New Clause
19
National
Tenants’ Voice
‘(1)
The Secretary of State shall by order make provision for the
establishment of a body to be known as the National Tenants’
Voice.
(2) The objects of the
National Tenants’ Voice shall include the
following—
(a) to
represent the interests of tenants in the social rented
sector;
(b) to act as an
advocate for tenants to the Regulator of Social Housing, providers of
housing accommodation, Communities England, other government
departments and bodies, mortgage lenders and
others;
(c) to carry out and
promote research into matters affecting the interests of
tenants;
(d) to evaluate the
effects of policies and practice, both national and local, on
tenants;
(e) to promote good
practice in matters affecting the interests of
tenants;
(f) to give support
and assistance to national tenants’ representative organisations
and where appropriate to foster co-ordination of activities and mutual
support; and
(g) to perform
such other functions as may be
prescribed.
(3) In subsection
(2), “tenants” shall include those who occupy
accommodation under periodic or fixed term tenancies or under long
leases, and other lawful residential occupiers who receive housing
services from providers of social
housing.
(4) The Secretary of
State shall by regulation make provision for the
constitution and composition of the National Tenants’ Voice, for
membership of its governing body, for the determination of procedures,
for the establishment of executive and administrative support, and for
the delivery of reports and accounts.’.—[Lembit
Öpik.]
Brought
up, and read the First time.
Lembit
Öpik:
I beg to move, That the clause be read a
Second time.
The new
clause would establish a national tenants’ voice, which would
provide advocacy, support and research services and promote good
practice in matters affecting the interests of tenants. The creation of
a national tenants’ voice was envisaged in the Cave review,
which was published in June 2007. Perhaps even more important,
following the publication of the Hills report on social housing in
February 2007, the Government are pursuing an agenda of radical reform,
as the Minister himself says. That means that we are in a period of
flux and uncertainty as we do not know all the details yet. The changes
under consideration include periodic reviews of tenant circumstances,
the recently published action plan on overcrowding, the upcoming review
of the housing revenue account and questions about how housing
providers are monitored and regulated.
This is the time for a national
tenants’ voice. The Cave review said that a national
tenants’ voice should be established
“to be an advocate for tenants in
national debates and undertake dialogue with the government, regulators
and providers’ representative bodies, on more equal
terms.”
It goes on to
propose that
“there
should be consultation on the core standards for social housing and
that this should be an early focus for the new national tenant voice.
The performance of service providers will be judged against the
standards that are
developed.”
A
national tenants’ voice could also act as an advocate for
tenants in the private rented sector, which we have returned to a
number of times in the Committee’s proceedings. Often, private
tenants are in a vulnerable position. They live in the worst conditions
and have relatively little security of tenure. They have almost no say
about their rent, and they often feel in an inferior position when it
comes to dealing with their landlord. The Minister may consider siting
the national tenants’ voice in the National Consumer Council,
but Shelter, which feels very strongly about the need for such a voice,
does not think that permanently locating it in the council is
appropriate.
Mr.
Robert Syms (Poole) (Con): When the hon. Gentleman says
national does he mean
English?
Lembit
Öpik:
Yes, I do mean English. The Bill as it
pertains to proceedings is exclusively in relation to England. Scotland
and Wales have their own settlements and report respectively to the
Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly. I hope that that answers
the hon. Gentleman’s
question.
Shelter
feels that it is inappropriate to site the national tenants’
voice within the NCC. It thinks that such a voice should be
free-standing and independent, hence the wording of new clause 19. Once
again, I hope that the Minister will take a sympathetic view on this
matter, which follows directly from the Cave
review.
Mr.
Wright:
I pay tribute to the hon. Gentleman for
introducing the new clause. However, I do not think that it is
necessary. As I think that he said, the Government are committed to
establishing a national
tenants’ voice to represent and advise tenants. Martin Cave
argued strongly for such an organisation to ensure that the interests
of tenants, like our housing professionals and advisers, are
effectively represented when national and regional decisions are taken
on issues that affect them. On Second Reading and onwards, we have had
eloquent speeches about how social housing tenants often do not get a
good standard of service. Many social housing tenants do not have what
is known as exit power; they cannot choose to leave. Some tenants have
to endure bad housing standards in silence. Therefore, the role of the
national tenants’ voice is extremely important, especially in
the light of the other pieces of architecture that we are constructing
in the Bill in respect of the regulator and so on.
We consulted on this issue in
summer 2007. The response from tenant groups and housing associations
was extremely positive. Some 65 per cent. of those who responded
supported the idea of a national tenants’ voice, with a further
29 per cent. giving qualified support. Only 6 per cent. were not in
favour. I have had tenant groups in my office and they advocated very
strongly the idea of a national tenants’ voice.
On that basis, we are very
committed to existing national tenant organisations, such as Tenants
and Residents Organisations of England, the National Federation of
Tenant Management Organisations, and the Confederation of Co-operative
Housing. Such organisations need to play a key role in the
establishment of a national tenants’ voice. They feel that it is
very important that tenants should have a role in managing the
organisation. One option is to locate the national tenants’
voice within the new National Consumer Council when it is
formed.
The new
council will be established later this year under powers set out in the
Consumers, Estate Agents and Redress Act 2007. It will bring together
the current National Consumer Council, Energywatch and Postwatch to
create a much more powerful and streamlined consumer body. Our view is
that there are considerable advantages in locating the national
tenants’ voice within the new organisation. It will, for
example, strengthen both its advocacy and research functions. On that
basis, we have set up a project group, involving key stakeholders, such
as tenant organisations, to take forward those proposals. The group
will meet first in late February or early March and will be tasked with
advising us on the details of the remit, location and governance
structure of the NTV. As part of that, it will hold discussions with
the new National Consumer Council about its role and the viability of
locating the NTV within the NCC.
I stress to the hon. Member for
Montgomeryshire and the wider Committee that discussions cannot take
place until the new council has been appointed. We expect that to
happen in February, and we anticipate the project group completing its
work by the end of the
year.
Mr.
Love:
I agree with everything that the hon. Gentleman has
said about a national tenants’ voice. I wanted to make the plea
that we should not forget tenant representation at a local level. From
my own experience, it is incredibly patchy, and if we do not have
representation at a local level, the national level will not
mean very much. I ask the Minister not to forget local representation,
and to do what he can to ensure that we get proper coverage at a local
level.
Mr.
Wright:
As ever, my hon. Friend is correct. We have had
many debates during the last few sittings about the need for the
regulator, and to ensure that tenants’ voices are not lost with
regard to standards. The regulator will be a powerful driver in
ensuring that we raise housing standards, and to ensure that tenants
are consulted and engaged on a regular basis at a local
level.
I think that
tenants organisations should be involved in setting up the governance
arrangements of the national tenants’ voice, as they have been
in local discussions, and in the decision whether it should be sited in
the national consumer council. It is not correct for me, the Secretary
of State or other Government Ministers to establish a particular form
for the national tenants’ voice. There will be a project group,
and given what I have said about the importance of tenants’
voices being heard at local and national level, I hope that the hon.
Gentleman will not press his new clause.
Lembit
Öpik:
The Minister has said that at this stage he
does not want to establish a particular form, but at the same time he
is establishing one. He says that he believes that the national
tenants’ voice should be contained within the National Consumer
Council. I do not disagree in principle, but I have issues with that.
Shelter holds the view that the NCC will give the tenants’ voice
insufficient power and authority to dispatch its duty to the millions
of people who are tenants in and around the country.
The Minister said that 65 per
cent. of those surveyed supported the idea of a national
tenants’ voice. Shelter has provided outstanding support to
myself and other hon. Members during the passage of the Bill, and I
thank it for that. Shelter is not trying to create arbitrary
free-standing institutions for the sake of it. It wants to ensure that
a tenants’ voice is worthy of the name. I hope that the Minister
will reflect on new clause 19, and that in informal conversations we
can pursue the matter further. We all want the same thing—to
ensure that it works. In order to provide space for that further
dialogue, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the
motion.
Motion and
clause, by leave,
withdrawn.
Clause
274
Orders
and
regulations
Amendment
made: No. 29, in clause 274, page 116,
line 19, at end
insert—
‘( ) an order under
section 14(8),’.—[Mr.
Wright.]
Clause
274, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 58 ordered to stand
part of the Bill.
Schedule
7
Amendments
of enactments: Part
1
Mr.
Wright:
I beg to move amendment No. 30, in
schedule 7, page 158, line 39, leave
out from beginning to end of line 1 on page 159 and
insert—
‘(4) Omit subsection
(2).’.
This is
a straightforward and technical amendment. It omits subsection (2) of
section 8(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. As I am sure
members of the Committee will recollect from our debate on Government
amendment No. 23, we have amended the Bill to ensure that some
non-local planning authority functions, such as the duty to keep
registers of enforcement notices may be given to the Homes and
Communities Agency concurrently with the existing body under a
designation order. Subsection (2) of section 8(a) of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990 provides that where the agency has non-local
planning authority functions conferred on it in relation to a
designated area, the agency will be the local planning authority in
place of the existing body. That removes the powers of the existing
body and slots the agency into the planning regime where functions have
been conferred. We no longer want that in all cases, so we tabled
amendment No. 23. The amendment is consequential to the acceptance of
amendment No.
23.
Amendment
agreed
to.
Schedule 7,
as amended, agreed
to.
Clause 275
ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Schedule
10
Repeals
Amendments
made: No. 123, in schedule 10, page 166,
line 5, at end
insert—
|
‘Leasehold
Reform Act 1967
(c. 88)
|
In
section
1—
|
|
(a)
in subsections (1)(a) and (1A), the words “at a low
rent”,
|
|
(b)
in subsection (3A)(b), the words “,
1AA”.
|
|
Section
1A(2).
|
|
Section
1AA.
|
|
Section
4A.
|
|
In
section 9(1C), the words “,
1AA”.
|
|
In
section 9A(1), the words “,
1AA”.
|
|
In
section 32A(1)(b), the words “or if section 1AA above were not
in
force”.
|
|
In
Schedule 3, paragraph
6(1A).’.
|
No.
303, in
schedule 10, page 168, line 22, at
end
insert—
|
‘Housing
Act 1988
(c. 50)
|
Section
81(6).
|
|
Section
133(6).’.
|
No. 124, in
schedule 10, page 168, line 22,
column 2, at end
insert—
|
‘In
Schedule 5, in paragraph 13(5), the word “and” following
paragraph
(a).’.
|
—[Mr.
Wright.]
Mr.
Wright:
I beg to move amendment No. 31, in
schedule 10, page 168, line 24, at
end
insert—
|
‘Town
and Country Planning Act 1990
(c. 8)
|
Section
8A(2).’.
|
This
is a straightforward and technical amendment adding section 8A(2) of
the 1990 Act to the list of legislation being repealed. For the reasons
set out a few moments ago on Government amendment No. 30, subsection
(2) is no longer
necessary.
Amendment
agreed
to.
Amendments
made: No. 125, in schedule 10, page 168,
line 25, column 2, at beginning
insert—
No.
126, in schedule 10, page 168, line 41,
column 2, at end
insert—
No.
127, in
schedule 10, page 168, line 47, column 2, at
end
insert—
|
‘In
Schedule 9, paragraphs 1 and 2(2), (4), (5), (6) and
(8).’.
|
No.
304, in
schedule 10, page 168, line 47, at
end
insert—
|
‘In
Schedule 2, in paragraph
11(4)—
|
|
(a)
“or the Housing Corporation”,
and
|
|
(b)
“or, as the case may be, the Housing
Corporation”.’.
|
No.
305, in
schedule 10, page 169, line 12, after
‘paragraphs’ insert
‘68(a),’.
No.
306, in
schedule 10, page 169, line 12, leave
out ‘and 94’ and insert ‘94 and
97(3)’.
No.
128, in
schedule 10, page 169, line 24, at
end
insert—
|
‘Commonhold
and Leasehold Reform Act 2002
(c. 15)
|
Section
141.’.
|
—[Mr.
Wright.]
Schedule
10, as amended, agreed
to.
Clause
s
276
to 278
ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
| 
