Lembit
Öpik: That was a predictable and reasonable answer.
It is evident to me that Government amendment No. 230 is becoming
increasingly important in relation to this group of amendments. When we
debate clause 174, will the Minister tell us how amendment No. 230 will
impact on the restructuring, dissolution and accounts of profit-making
registered providers? The inference on this and previous clauses to
which I have moved amendments is that non-profit registered providers
will be under a greater onus to conform to the clauses than
profit-making registered providers. It would be helpful if the Minister
were to clarify that matter when we discuss Government amendment No.
230.
I beg to ask leave to withdraw
the
amendment. Amendment,
by leave,
withdrawn. Clause
150 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
151Company:
conversion into industrial and provident
society
Mr.
Wright: I beg to move Government amendment No. 217, in
clause 151, page 61, line 27, after
‘is a’ insert
‘registered’. This
amendment will ensure the consistency of the terminology that refers to
registered companies with other provisions in the Bill. I hope that
hon. Members will accept it.
Amendment agreed
to. Clause
151, as amended, ordered to stand part of the
Bill. Clause
152 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
153Industrial
and provident society:
restructuring
Mr.
Wright: I beg to move Government amendment No. 218, in
clause 153, page 62, line 12, leave
out ‘dissolution’ and insert
‘resolution’. This
is merely a correction to align terminology within
the clause. The matters for which the regulator’s consent is
required under the clause are amalgamations, transfers of engagement
and conversions into companies, and not dissolutions of industrial and
provident societies. On that basis, it is a minor and technical
amendment, and I hope that hon. Members will accept it.
Amendment agreed
to. Clause
153, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 154 to 161 ordered
to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
162Requirement
of
consent
Lembit
Öpik: I beg to move amendment No. 93, in
clause 162, page 64, line 32, leave
out subsection
(1).
The
Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss the
following amendments:
No. 94, in
clause 162, page 64, line 34, leave
out
‘profit-making’. No.
95, in
clause 163, page 65, line 4, leave
out
‘non-profit’. No.
96, in
clause 165, page 65, line 38, after
‘disposal’, insert ‘of social
housing’.
Lembit
Öpik: Amendment No. 93 is a probing amendment to
challenge the inclusion of subsection (1), which states:
“Any disposal of land by
a non-profit registered provider requires the regulator’s
consent unless it falls within an
exception”. Do the
Government intend any such disposal by non-profit registered
organisations to go through the register? Is there any risk of that
being overt regulation?
Amendments Nos. 94 and 95 relate
to the discussion that we have already had about a level playing field
for non-profit-making registered providers, and there is no need for
the Minister to repeat the arguments. We are quite clear about where
the Government stand, and we are comfortable with
it. 12.15
pm Amendment No.
96 is even more interesting, because it would insert “of social
housing” in the title of clause 165, making it read
“Disposal of social housing without consent”. We are
perennially concerned about the disbandment and reduction of social
housing, and we felt that it would be useful to highlight social
housing’s status. Much of our debate has been about protecting
such interests, and I wonder what the Minister thinks about our
proposal to raise the status of social housing in the context of clause
165.
Mr.
Wright: The amendments would require non-profit and
profit-making providers of social housing to seek consent from the
regulator for the disposal only of social housing, not of other land.
The requirement to seek consent to dispose of land has been a
fundamental part of the system of social housing regulation since at
least 1974. It has allowed central Government and others to invest in
RSLs in the full confidence that they cannot dispose of their homes and
other assets without the consent of the Housing Corporation, which is
right and proper.
Under the new investment and
regulatory regime that the Bill establishes, as we have said on several
occasions this morning, the system will be preserved for non-profit
providers such as current RSLs, but profit-making providers will have
to seek consent for disposal of social housing only. The purpose is to
ensure that a for-profit organisation, which we hope to help to build
the required numbers of social housing in order to maintain their
quality, may own only a small amount of social housing among a wider
stock of the property, including perhaps property for sale on the open
market and other pieces of land. I know where the hon. Member for
Montgomeryshire is coming from with the amendments, but it would not be
appropriate for the regulator to have any control over those other
assets. On that basis, I do not agree with the amendment, and I hope
that he will withdraw it.
Lembit
Öpik: I think that I understand the
Minister’s position, and I am grateful for his response, but to
be honest, I should like to discuss the issue further with the housing
organisations that have been so helpful in advising me. Therefore, to
make it possible for me to return to the issue on Report, I beg to ask
leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave,
withdrawn.
Amendment made: No. 219,
in clause 162, page 64, line 35, at
end insert— ‘( ) The
regulator shall not consent to a disposal by a non-profit registered
provider which it thinks is being made with a view to enabling the
provider to distribute assets to
members.’.—[Mr.
Wright.] Clause
162, as amended, ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
163Exceptions Amendments
made: No. 220, in clause 163, page 65,
line 9, leave out ‘or
paragraph’. No.
221, in
clause 163, page 65, line 10, after
‘12(1)(h)’ insert ‘and 12ZA to
12B’.—[Mr.
Wright.] Clause
163, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 164 ordered to stand
part of the Bill.
Clause
165Disposal
without
consent
Mr.
Wright: I beg to move amendment No. 222, in
clause 165, page 66, line 2, after
‘provider’ insert ‘if either of
the following cases applies. ( ) Case 1
applies where the disposal is of land other than a
dwelling. ( ) Case 2 applies
where the disposal
is’. This
is a technical amendment to ensure that the new legislation replicates
the effects of the Housing Act 1996 in relation to disposals that are
made without the regulator’s consent. In general, if the
regulator’s consent is required for a disposal, and consent is
not given, any attempt at disposal is void. The current regime,
however, provides for two exceptions that we intend to replicate in the
new regime. The first, which is set out in clause 165(2), covers an
ordinary individual home buyer who purchases a single dwelling from a
registered provider that the latter reasonably believes is for use as
their main home. I suggest that such disposals are not void because it
would place an excessive burden on the home buyer to establish whether
the required consent had been given before buying the
dwelling. The second
exception, added by amendment No. 222, is for the disposal of land
other than a dwelling, such as an office building. That will reserve
the most serious consequences of a disposal without consent—the
disposal therefore being void—for disposals of homes. That aims
to protect the social housing stock, while placing the minimum possible
burdens on third parties doing business with registered providers. I
hope that that is self-explanatory and that the Committee will accept
that
amendment. Amendment
agreed
to. Clause
165, as amended, ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
166Separate
accounting
Mr.
Wright: I beg to move amendment No. 223, in
clause 166, page 66, line 15, at
end insert— ‘( ) net
proceeds of sale of property in respect of which a grant was made under
section 22 of this Act in respect of discounts given by a registered
provider on disposals of dwellings to
tenants,’.
The
Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss
Government amendments Nos. 224 to
228.
Mr.
Wright: These are technical amendments tying up the
accounting requirements in relations to the disposals proceeds fund and
the HCA’s new powers to make grant payments. The Bill will make
no change to the right of certain RSL tenants to acquire their homes,
provided for under the Housing Act 1996. When a tenant exercises their
right to acquire, the RSL is required to sell the home to the tenant at
a discount, which is currently of between £9,000 and
£16,000. The Housing Corporation then has a statutory duty to
reimburse the RSL for that discount. The RSL is required to account for
both the disposal proceeds and any grant received in respect of
discount in a separate disposals proceeds fund, which can be spent only
on purposes determined by the Housing Corporation. That ensures that
when a home is sold under right to acquire, the proceeds are invested
in new homes for social rent.
This Bill replicates those
provisions in their entirety for registered providers and makes no
substantive changes. The amendments simply make technical changes to
ensure that the system continues under the new funding arrangements of
the HCA. Amendments Nos. 223 to 226, therefore, add references to the
funding powers of the HCA in clause 22, under which the agency will pay
grants to RSLs for discounts in respect of disposals.
Amendments Nos. 227 and 228
make technical changes to ensure that requirements to account
separately for disposals proceeds are met by for-profit providers. The
Bill refers to the regulator’s powers to make directions in
relation to accounts under clause 123. However, clause 123 applies only
to non-profit providers. The amendments, therefore, make it clear that
the regulator’s direction-making powers under clause 123 and the
sanctions under clauses 132 and 133 also apply to profit-making
providers in relation to the disposals proceeds fund.
Amendment agreed
to. Amendments
made: No. 224, in clause 166, page 66,
line 16, leave out ‘that Act’ and insert
‘the 1996
Act’. No. 225,
in
clause 166, page 66, line 16, at
end insert— ‘( ) grant
received under section 22 of this Act in respect of discounts given by
a registered provider on disposals of dwellings to
tenants,’. No.
226, in
clause 166, page 66, line 17, leave
out ‘either of those sections,’ and
insert ‘section 20 or 21 of the 1996
Act, ( ) repayments of discount in respect
of which grant was received under section 22 of this Act in respect of
discounts given by a registered provider on disposals of dwellings to
tenants,’.
No. 227, in
clause 166, page 66, line 24, leave
out ‘under section 123’.
No. 228, in
clause 166, page 66, line 25, at
end insert— ‘( ) Subsections
(4) to (6) of section 123 apply to a direction under this section as to
a direction under that
section. ( ) Sections 132 and
133 apply in relation to a direction under this section as in relation
to a direction under section 123.’.—[Mr.
Wright.] Question
proposed, That the clause, as amended, stand part of the
Bill.
The
Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss
Government new clause 43— Use of
proceeds.
Mr.
Wright: As I have mentioned, the clause requires
registered providers to operate a disposals proceeds fund, as is
currently required under the 1996 Act. The new clause will put in place
the final part of the system by giving the regulator the power to
determine the purposes on which disposals proceeds can be spent. It
also allows the regulator to require the registered provider to pay
sums to the HCA, if the provider has not used them as required by the
regulator in a specified period. The agency would then be able to
re-invent the proceeds, for example, in more social housing stock. On
that basis, I beg to move that new clause 43 be read a second
time.
The
Chairman: New clause 43 will be taken whenever we reach
it, which is not yet.
Question put and agreed
to. Clause
166, as amended, ordered to stand part of the
Bill. Clauses
167 to 171 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
172Overview
| 
