexibility in the grants legislation to respond quickly to such change.
The purpose of the amendment is to reflect in the grants legislation a recent Court of Appeal judgment concerning the Social Security (Persons from Abroad) Miscellaneous Amendments Regulations 1996. The court ruled that the regulations were ultra vires in so far as they purported to deny benefits to certain persons pursuing immigration matters with the Home Office.
The amendment inserts a reference providing for regulations made under clause 3 to refer to the provisions relating to entitlement to housing benefit and any other form of assistance that may have effect from time to time. In effect, it will ensure that those persons excluded in the regulations are people who are subject to immigration control who are not entitled to housing benefit. It will ensure that those who are covered by these controls but who are able to apply for benefit following the court ruling are not excluded from grant eligibility.
We have already debated these provisions. It is unlikely that many of those who are covered by the relevant immigration controls would qualify for grants under part I.
The purpose of the grant system is to ensure that people are given help with repairs and improvements, so that they may remain in fit homes. The legislation is therefore framed to meet that objective, with most applicants required to satisfy a prior qualifying period of ownership or occupation of the dwelling. It is unlikely that many persons covered by the immigration rules would be able to meet these and other requirements of the grants legislation. The amendment would ensure that no one who qualifies for housing benefit will be excluded from grant eligibility.
Amendments Nos. 122 and 123 make similar provision in respect of a person's eligibility to participate in a group repair scheme or to receive home repair assistance. I commend the amendments to the House.
Mr. Raynsford:
As the Minister rightly conceded, it is not likely that many people who come to the United Kingdom seeking asylum will be in a position to apply for renovation grants. That of itself should cause us to pause for thought about the wisdom of the proposed measures, and of the way in which the Government are proceeding.
Another cause for thought is that the Minister has stressed that the proposed legislation has been framed to ensure that anyone who qualifies for housing benefit will not be debarred from renovation grant. The Minister will be aware that the majority of home owners are those who qualify for renovation grants. By definition, they do not qualify for housing benefit. The reference to housing benefit will cause a great deal of confusion, but it is there because it is the test that is used for the definition of entitlement to welfare benefits, a test that may result in people being denied those benefits because they are asylum seekers.
The Minister might like to reflect on a further area of confusion. There was a well publicised case recently of someone who, threatened with deportation from this country, sought refuge or sanctuary in church premises, from where he was seized by immigration officials. According to reports in the press, his seizure caused him a serious health problem.
I do not want to go into the circumstances of that case, but I ask the Minister to reflect on the interrelationship of the amendments and the provisions in amendment No. 56,
which he will be moving later. He will know that amendment No. 56 would exempt charities and ecclesiastical residences from restrictions on participation in group repair schemes.
'( ) a health authority, special health authority or NHS trust;'.
'( ) a police authority established under section 3 of the Police Act 1964;'.--[Mr. Brandreth.]
'( ) Regulations under subsection (3) may proceed wholly or in part by reference to the provisions relating to entitlement to housing benefit, or any other form of assistance, as they have effect from time to time.'.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |