Draft Land Registration (Network Access) (Amendment) Rules 2011
The Committee consisted of the following Members:
† Brake, Tom (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)
† Crockart, Mike (Edinburgh West) (LD)
† Djanogly, Mr Jonathan (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice)
† Flello, Robert (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Lab)
Godsiff, Mr Roger (Birmingham, Hall Green) (Lab)
† Halfon, Robert (Harlow) (Con)
Harris, Mr Tom (Glasgow South) (Lab)
† Hunt, Tristram (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab)
† McDonagh, Siobhain (Mitcham and Morden) (Lab)
† Mercer, Patrick (Newark) (Con)
† Morris, Anne Marie (Newton Abbot) (Con)
Shannon, Jim (Strangford) (DUP)
† Smith, Mr Andrew (Oxford East) (Lab)
† Stewart, Iain (Milton Keynes South) (Con)
† Stewart, Rory (Penrith and The Border) (Con)
† Tami, Mark (Alyn and Deeside) (Lab)
† Wharton, James (Stockton South) (Con)
† Wright, Jeremy (Lord Commissioner of Her Majesty's Treasury)
Lydia Menzies, Committee Clerk
† attended the Committee
Sixth Delegated Legislation Committee
Wednesday 13 July 2011
[Mr Andrew Turner in the Chair]
Draft Land Registration (Network Access) (Amendment) Rules 2011
2.30 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Jonathan Djanogly): I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Land Registration (Network Access) (Amendment) Rules 2011.
It is, as ever, a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. These rules amend the Land Registration (Network Access) Rules 2008, which make provision about network access agreements. Those are agreements with the chief land registrar conferring authority to have access to the Land Registry’s electronic network on a person who is not a member of the Land Registry. The purpose of these rules is to ensure that the criteria that applicants for a network access agreement must meet are consistent with the terms of the Legal Services Act 2007, which makes provision for the regulation of persons who carry on certain legal activities.
The 2008 rules came into force before the changes made by the 2007 Act. At that time, the provision of reserved legal activities was subject to the provisions of the Solicitors Act 1974 and various other enactments. The network access rules were drafted to be consistent with those enactments. At that time, the regulation of legal services was based on the regulation of individual solicitors, barristers, licensed conveyancers and notaries. Under the 2007 Act, there is a move towards regulation of the bodies that deliver legal services. It is now necessary to amend the network access rules for consistency with the new legislation. It would not, of course, be appropriate for the chief land registrar to enter into a network access agreement with a person or body that was not authorised under the 2007 Act to undertake land registration activities.
These rules amend the criteria to be met by applicants for a network access agreement to bring them into line with the 2007 Act, and make adjustments to take account of alternative business structures. They will allow a person or body that is authorised under the Act to carry on legal activities relating to land registration, or a person or body that employs such an authorised person who will undertake those activities or direct and supervise them, to enter into a network access agreement, provided that they also meet other criteria set out in the network access rules. One class of body that can currently enter into a network access agreement will be unaffected—a Government Department. That is because of the exemption for public officers from the provisions of the 2007 Act.
In addition, amendments have been made to the definition of “intervention” and “disciplinary proceedings” to include references to licensing authorities that will regulate alternative business structures; and the insurance criterion has been amended so that the wording corresponds with wording used in the 2007 Act. The amendments will come into force on the day on which section 71 of the Act comes into force. That section will allow for the commencement of alternative business structures.
In drawing up the amendments, the Government intended to ensure that there was a level playing field for all legal services providers, whether they were traditional conveyancing practices or alternative business structures. The Lord Chancellor must consult such persons as he considers appropriate before making rules relating to access to the Land Registry’s electronic network. An impact assessment was also undertaken. The majority of those who responded to the consultation and impact assessment supported the proposals.
In summary, the draft rules update the criteria for entitlement to a network access agreement with the chief land registrar, reflecting provisions already made by the 2007 Act. I therefore commend the rules to the Committee.
2.33 pm
Robert Flello (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Lab): As ever, it is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Turner. This is a fairly straightforward, technical measure. I am grateful to the Minister for his explanation and for the detailed explanatory memorandum. I would like to place on the record Lord McNally’s comments in the other place on 5 July about the Land Registration (Network Access) (Amendment) Rules 2011. He said:
“One thing that I continually impress on colleagues from other departments is that we have a very important public asset in the trust that people put in the Land Registry process, and rightly so. For the great majority of us, the title and ownership of our property—those of us who are house owners—represents the biggest investment that we ever make in our lives. So the integrity of that process is extremely important.”—[Official Report, House of Lords, 5 July 2011; Vol. 729, c. GC73.]
May I impress on the Minister that it is important that he takes back to his Department and his colleagues in the Cabinet Office the message that any proposal to strip out responsibilities from the Land Registry to incorporate into a public data body would give rise to real concerns that that would then itself be sold off? The whole issue would resonate extremely loudly with the British public and fly in the face of Lord McNally’s correct observation on the value of this public asset. The Opposition do not intend to object to the order. It is a fairly technical measure, but I would like to have that on the record and perhaps the Minister might want to respond about the importance of making sure that the entire structure of the Land Registry remains in the public domain with all the safeguards that that brings.
2.36 pm
Mr Djanogly: I thank the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent South for putting his points forward and for saying that he is generally happy with the statutory instrument. The point he makes is not related to the SI, but Lord McNally is lead Minister for the Land Registry and he spoke for the Department when he made those remarks in the other place the other day. He is, of course, concerned to maintain the integrity of the Land Registry as a public asset. Everything that we in the Ministry of Justice are working towards is aimed at doing exactly doing that. As the hon. Gentleman will know, we are looking at the future role of the Land Registry. We are looking at its corporate being. We are looking at the value that exists within it and what it
contains, and how we can improve the services that it provides. I can assure him that that is being conducted on the basis of consultation and careful and measured thought about how best to preserve this valuable asset.