Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Bill

---

Standing Committee G

Thursday 20 January 2005

(Morning)

[Mr. Eric Forth in the Chair]

Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Bill

Clause 12

Disposal

9.25 am

Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York) (Con): May I warmly welcome you to the Committee, Mr. Forth, and say what a particular privilege it is to serve under your illustrious chairmanship?

Clause 12 deals with disposal. I was slightly concerned and surprised to hear at the end of Tuesday's sitting that not only has the Minister accepted that there is no definition of ''abandoned cars'', which I had worked out for myself, but that there is no definition of ''fit for disposal''. There is, therefore, potential for confusion in implementing the clause.

Subsection (2) means that the provision applies

''in the case of a vehicle, which in the opinion of the authority is in such a condition that it ought to be destroyed''.

Will the Minister specify how authorities might have a different opinion of what condition that ought to be? Does he not find it regrettable that there may be wide variations across the country in interpreting that phrase? We certainly find that disappointing.

Some concern has been expressed by farmers, particularly through the National Farmers Union, about how disposal will be treated in urban and rural areas. In their view, subsection (2) focuses on vehicles to be destroyed after their removal from roads. Will the Minister address the particular case of disposal of vehicles in the countryside? Is the presumption that the vehicle has been placed on the land wilfully, and is therefore subject to disposal by its owner, who may not own the land? What precautions must the relevant authority take?

I have studied the clause carefully, and I cannot see anything relating to appeals, but it may be that my reading is not sufficiently accurate. Will the Minister guide the Committee as to what possibility there is to appeal? If an appeal is to be made to a magistrates court, how long will it take for it to be dealt with?

Subsection (4) covers the definition of ''licence''. How does the Minister expect that to be interpreted? In relation to clause 11, he said that a vehicle would be taken away. What means of disposal are available under section 4(1) of the Refuse Disposal (Amenity) Act 1978? For the benefit of landowners and farmers, will he confirm that the local authority will be charged the cost of a vehicle's removal, disposal and
 
Column Number: 90
 
destruction, and not those who may be innocent parties? Will he assure us that the Bill will be uniformly applied across the country, that those living in the countryside, in particular in remote areas, will be considered, and that there is a right of appeal?

The Minister for Rural Affairs and Local Environmental Quality (Alun Michael): I welcome you to the Committee, Mr. Forth. I know that we have to be disciplined with you in the Chair. No doubt we will be called on to be both interesting and proper, so I am sure that it will be an interesting sitting.

The hon. Lady raised a number of interesting points. We could spend a great deal of time on some of them, but in general they are not a problem because they require the application of experience and common sense to a set of circumstances. That is what local authorities and the police do, while keeping at the back of their minds the interpretation that the courts would place on their actions. Similarly, the courts deal with these issues in a common-sense way.

If things are too tightly drawn, there is always a danger of ending up with a definition that cannot be applied sensibly. The phrase that has been used on a number of occasions is ''recognising an elephant on the doorstep.'' One knows that it is not a cow or pig, but defining an elephant in precise terms is a little more difficult, at least in legal language. The application of common sense leads to a practice that is well understood by all.

I am not necessarily looking for everything to be applied uniformly. I want legislation that enables local authorities to tackle real problems sensibly and appropriately. They will do that sensibly by recognising people's expectations and what the law requires them to do, and appropriately because circumstances vary. It is not necessary to provide a definition of ''fit for destruction'' because there is no evidence that that is a major problem. There is already a requirement for actions to be taken when a vehicle is abandoned and no longer fit for use.

Clause 17 gives the Government the power to issue statutory guidance so that if there were any suggestion that local authorities were running into difficulties as a result of changes in the design of vehicles, for instance, they could be dealt with. Clause 12 deals with disposal after the car has been removed under clause 11. We have already discussed the removal from all types of land, so we have covered what happens in relation to the abandonment of a vehicle.

There is no appeals system. There can be compensation for unnecessary destruction. If a car is sold or disposed of and a sum is received for that, it would come into the equation. There are also ways of dealing with a local authority if it exceeded its power. There was no evidence in any of our discussions with local authorities, the police and interested organisations that the problems were anything other than theoretical. In practice, it is clear that people understand the situation.

By checking the vehicle register, the local authority should be able to ascertain whether the vehicle is abandoned. Vehicles with a tax disc and a registered keeper are not normally abandoned, but there are
 
Column Number: 91
 
occasionally circumstances in which that is the case. Under clause 11, if the vehicle is removed, the vehicle keeper will be given sufficient notice to come and collect it. It is then in their hands to take such action as they want to avoid its disposal or destruction. The clause ensures that the local authority can take appropriate action in all circumstances. I hope that that explanation satisfies the hon. Lady.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 12 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 13

Guidance

Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

Miss McIntosh: This is the opportunity for the Minister to tell the Committee what form the guidance will take. As he said, the points that I raised on clause 12 were pertinent and could be discussed for some time, but the Committee is tightly timetabled. I did not hear what he said about appeals. Will there be scope for them?

Alun Michael: I am happy to repeat what I said; it was very short. There is not an appeal system.

Miss McIntosh: That makes the guidance even more appropriate. I understand that the Environment Act 1995 sets out clearly the appeals procedure against remediation notices, that the right of appeal will exist and that an appeal would be to a magistrates court. Can the Minister confirm whether that legislation still exists, or is he saying that clause 13 will usurp it and there will be no scope for appeals at all?

It has been put to me firmly that landowners and particularly the NFU will want to be consulted before the guidance is drafted and issued. I imagine that a raft of other organisations, such as utility companies—perhaps not the best example—could be affected by the provision on abandoned vehicles. Will the Minister look favourably on the NFU's specific request? Which organisations will be consulted? Presumably, motoring organisations, such as the AA, the RAC and the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders Ltd., will want to be consulted and that that will happen.

Such organisations would like the guidance to cover a situation in which an abandoned vehicle, as defined by the guidance notes on clause 13, has a current tax disc and a registration plate and is therefore road legal. Will sufficient time be allocated to tracing the vehicle owner? The Minister alluded to the relevant clause and said that the period was seven days, but will the guidance notes allow for discretion? In relation to other provisions in this part, he confirmed that all the powers and duties are discretionary. Will the guidance say that the powers are discretionary? If so, that raises the question of what purpose the Bill serves.

All local authorities are extremely alarmed—this has been expressed through the Local Government Association in particular—that the costs of removal will be extremely high and possibly disproportionate,
 
Column Number: 92
 
and that is on top of the other duties that authorities are being asked to perform. Will the guidance notes make it clear to what extent this provision should be a priority as opposed to other rights and duties and the additional responsibilities that the Government have imposed on authorities over the past seven and a half years?

Much will depend on the guidance and what precautions the Minister imagines it will provide to ensure that there is uniform application throughout the country. If the provisions of part 2 are dealt with in a widely disparate way, that will negate any beneficial aspects. It would therefore help to have the confirmation that I requested. Who will be consulted? Are the Government minded to consult landowners and, in particular, the NFU?

Alun Michael: Let me spell out where we are. Clause 13 obliges local authorities to have regard to guidance given by the appropriate person when exercising their functions in relation to the removal and disposal of vehicles under the 1978 Act. We are dealing here only with the removal and disposal of vehicles. The ''appropriate person'' in this case is the Secretary of State or the National Assembly for Wales.

The type of the regime that the hon. Lady envisages would be extremely bureaucratic, with a massive, detailed guidance on what local authorities should do, almost down to spelling out how they should breathe in and out as they undertake their duties, which would be wholly inappropriate. I remind her that we are dealing with the destruction and disposal of vehicles, which occurs only if no one claims the vehicle within a specific period. That is where the seven days comes in. Who would appeal, therefore?

It is nonsense to create an unnecessary construct. If there are problems, the clause enables us to issue guidance without having to return to primary legislation. I envisage the guidance being simple and straightforward, addressing only those issues that are known to require it. We discussed the matter with local authorities, motoring organisations and others to ensure that we understood the problems that they face.

I repeat my understanding of how serious the problem is, and people want it to be dealt with. The hon. Lady referred to the NFU. I spoke to its president some time ago about the Bill, which deals with the problem of abandoned vehicles and the dangers they pose, and with fly-tipping and other difficulties experienced by the farming community. The clause is simple and straightforward.

---

Prepared 20 January 2005