House of Commons
Tuesday 12 January 1999
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT AND THE REGIONS
The Secretary of State was asked--
Greenhouse Gases
1. Mr. Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove): What representations he made at COP4--the fourth conference of the parties--on the trading of greenhouse gas emission permits as a mechanism for annexe 1 countries to meet their targets under the Kyoto protocol. [63565]
The Minister for the Environment (Mr. Michael Meacher): During his address to the recent climate change meeting in Buenos Aires, my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister spoke of the importance of domestic policies to tackle climate change, while recognising the need to continue dialogue with other countries to develop rules for emissions trading. The rules must ensure environmental effectiveness as well as economic efficiency.
Mr. Stunell: I thank the Minister for his reply. Does he agree that mounting evidence of the severe impact of climate change means that any scheme for trading emissions must include secure monitoring and sensible transitional arrangements? Can he persuade the United States Government in particular to accept the reality of climate change and the need to take very prompt action?
Mr. Meacher: My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister and I played a significant role at the historic Kyoto meeting in shifting the United States from its zero target to a cut of 7 per cent. by the end of the conference. I cannot guarantee that we shall have the same success again, but we are committed to establishing a fair ceiling. It is written in the protocol that domestic action is the key issue and that flexible mechanisms must be supplementary to it. We shall be making every effort to ensure that that ceiling is in place, properly monitored and transparent.
Mrs. Gillian Shephard (South-West Norfolk): Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that, thanks to the previous Government's leading role in this area and his acceptance of our policies, this country is very well placed not only to give a lead, but to bring others on board, including the United States? He said something about
mechanisms that he proposes to use in order to bring that about. Will he also tell the House about his timetable, thereby dispelling the accusation of Friends of the Earth that the Buenos Aires conference set an agenda for inaction?
Mr. Meacher: Our only inheritance from the previous Government in respect of climate change was the closure of more than half of this country's remaining pits, which was not, of course, in any sense aimed at an environmental objective. It had a completely different provenance. We of course intend to reach the targets. As a result of the significant role that my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister and I also played at the Buenos Aires conference, there is agreement for the first time among 160 countries on an action programme, which incorporates targeted deadlines. There are at least three in the work programme that was agreed. We intend to meet them--if we can, by COP6.
Right to Buy
2. Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West): What estimate his Department has made of the impact on take-up rates of his decision to reduce the discounts to council tenants under the right-to-buy arrangements. [63566]
The Minister for Local Government and Housing (Ms Hilary Armstrong): About 1 per cent. of council and housing association tenants exercise their right to buy each year. We estimate that about 90 per cent. of buyers will be unaffected by the changes to discounts, and of the rest--0.1 per cent. of social tenants--many will still be able to buy. We expect the percentage of social tenants buying their home to remain at about 1 per cent. each year.
Mr. Swayne: Do Ministers want to encourage tenants to aspire to own their own homes?
Ms Armstrong: Our commitment to home ownership is very clear. We want to ensure that anyone has a realistic chance and a sustainable opportunity to buy their own home. We also have a duty to the taxpayer to ensure that any programme that we introduce is value for money. The programme costs the taxpayer about £400 million a year. We think that we can get better value for money.
Ms Margaret Moran (Luton, South): Is my hon. Friend aware of the recent report by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, "Reviewing the Right to Buy", which raises some concerns about changes to right-to-buy discounts, especially the effects on social exclusion? It argues for a flat-rate purchase grant instead of discounts. Will she comment on its proposals?
Ms Armstrong: I am aware of that report, which we are considering--as part of the general consultation. We have received representations from around the country, including the local authority of the hon. Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne), which fully supports our proposals. We will take into account all those representations, along with the work of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Mr. Simon Burns (West Chelmsford): Does the Minister recall that her party has historically been
opposed to the right to buy for council house tenants, and that it has been motivated by both ideology and spite? The measure to cut the discount by £12,000 in London and £38,000 in the north-east will be seen as nothing less than that. Does she accept that that will cause hardship to tenants hoping to buy their houses? Is she prepared to introduce transitional relief to lessen the impact of that attack on home ownership?
Ms Armstrong: Once again the hon. Gentleman gets his facts wrong. The Labour party did not oppose the principle of the right to buy--[Interruption.] We said that money should be invested in social housing to make sure that people in the rest of the country who needed houses could get them.
Ms Armstrong: I am not digging. It is the hon. Gentleman who has dug deep and cannot get out. We are in favour of home ownership, but we are also in favour of people who rely on social tenancies having a decent choice. That is why we have allocated £5 billion to put right social housing, which the Conservative Government neglected. For the first time in the history of surveying, council housing conditions deteriorated under the previous Administration. We will put a stop to that.
Devolved Budgets
3. Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow): If he will make a statement on the status of the leaked document relating to control by the Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Ireland Assemblies of budgets currently managed in London. [63567]
The Minister for the Regions, Regeneration and Planning (Mr. Richard Caborn): My hon. Friend should know that Governments do not comment on leaked documents.
Mr. Dalyell: How about putting in the Library of the House the respectable case for central funding?
Mr. Caborn: I am speaking not on behalf of the Library of the House, but for the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions. I do not believe that that comes within our expenditure.
Mr. John Swinney (North Tayside): Bearing in mind the fact that the Minister's answers on the point raised by the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) will be recorded in the Official Report, does the Minister believe that it would have been better for the issue to have been raised in public, rather than appearing in a leaked memo, and for the House to have had the opportunity for scrutiny and debate?
Mr. Caborn: We deplore all leaks from Government Departments, but there has been adequate time to discuss on the Floor of the House and in Committee the financial arrangements for devolution for Scotland, and there is secondary legislation dealing with that as well.
Home Buying and Selling
4. Dr. Doug Naysmith (Bristol, North-West): What representations have been received as a result of the Government's consultation on reform of the processes of home buying and selling. [63568]
The Minister for Local Government and Housing (Ms Hilary Armstrong): "The key to easier home buying and selling" was published on 7 December 1998. Since then, there has been a steady stream of responses on a wide range of issues. The consultation period ends on 31 March 1999.
Dr. Naysmith: In view of the interest that has been shown, is there any possibility of speeding up the process and starting to take action more quickly?
Ms Armstrong: The matter has probably raised more interest among the public than any of the other consultation documents that we have issued. It is, therefore, important that we get it right. There has been considerable concern about the home buying and selling process. The Government decided to improve the situation so that people would know what they were getting into if they sought to buy their home, and so that they would have more confidence in the process. I agree with my hon. Friend about the need to speed up the process of home buying and selling. That is the weakness in the British system. To do that effectively, we need a proper period of consultation. We are committed to introducing proposals for action this year.
Mr. Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath): Does the Minister accept that we might all wish to speed up the process of house transfer, but that there are great dangers in imposing serious financial obligations on vendors? They might be required to pay for searches and surveys that might then go out of date before a potential purchaser was identified. Will she recognise the great concern, expressed by many professionals in this area, that the Government's thinking on this may be rather skewed?
Ms Armstrong: We had the most extensive consultation ever with the professions in this area before we published the consultation document, and they were very involved in drawing it up. It is a Government document and the professions are now considering it in great detail. Anyone who reads it in full will see that it recognises the down sides of proposals as well as their benefits. Any consultation must take account of views on both sides, and we shall seek to do that. However, we are determined to improve the process, which brings frustration to many.
Mr. Andrew F. Bennett (Denton and Reddish): Does my hon. Friend accept that the slowness at which houses in Britain are sold is a substantial problem, and that if we could speed up the process, it might be unnecessary to build quite so many new houses--the 4.4 million that Conservative and Labour Members alike are keen should not be built on green land? Does my hon. Friend agree that, if house turnover is improved, there will be slightly less need to build new ones?
Ms Armstrong: I do not want to make assumptions that have not been fully researched, but my hon. Friend
may have a point. Other countries manage to get through the process much more speedily than we in Britain do, so we must consider what improvements can be made. That may bring the wider benefits of which my hon. Friend speaks; it will certainly bring benefits for consumers and citizens, for so many of whom this is the most important financial decision in their lives. They want the system to work better.
Mrs. Gillian Shephard (South-West Norfolk): Will the Minister comment on reports that her Government's urban task force is to recommend that those who own or buy houses on green-field sites should lose the right to mortgage tax relief? Does she accept that, although it is principally country dwellers who object to urban encroachment on green spaces, it would be a bit much even for her Government to expect only country dwellers to pay to prevent that?
Ms Armstrong: I am not sure how that point can be taken into account in the consultation on the home buying and selling process, but the right hon. Lady shows some ingenuity. All I would say is that she should not believe everything that she hears on the radio.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |