Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

173B: Before Clause 131, insert the following new Clause-

"Exemptions from flexible tenancy regime

(1) The Secretary of State shall by regulations provide that a secure tenancy shall not be capable of being a flexible tenancy if it falls within one of such classes as shall be prescribed.

(2) The prescribed classes of secure tenancy referred to in subsection (1) shall include-

(a) tenancies granted to a tenant (alone or jointly with others) aged 60 years or more;

(b) tenancies granted to a tenant (alone or jointly with others) in circumstances where the tenant or a member of his or her household suffers from a long-term illness or disability, or has a need for secure accommodation on medical or welfare grounds;

(c) tenancies granted to such other persons as regulations shall provide who have a need for secure accommodation.



20 July 2011 : Column 1468

(3) In determining whether a tenant falls within one of the prescribed classes of person, the landlord authority shall have regard to guidance issued by the Secretary of State under this section.

(4) Where a tenancy is a secure tenancy by reason of regulations made under this section, it shall be a ground for possession within section 84 of the Housing Act 1985 (grounds and orders for possession) where the accommodation afforded by the dwelling-house is more extensive than is reasonably required by the tenant.

(5) The court shall not make an order for possession under subsection (4) unless-

(a) it is satisfied that suitable alternative accommodation will be available for the tenant when the order takes effect; and

(b) it considers it reasonable to make the order.

(6) Part IV of Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1985 (suitability of accommodation) shall have effect for determining, for the purpose of subsection (5)(a), whether suitable alternative accommodation will be available for the tenant.

(7) Where the landlord considers that the ground for possession in subsection (4) applies to a tenancy, the court shall not entertain proceedings for possession of the tenancy unless the landlord has complied with the notice requirements in section 83 and subsections (3) and (4) of section 84 of the Housing Act 1985.

(8) Where proceedings are brought for possession of a dwelling-house under the ground in subsection (4), the court shall have the powers set out in section 85 of the Housing Act 1985."

Lord Best: My Lords, Amendments 173B and 173D concern the new regime for flexible tenancies which will change the nature of security of tenure in social housing and will mean that in future councils will be able to grant tenancies for just two years rather than for life. Correspondingly, housing associations will be allowed by their regulator to use assured and short-hold tenancies in place of the previous presumption in favour of lifetime security of tenure.

There are positive reasons for such a change. For example, some housing associations, particularly in central London, can see benefits from letting some properties to younger, mobile, more affluent, single people and childless couples. These tenants can add a mix of incomes and of lifestyles to so-called monocultural estates that might otherwise become labelled as being only for the most disadvantaged households. In combination with reforms being introduced by the Government to enable social landlords to charge much higher rents, shorter tenancies to rather better-off tenants could produce surplus income to plough back into meeting more traditional housing needs. A two-year tenancy could suit this kind of tenant.

As a supporter of flexibilities and freedoms for social landlords, and as an advocate for more mixed and less stigmatised social housing, I see the merit in a tenure regime that allows some short-term lettings for certain categories of tenant. The key point is that councils and housing associations will continue to be entitled to grant permanent tenancies if they so decide: I would hope Ministers will give them every encouragement to continue to do so. Security is a distinguishing feature of social housing since these landlords are not investing with an eye on future capital gains and do not need, in contrast to the private rented sector, to be able to gain possession for investment reasons. In my early days in the Housing Association world, organisations like the Notting Hill Housing Trust and Paddington Churches Housing Association bought tenanted properties from the notorious

20 July 2011 : Column 1469

landlords of the day simply to provide security for the occupiers. Even though sufficient funds for renovating the buildings were not available, security could be offered, and that could change lives.

I think-and certainly I hope-that the new tenancies are not the thin end of a wedge. Ministers have made clear that they would expect two-year flexible tenancies to be very exceptional. The Government's consultation paper on housing reform states that

I find this reassuring. However, it is not clear whether there is an expectation that flexible tenancies will generally be used for a longer but still relatively short period-say, five years-with no certainty that they will be renewed thereafter.

Some commentators, recognising the intense pressures for social housing, have advocated a review of each tenant's income after a fixed period and no renewal of the tenancy if that tenant has achieved average earnings or above, or if they no longer qualify for housing benefit. I fear this approach would send out all the wrong signals and could be hugely counterproductive. Tenants will be well aware that the chances of finding a comparable family home in the private rented sector, at a reasonable rent, are remote, and of course no private landlord would be likely to offer security of tenure for more than six months or a year. So the prospect of being forced to leave their home would hang over social housing tenants like the sword of Damocles. This way of using flexible tenancies would penalise those who make a success of their lives; it would encourage people to fail at work in order to keep their families secure; it would encourage deceit to save the family home and would require an army of snoopers to police it; and it would mean announcing that social housing was confined to losers, condemning those brought up there as society's failures and greatly impeding their life chances.

Quite different is the concept of a periodic review, a free consultation, by the landlord for the tenant to see whether, if incomes have risen, a shared ownership or equity purchase arrangement would not now be sensible. Although the tenant would thereafter pay more, they would secure an ownership stake, with all the financial and psychological advantages that that could bring.

Amendment 173B, again backed by Shelter and Crisis, would make sure that the flexible tenure regime excluded certain specific categories of tenant. The first group is older people, including those owner occupiers we are hoping will move from unsuitable homes and who, if we could persuade them to move into retirement flats, would free up a family home. But older people will never be persuaded to move if the tenancy is for only a few years, after which they could, even if only in theory, be evicted. The second category is the tenant with a disability or long-term illness who clearly needs a secure home. The third category is widely drawn to embrace any others whom the Secretary of State could commend for proper security of tenure. My view is that this should normally cover families with children for whom a sense of security by remaining at the same school, by becoming established in the area and by

20 July 2011 : Column 1470

settling down for the long term is hugely important. The Minister may argue that no exemptions are necessary because housing associations and councils can continue to give lifelong tenancies if they wish, but this amendment would provide reassurance for those likely to be most anxious about the loss of security.

Amendment 173D picks up on the provision in the Bill for a review of the tenant's position because they have lost their tenancy at the end of a fixed period and spells out that normally the tenant could expect to have the tenancy renewed for at least a similar term. This is not as helpful to those for whom security is all-important as knowing that the home is theirs, like that of any other owner occupier, for as long as they need it. But this amendment at least gives a measure of comfort that only in exceptional circumstances will they be required to move out after five years, or whatever initial term they obtained. Just because they have now secured a proper job, there should be no expectation of having to up sticks and find another home.

Together, these amendments try to ensure that the positive elements of a move to flexible tenancies are preserved, while fears and anxieties about the arrangements are put to rest. I beg to move.

6.45 pm

Lord Shipley: My Lords, I shall speak to Amendments 173CE and 173E. I should say that a gremlin has got into the system, and Amendment 173CF is incorrect. I beg permission not to speak to it because it is a mistake.

The purpose of Amendment 173CE is to enable a person to whom the offer of a flexible tenancy is made to request a review of the landlord's decision as to the length of the term of the tenancy, thus eliminating the restriction that no review can be requested if the offer is within the landlord's policy as to the length of the term of such tenancies. I shall give an example to explain the problem. A tenant or prospective tenant may want to request a longer period which is permitted by the policy but which has not been offered on the basis of the initial assessment by the local authority before the offer. The longer period being sought could be because of long-term specialised medical treatment needed for a member of the household or to avoid disruption of the education of a child with particular needs. There could be a difference between the authority's initial assessment of the time required for the tenancy and the tenant's assessment of the time leading to the need for a review. I do not understand why a local housing authority should not consider representations in relation to the length of a flexible tenancy in a particular case. It would be to the advantage of a tenant or prospective tenant that it should be able to undertake a review.

Amendment 173E is about creating a presumption that flexible tenancies should be renewed on expiry unless good reasons are shown to the contrary. As the legislation stands, the process tenants will have to undergo when their flexible tenancies come to the end of the fixed term is weighted almost entirely in favour of the landlord. The amendment would hope to ensure that, when this process is being undertaken, there is

20 July 2011 : Column 1471

greater protection for tenants, many of whom will be particularly vulnerable toward the end of their tenancy. This could be achieved by requiring a landlord to justify refusing to extend the tenancy rather than expecting the tenant to undergo a potentially complicated reapplication process. This would be preferable, as many tenants might be unaware of what factors are relevant to the authority's decision and might find it difficult to successfully advocate for renewal of a tenancy or struggle to provide proof of need.

We also need to guard against bureaucratic failure. Bureaucratic failings already cause a great deal of hardship for people on low incomes, such as when mistakes occur in determining housing benefit claims or when registered providers fail to issue an assured tenancy following a successful probation period. No one should face the loss of their home as a result of bureaucratic failing. This amendment would help to prevent this happening. There is also the question of landlord accountability. This amendment would help to improve accountability, as landlords would have to demonstrate greater objectivity and transparency before taking possession of a tenant's home. The removal of security of tenure will result in a great deal more uncertainty for tenants, as they will become aware of the looming threat of losing their homes toward the end of their fixed-term tenancy. While a presumption in favour of renewal would not remove this huge worry, it would at least ensure that tenants are on a more secure footing and hope to ensure that landlords undertake a thorough process when reviewing tenancies.

In committee in the other place, the Minister Andrew Stunell, said that we expect landlords to discuss housing options with tenants well before the fixed term of their tenancy comes to an end. That we would expect the tenancy to be renewed in many cases needs to be underlined. For those reasons, it is important that this expectation in terms of presumption of renewal of tenancy is written into the Bill. Social housing is for many people the best means of ensuring security and a long-term stable home. For some, it is the first step in enabling them to improve their circumstances. Having people living in a neighbourhood for long periods can build community cohesion and social capital. The amendment will simply help to maintain people in their homes.

Baroness Doocey: Speaking to Amendments 173CA and 173CB, I turn to Amendment 173CA. The purpose of this amendment is to increase the minimum length of flexible tenancies in social housing. With a diminishing stock of social housing under increasing pressure, the Government see greater flexibility of tenancies as a better way of managing social housing stock. The amendment would increase the minimum length of a flexible tenancy from two to seven years. It does not oppose the principle of flexibility. Rather, it is an attempt to reconcile the advantages of flexibility with the need of tenants for a reasonable degree of security and stability.

In theory, the Bill would give local authorities and housing associations the flexibility to be able to offer tenancies of varying length in order to best manage their stock. They could still offer inflexible tenancies if they chose; the length of a flexible tenancy could be as

20 July 2011 : Column 1472

short as two years, although we know that the Government believe that a two-year tenancy would be the exception. However, in practice, there is a risk that local authorities and housing associations could make two years the norm. If two years become widespread or commonplace, it would undermine household housing stability.

Until now, social housing has been stable; it is often the first stable accommodation that many vulnerable people have ever experienced. If this stability were lost, it would remove a key benefit of social housing for such people. It would significantly weaken the sustainability of communities. Two years is too short because it would lead to a higher turnover of residents on estates, with the associated problems of poor community cohesion. If we want to achieve mixed communities and well-functioning neighbourhoods, it is important that people-including those in work and with good prospects-are able to put down roots in an area and feel a sense of ownership. Extending the minimum to seven years is not a panacea but it would go some way towards mitigating the problems caused by flexible tenancies.

A two-year limit could act as a serious disincentive to work since tenants would fear that if they find employment and increase their earnings, they might no longer be able to renew their tenancy. A seven-year limit would lessen this fear since finding employment would not have an immediate impact on their tenancy.

The purpose of Amendment 173CB is to ensure that people moving on from one secure tenancy are offered another. At present, tenants in the social rented sector enjoy secure tenancies of unlimited duration. The change to a flexible scheme would apply to new tenants but not existing ones. Leaving aside any objections to flexibility per se, the Bill as drafted includes an ambiguity. It is clear that an existing secure tenant will not have his or her tenancy agreement torn up or amended. It is also clear that a new tenant may be subject to a limited-term tenancy. However, the Bill is unclear on what happens if an existing secure tenant moves to a different property. Therefore, it does not guarantee their security.

The Government are putting measures in place to make it easier for social tenants to transfer to a new property that will better meet their needs, such as the introduction of the national affordable home swap scheme. At the same time, the Government intend to cut housing benefit for social tenants who are underoccupying; that is, those living in a house with more bedrooms than they are deemed to need. Many of the people affected by this cut will move to smaller accommodation, but only if that accommodation is available. The Government are right to encourage an increase in social housing transfers because everyone wins. It will be good for existing tenants who can move to more suitable housing, the homeless because it will free up larger houses and social landlords because they can better allocate their housing stock. However, if the Bill leads to existing secure tenants being granted only flexible tenancies simply because they have made the choice to move to a new property, the effect will be that many, if not most, such tenants will decide to stay put.



20 July 2011 : Column 1473

Lord Rix: My Lords, my Amendment 174 also concerns the Government's proposal to introduce flexible tenancies of just two years for social housing tenants. The promotion of flexible tenure is based on the notion of non-disabled younger adults having access to other housing options, depending on income levels and employment. I am concerned that this approach is not appropriate for people on low or fixed incomes, especially those with disabilities who may have limited or no other housing options available. Many disabled people may also need adaptations to their homes or rely on informal support networks, which can take many years to establish. Many disabled people consider security of tenure to be essential to both their quality of life and their well-being. Over the years, many tenants build up local support networks and use nearby services which enable them to remain independent. I am therefore extremely concerned by the proposal to introduce two-year tenancies and the reluctance to make an exemption on the face of the Bill for certain groups, in particular those who are disabled.

At the Report stage of the Bill in the House of Commons, the Under-Secretary of State at the Department for Communities and Local Government, Andrew Stunell MP, outlined that the Government,

He also confirmed that,

I welcome these comments as they show some recognition that disabled people require further protective measures. However, I do not think that standards alone are adequate enough to protect disabled people from flexible tenancies. Hence, Amendment 174 aims to place an explicit exemption on the face of the Bill for disabled and older people.

7 pm

Lord Kennedy of Southwark: My Lords, I rise to speak briefly in support of Amendment 173B moved by the noble Lord, Lord Best, and on other welcome amendments in this group.

Amendment 173B adds an important protection to exempt vulnerable and older people from flexible tenancies. Amendment 173CA in the names of the noble Baroness, Lady Doocey, and the noble Lord, Lord Shipley, adds an additional protection to extend those terms from two to seven years. Amendment 173CB in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Doocey, seeks to have protection regarding previous tenancy arrangements. In his Amendment 173D the noble Lord, Lord Best, also seeks to add a protection for the review decision so that it proceeds,

terms of the tenancy. The noble Lord, Lord Rix, highlighted in his amendment the exemptions for vulnerable or older people from flexible tenancies.

As I said in my previous remarks, the Opposition are very concerned about this Bill, and particularly this housing section. We very much hope that the Government are listening to what has been said in the

20 July 2011 : Column 1474

House today. I hope that the Minister can either accept these amendments or give the House an assurance that she is going to take them away, reflect on them, and bring these matters back at Report.

Baroness Hanham: My Lords, before I respond to the debate, I move the government amendments that are in my name-

The Lord Speaker (Baroness Hayman): If the noble Baroness forgives me, you can only move amendments at the point at which they come in the Marshalled List. You can speak to them with the greatest of pleasure.

Baroness Hanham: My Lords, I shall learn after another few years if I have not learnt before. My apologies to the House.

I will speak to the amendments in my name. Government Amendments 174N and 174P are small amendments which remove requirements on landlords to register a tenancy with the Land Registry and execute the tenancy by deed. They reflect concerns from the National Housing Federation that requirements to register tenancies with a term of more than seven years and execute by deed those with a term of more than three years would discourage landlords from granting longer-term tenancies. There are, in these circumstances, no practical advantages to a social tenant from either the tenancy being registered or executed by deed since they cannot deal in their tenancy-that is, tenancies in social housing may not be bought and sold. These amendments simply put fixed-term social tenants on the same footing as secure or assured social tenants in this regard.

I turn to government Amendments 173CAA, 173CC, 173CD, 174B, 174C, 174D, 174E, 174F, 174G, 174H, 174J, 174K, 174L and 174M. These amendments make small corrections to the existing text of the Bill and provide additional clarification where parliamentary counsel considers this helpful. They make no change to our policy intention. Those are the government amendments; I now turn to the debate on this part of the Bill which, as I expected, was again half understanding but also slightly quarrelsome. I will again seek to answer the amendments as well as I can.

The amendment spoken to by the noble Baroness, Lady Doocey, would be an unhelpful restriction on local authority landlords' flexibility to use their social housing stock in a way which best meets the needs of individual households and their local area. This question was about the two-year minimum-term offers. I need to explain that we believe that there is some advantage in seriously exceptional circumstances-and I stress these will be very exceptional circumstances-for landlords to be able to provide for a short period of housing when it is felt it is needed and proper protection.

We have consulted landlords on this and they have made it clear that the great majority would only issue two-year tenancies under exceptional circumstances. As we expect and mean that to be exceptional, as I will say later on, we will look to see what we need to do to underline that. We continue to affirm that we expect longer tenancies of five or 10 years, and of course lifetime tenancies, to be the norm. Those are particularly for vulnerable households or those with children.



20 July 2011 : Column 1475

Of course the vulnerable will be protected. We intend to require landlords in their tenancy policies to take specific account of the needs of those who are vulnerable through the provision of tenancies that provide a reasonable degree of stability. Two-year tenancies might be appropriate in particular and probably quite exceptional circumstances-for example, helping young people to enter employment; for a family who need a larger home for the short term; or perhaps for someone who has had a serious accident, cannot manage in their own home for a short period and needs access to accessible housing for a short term before they return home. As regards larger housing requirements, people's children often leave home and therefore the tenancy may not be needed any more. We know that some local authorities are considering how fixed-term tenancies could help them to develop support packages for recovering drug addicts, for example.

I want to underline firmly that we are looking for these provisions to be applied in exceptional circumstances and, in the light of today's debate, I will reflect on how we can ensure that social landlords grant only tenancies with a term of less than five years in exceptional circumstances. We probably will not be able to put that in the Bill because it may not make sense; but there will be strong guidance about what we mean by exceptional two-year tenancies. I will discuss this matter with officials and consider the best way of dealing with it because I want to make it absolutely clear so that people are not concerned any more. I know that they have been.

Amendments 173B, 174A and 174 propose new clauses that would create categories of individuals and families who could not be offered a flexible tenancy. They would always have to receive a lifetime tenancy. We recognise that the needs of older people and the needs of those with a disability, for example, are likely to remain broadly constant over the long term. Lifetime or long-term tenancies are, of course, likely to be appropriate for these households in the vast majority of cases. More importantly, landlords recognise that too. In only the most exceptional cases will two-year tenancies be granted, but they will usually be for significantly longer or a lifetime for those with ongoing needs. As a safeguard, our draft direction to the social housing regulator sets out our intention to require landlords in their tenancy policies to take specific account of the needs of the vulnerable. Indeed, we have strengthened our proposed terms for the tenure standard, having listened carefully to the views expressed. That is a better way forward than seeking to prescribe centrally categories of people who should always be granted a lifetime tenancy.

The new clauses proposed by Amendments 173B and 174A include a new ground for possession to be available for secure tenancies and provided to some new tenants if a property is more extensive than is reasonably required by the tenant and if the landlord can supply a suitable alternative. I support the intention behind these amendments. We need to do more to make best use of social homes, but we do not believe that these amendments are the right way forward. Flexible tenancies will be a far better means of tackling overcrowding and underoccupancy. They offer a straightforward deal between landlords and tenants,

20 July 2011 : Column 1476

particularly on underoccupancy. A landlord could, for example, offer a family a large family home on a 15-year tenancy on the clear understanding that they would be required to move to a smaller social property at the end of that term when their children had left home and, therefore, they had more space than was necessary.

Amendment 173CB seeks to put into legislation for some existing tenants the guarantee of continued security on moving home. We by contrast are putting in place through regulation a guarantee of continued security for all existing tenants who move to a social rented home. I hope that that answers the concerns of the noble Baroness, Lady Doocey. We are upholding our promise that existing tenants' rights would be protected and respected, and that includes guaranteeing the same level of security to existing tenants who move to another social rented property. We will do that through a direction to the housing regulator on the new tenancy standard, which we have now published for consultation. All social landlords will be required to meet the tenancy standard, which will guarantee continued security to existing secure and assured tenancy, unlike this amendment.

We do not believe Amendments 173D and 173E are necessary. A review of the original decision must be carried out by a more senior officer not previously involved to ensure that the decision was fair and in line with the landlord's published tenancy policy. Should the reviewing officer conclude that the decision is not in line with the landlord's policy then the landlord will have to reconsider. If he does not then a tenant can approach a local councillor, MP or tenancy panel for assistance and have their case referred to the Housing Ombudsman. The Bill makes clear that where a landlord seeks possession of a tenant's property, despite a review concluding that they were not acting in line with their own policy, then of course the court will refuse that application. The inclusion of a reference to comply with human rights is therefore not necessary. Landlords will need to ensure their decisions on tenancies are proportionate in human rights terms. Recent judgments make clear that a tenant of a local authority will be able to raise a proportionality defence in possession proceedings.

Amendment 173CE would widen the scope of the review available to a tenant or prospective tenant on the length of a tenancy being offered by a local authority. As the Bill stands, the review gives the individual an opportunity to request a review if they consider that the length of the tenancy they are being offered is not in line with the landlord's published tenancy policy. That policy must set out the kinds and length of tenancies the landlord will grant in different circumstances. If a decision by the landlord appears to be out of line with the policy then it is absolutely right that a prospective tenant should be able to challenge it. If a prospective tenant has concerns that the tenancy policy is not fair, they are free to pursue the issue through the landlord complaints procedure.

Amendment 173CF changes the wording of the Bill to request a review on the length of tenancy. We are covered with that; as it stands, a person seeking a review could argue that their tenancy should be for life.



20 July 2011 : Column 1477

I will respond to Amendment 174AA although I am not sure whether it was spoken to. While I agree it makes sense that when a tenancy will be for life, a tenant should be compensated when the tenancy is for a fixed term, a right to compensation makes less sense. Perhaps we did not discuss compensation but I will finish nevertheless. This is about flexibility for the landlord, making sure they can make best use of their stock. Forcing a landlord to pay for improvements made by a tenant who may shortly be moving on is just not practical.

I have spoken in some detail-perhaps more than anybody would have wished- but I hope that having done so it will set the base for future debate. I ask that, with those responses, noble Lords will not press their amendments.

Lord Best: My Lords, I am very grateful indeed to the Minister for that very long and valuable exposition of the many ways in which things may turn out for the best at the end of this process. I welcome her reassurance that lifelong tenancies will still be very much the bread and butter of what social housing is all about; not just for those with extremely important ongoing needs, such as older people and those with disabilities, but for families with children, for whom a tenancy for life-a proper family home-is so important. Where social landlords do use flexible tenancies, she makes it clear that these will seldom be for less than the full five years. In any case, they will be relatively exceptional.

The noble Baroness mentioned the guarantee that those who move or transfer their home will take with them the same security of tenure. That is very important. She made a lot of reassurances that we will be able to read at our leisure during the summer, which I hope we will find satisfactory. The Minister explained that a lot of those ministerial intents will be put into practice through the regulator having the power to issue firm requirements on social landlords in relation to tenure. That is an extension of the way in which the regulator works at present. None of the three noble Lords whose names were above mine who were to oppose the Question that Clause 133 should stand part of the Bill rose to do so-I do not suggest that they do now. The noble Baroness explains the value of the regulator having that role. She gives me a dilemma because, as a matter of principle, many people are opposed to the Secretary of State giving more and more instructions to the regulator and are aware of the dangers that that has of taking away the independence of the social housing landlords. Perhaps we could debate those matters when some of us oppose Clause 134 standing part of the Bill. In the mean time, with all those reassurances from the noble Baroness, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment 173B withdrawn.

Clause 131 : Tenancy strategies

Amendment 173C

Moved by Lord Best

173C: Clause 131, leave out Clause 131 and insert the following new Clause-

"Tenancy strategies



20 July 2011 : Column 1478

(1) A local housing authority in England working with registered providers of social housing in its area, residents, and other stakeholders shall consider appropriate responses to relevant tenancy issues locally.

(2) A local housing authority must publish information detailing the approach taken locally to tenancy issues in any manner it considers appropriate.

(3) This information may include how the local housing authority, registered providers and partners will work together in relation to-

(a) the kinds of tenancies they grant,

(b) the circumstances in which they will grant a tenancy of a particular kind,

(c) where they grant tenancies for a certain term, the lengths of the terms,

(d) the circumstances in which they will grant a further tenancy on the coming to an end of an existing tenancy, and

(e) any other issues as determined appropriate by the local housing authority.

(4) The powers in this section may be exercised by a single local housing authority or by two or more local housing authorities acting jointly."

Lord Best: My Lords, I apologise for speaking again, but I shall do so only briefly. Amendment 173C is supported by the Local Government Association and the National Housing Federation. Clause 131 places a duty on every local authority to draw up a tenancy strategy for its area. The social landlords, the registered providers of social housing, must then have regard to that tenancy strategy in formulating their tenancy policies. Neither local authorities nor housing associations are in favour of that idea. Pursuing a theme affecting the whole Bill, I oppose the centralist tendency at work here in dictating the process and instructing local authorities on how to act-in this case, making them produce a new strategy.

Local authorities do not want to be told what to do in their procedures. Equally, housing associations are not keen on that prescriptive approach when they know that better results can be achieved by forging locally tailored partnerships. Bodies such as the Chartered Institute of Housing have strongly encouraged local authorities to reduce tenant strategies for some time, and those voluntary arrangements are working well. Therefore, the replacement clause in my amendment is intended to get local authorities and social housing providers to work together, with councils taking the strategic role in identifying housing requirements and the tenancy policies that flow from understanding those data. Such an approach goes with the grain of localism and recognises the very different housing strategies already been brought together by a number of local authorities, from the Derbyshire Dales to the London Borough of Hackney, to create mutually agreed approaches with their partners. This is how it should be. I beg to move.

Baroness Hanham: My Lords, I have a swift answer for the noble Lord. A tenancy strategy will not be onerous. There is no requirement for it to be in a specific format or of a particular length or particular content. Many local authorities have indicated that they want to build on the existing policies and strategies, and Clause 131 rightly requires the authority to consult housing associations before adopting strategy. I therefore ask the noble Lord to withdraw his amendment.



20 July 2011 : Column 1479

Lord Best: I thank the Minister for that response and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment 173C withdrawn.

Clause 131 agreed.

Clauses 132 to 134 agreed.

Clause 135 : Flexible tenancies

Amendment 173CA not moved.

Amendment 173CAA

Moved by Baroness Hanham

173CAA: Clause 135, page 127, line 30, leave out "secure" and insert "flexible"

Amendment 173CAA agreed.

Amendment 173CB not moved.

Amendments 173CC and 173CD

Moved by Baroness Hanham

173CC: Clause 135, page 127, line 39, leave out "("the original flexible tenancy")"

173CD: Clause 135, page 127, leave out line 41 and insert "that is a flexible tenancy for a term certain of the length specified in the notice, and sets out the other express terms of the tenancy, and

(e) the length of the term specified in the notice is at least two years.

(3A) The length of the term of a flexible tenancy that becomes such a tenancy by virtue of subsection (3) is that specified in the notice under paragraph 4ZA(2) of Schedule 1.

(3B) The other express terms of the flexible tenancy are those set out in the notice, so far as those terms are compatible with the statutory provisions relating to flexible tenancies; and in this subsection "statutory provision" means any provision made by or under an Act."

Amendments 173CC and 173CD agreed.

Amendments 173CE to 174 not moved.

Clause 135, as amended, agreed.

Amendment 174A not moved.

Clause 136 : Flexible tenancies: other amendments

Amendment 174AA not moved.

Amendments 174B to 174M

Moved by Baroness Hanham

174B: Clause 136, page 131, line 23, leave out subsection (6)

174C: Clause 136, page 131, line 31, leave out "the purposes of the Housing Act 1985" and insert "a term certain"

174D: Clause 136, page 131, line 38, leave out from second "tenancy" to end of line 39 and insert "that would be a flexible tenancy for a term certain of the length specified in the notice,"

174E: Clause 136, page 132, line 1, after "specifying" insert "a period of at least two years as"

174F: Clause 136, page 132, line 1, at end insert ", and

(c) setting out the other express terms of the tenancy.

(3) The length of the term of a flexible tenancy that becomes such a tenancy by virtue of this section is that specified in the notice under subsection (2).



20 July 2011 : Column 1480

(4) The other express terms of the flexible tenancy are those set out in the notice, so far as those terms are compatible with the statutory provisions relating to flexible tenancies; and in this subsection "statutory provision" means any provision made by or under an Act.""

174G: Clause 136, page 132, line 2, leave out subsection (8)

174H: Clause 136, page 132, line 8, leave out "This section" and insert "Subsection (2)"

174J: Clause 136, page 132, line 10, after "tenancy" insert "within the meaning of section 107A of the Housing Act 1985"

174K: Clause 136, page 132, line 13, at beginning insert "If the landlord has served a notice within subsection (3) on the tenant before the end of the demoted tenancy then,"

174L: Clause 136, page 132, line 14, at end insert-

"(3) The notice must-

(a) state that, on ceasing to be a demoted tenancy, the tenancy will become a secure tenancy that is a flexible tenancy for a term certain of the length specified in the notice,

(b) specify a period of at least two years as the length of the term of the tenancy, and

(c) set out the other express terms of the tenancy.

(4) The length of the term of a flexible tenancy that becomes such a tenancy by virtue of this section is that specified in the notice under subsection (3).

(5) The other express terms of the flexible tenancy are those set out in the notice, so far as those terms are compatible with the statutory provisions relating to flexible tenancies; and in this subsection "statutory provision" means any provision made by or under an Act.""

174M: Clause 136, page 132, line 15, leave out subsection (10)

Amendments 174B to 174M agreed.

Clause 136, as amended, agreed.

Amendments 174N and 174P

Moved by Baroness Hanham

174N: Before Clause 137, insert the following new Clause-

"Creation of tenancies of social housing

(1) In section 52 of the Law of Property Act 1925 (requirement that conveyances of land and interests in land be made by deed) in subsection (2) (exceptions) after paragraph (d) insert-

"(da) flexible tenancies;

(db) assured tenancies of dwelling-houses in England that are granted by private registered providers of social housing and are not long tenancies or shared ownership leases;".

(2) After that subsection insert-

"(3) In this section-

"assured tenancy" has the same meaning as in Part 1 of the Housing Act 1988;

"dwelling-house" has the same meaning as in Part 1 of the Housing Act 1988;

"flexible tenancy" has the meaning given by section 107A of the Housing Act 1985;

"long tenancy" means a tenancy granted for a term certain of more than 21 years, whether or not it is (or may become) terminable before the end of that term by notice given by the tenant or by re-entry or forfeiture;

"shared ownership lease" means a lease of a dwelling-house-

(a) granted on payment of a premium calculated by reference to a percentage of the value of the dwelling-house or of the cost of providing it, or



20 July 2011 : Column 1481

(b) under which the lessee (or the lessee's personal representatives) will or may be entitled to a sum calculated by reference, directly or indirectly, to the value of the dwelling-house.""

174P: Before Clause 137, insert the following new Clause-

"Registration of tenancies of social housing

(1) The Land Registration Act 2002 is amended as follows.

(2) In section 3 (voluntary registration of title) after subsection (4) insert-

"(4A) A person may not make an application under subsection (2) in respect of a leasehold estate in land under a relevant social housing tenancy."

(3) In section 4 (compulsory registration of title) after subsection (5) insert-

"(5A) Subsection (1) does not apply to the transfer or grant of a leasehold estate in land under a relevant social housing tenancy."

(4) In section 27 (dispositions required to be registered) after subsection (5) insert-

"(5A) This section does not apply to-

(a) the grant of a term of years absolute under a relevant social housing tenancy, or

(b) the express grant of an interest falling within section 1(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925, where the interest is created for the benefit of a leasehold estate in land under a relevant social housing tenancy."

(5) In section 33 (interests in respect of which notice may not be entered on the register) after paragraph (b) insert-

"(ba) an interest under a relevant social housing tenancy,".

(6) In section 132(1) (interpretation) at the appropriate places insert-

""assured tenancy" has the same meaning as in Part 1 of the Housing Act 1988;";

""dwelling-house" has the same meaning as in Part 1 of the Housing Act 1988;";

""flexible tenancy" has the meaning given by section 107A of the Housing Act 1985;";

""long tenancy" means a tenancy granted for a term certain of more than 21 years, whether or not it is (or may become) terminable before the end of that term by notice given by the tenant or by re-entry or forfeiture;";

""relevant social housing tenancy" means-

(a) a flexible tenancy, or

(b) an assured tenancy of a dwelling-house in England granted by a private registered provider of social housing, other than a long tenancy or a shared ownership lease;";

""shared ownership lease" means a lease of a dwelling-house-

(a) granted on payment of a premium calculated by reference to a percentage of the value of the dwelling-house or of the cost of providing it, or

(b) under which the lessee (or the lessee's personal representatives) will or may be entitled to a sum calculated by reference, directly or indirectly, to the value of the dwelling-house;".

(7) In Schedule 1 (unregistered interests which override first registration) after paragraph 1 insert-

"Relevant social housing tenancies

1A A leasehold estate in land under a relevant social housing tenancy."

(8) In Schedule 3 (unregistered interests which override registered dispositions) after paragraph 1 insert-

"Relevant social housing tenancies

1A A leasehold estate in land under a relevant social housing tenancy.""

Amendments 174N and 174P agreed.

Clauses 137 and 138 agreed.

Schedule 14 agreed.



20 July 2011 : Column 1482

Clause 139 : Succession to secure tenancies

Amendment 175

Moved by Lord Rix

175: Clause 139, page 134, line 15, after "partner" insert "(priority successor)"

Lord Rix: Amendments 175, 176, 177 and 178 regard the Government's intention to remove succession rights for carers and relatives, which are currently provided by a secure tenancy. In contrast to the Government, I believe that this right should be preserved and extended to all new tenancies in the social housing sector. The original provisions in the Housing Act 1985 gave recognition to the role of carers who had given up their own homes to look after a parent or a relative. We already know that unpaid carers make a significant contribution to the welfare of disabled and older tenants and dramatically reduce the demands on social services, the NHS and, of course, the Treasury.

The provision in the Housing Act 1985 also ensures that a disabled son or daughter living with parents, often into old age, would be protected after their parents have died. In 2006 the Law Commission recommended a single social tenancy that would allow a "reserve successor" on the death of a "priority successor". A priority successor would be a spouse or partner, and a reserve successor would be a relative or carer living with the resident before their death. At the end of the Report stage in the House of Commons, the Government made some amendments to the clause on succession rights that will allow for succession rights for tenants other than spouses or civil partners, where,

I welcome the Government's acknowledgement that restricting succession rights to spouses and civil partners alone is not appropriate. However, I am still concerned that the changes proposed do not go far enough, and I do not believe that the government amendments which follow mine affect my concerns. I beg to move.

Lord Kennedy of Southwark: My Lords, I am sorry; I was too slow in getting to my feet. I support Amendment 175 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Rix, and other amendments in the group. Clause 139 removes the statutory right of succession of those other than spouses and partners to succeed to secure tenancies granted after the Bill comes into force, except where an express term of tenancy makes provision for this. I understand that this clause has been inserted to assist local authorities in dealing with under-occupancy of social housing following succession against the background of a chronic shortage of social housing and correspondingly long waiting lists.

There is concern on these Benches that these proposed changes are likely to have a disproportionate effect on vulnerable people. Presently, close family members are able to succeed to secure tenancies. In addition, local authority tenancies sometimes contain an express provision to provide succession rights to close family members. The proposals under Clause 139 would mean

20 July 2011 : Column 1483

that any family member other than a spouse or a civil partner would not be able to succeed to any form of secure tenancy unless there was an express tenancy term making provision for this. Even then, that person's succession would have to be in accordance with that term. This provides considerable discretion to social landlords to operate a term in their agreement that may make it virtually impossible for a member of a family, other than a spouse or a partner, to succeed to a tenancy.

Local authorities are under pressure to ensure that their housing stock is fully utilised. The removal of the right of succession beyond spouses and civil partners is potentially damaging. Many of those currently eligible to succeed a close family member may have remained living at home with good reason-perhaps because of a disability or some other vulnerability. No doubt local authorities also see remaining in the parental home a number of single adults who have no vulnerability or disability but simply have no inclination to move out. However, we are concerned to ensure that protections for the vulnerable are not removed unwittingly. Restricting the right of succession under the Bill to a spouse or civil partner goes too far, as other potentially vulnerable family members may be living at the property and have little choice about their living arrangements. If the change under the Bill goes ahead, there will be no prospect of anyone close to the deceased who may have lived in the tenancy all their lives securing such a succession unless it is specifically stipulated in the tenancy terms.

There will be little incentive for local authorities or landlords to include an express provision in their tenancy agreements. Local authorities, which currently make such express provisions for succession by non-spouses-with unsecured tenancies, for example-may well cease to do so once the statutory succession rules are changed, with an increasing number of new tenancies being granted without express provisions on succession. The Government should carry out a more detailed impact assessment of the removal of such a provision and of the extent to which the removal would affect the construction or granting of secure tenancies.

Amendments 175, 176, 177 and 178 would create a condition allowing close family members to become qualified reserve successors to a secure tenancy, as per the current system. Reserve successors would be qualified to succeed only if, at the time of the tenant's death, the dwelling house was occupied by a spouse or civil partner of the deceased tenant as his or her only or principal home. There are alternative measures for addressing under-occupancy following succession, by making existing grounds for possession under-occupancy function more effectively.

In conclusion, I look forward with interest to the noble Baroness's response. I hope that she is able to give the Committee some reassurance on these important matters.

7.30 pm

Baroness Hanham: My Lords, before responding, I wonder whether I may speak to the amendments in this group that stand in my name-Amendments 178ZA, 178ZB, 178ZC and 178ZD. Amendments 178ZA and 178ZB are minor and technical, and tidy up Clause 139.



20 July 2011 : Column 1484

Amendment 178ZC ensures that there will be no statutory succession in the case of shared ownership properties, as this could conflict with the rights of a beneficiary in a deceased shared owner's will. Amendment 178ZD ensures that where there is no eligible successor but someone inherits the balance of a fixed-term tenancy as part of the deceased tenant's estate, the landlord can recover the property. Amendment 178ZD helpfully deals with an issue raised by the Opposition in the other place. When someone who is not a spouse or partner succeeds to a local authority property which is larger than they reasonably need, the landlord can move them to a more suitably sized property between six and 12 months after the death of the original tenant.

The amendment deals with cases where the successor tenant withholds news of the death of the tenant from the landlord until after the recovery window has closed, thereby preventing the landlord reclaiming the property. It does this by allowing a court to decide whether the window is deemed to have opened six months after the original tenant died or six months after the landlord became aware of the death. I hope that is reasonably clear.

I can reply to the amendments quite quickly. Our proposals guarantee one succession to a spouse or partner and importantly also allow landlords a freedom to grant more successions, as they see fit; for example, allowing a succession to someone as the noble Lord, Lord Rix, has said, who has given up their own home to move in and care for the tenant. We believe that the proposals are clear, simple and fair: one guaranteed succession to a spouse or partner and anyone else if the tenancy agreement says so. That will allow landlords to ensure properties go to those in actual need and Amendments 175 to 178, tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Rix, would reintroduce a prescriptive approach which would prevent landlords considering individual circumstances in reaching sensible decisions. Once again, social landlords are social landlords and are meant to be considering the best interests of those who live in their properties. With that explanation, I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Rix, will be willing to withdraw his amendment.

Lord Rix: My Lords, I have no desire to delay your Lordships' holidays any longer, so I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment 175 withdrawn.

Amendments 176 to 178 not moved.

Amendments 178ZA and 178ZB

Moved by Baroness Hanham

178ZA: Clause 139, page 134, line 44, leave out from beginning to end of line 5 on page 135

178ZB: Clause 139, page 135, line 17, at end insert-

"(6) The amendments made by this section do not apply in relation to a secure tenancy that-

(a) was granted before the day on which this section comes into force, or

(b) came into being by virtue of section 86 of the Housing Act 1985 (periodic tenancy arising on termination of fixed term) on the coming to an end of a secure tenancy within paragraph (a)."



20 July 2011 : Column 1485

Amendments 178ZA and 178ZB agreed.

Clause 139, as amended, agreed.

Clause 140 : Succession to assured tenancies

Amendment 178ZC

Moved by Baroness Hanham

178ZC: Clause 140, page 136, line 48, at end insert-

"(7) This section does not apply to a fixed term assured tenancy that is a lease of a dwelling-house-

(a) granted on payment of a premium calculated by reference to a percentage of the value of the dwelling-house or of the cost of providing it, or

(b) under which the lessee (or the lessee's personal representatives) will or may be entitled to a sum calculated by reference, directly or indirectly, to the value of the dwelling-house.""

Amendment 178ZC agreed.

Clause 140, as amended, agreed.

Amendment 178ZD

Moved by Baroness Hanham

178ZD: After Clause 140, insert the following new Clause-

"Secure and assured tenancies: recovery of possession after tenant's death

(1) In section 90 of the Housing Act 1985 (devolution of fixed term secure tenancy) after subsection (4) insert-

"(5) The following provisions apply where a tenancy that was a secure tenancy of a dwelling-house in England-

(a) has been vested or otherwise disposed of in the course of the administration of the secure tenant's estate, and

(b) has ceased to be a secure tenancy by virtue of this section.

(6) Subject as follows, the landlord may apply to the court for an order for possession of the dwelling-house let under the tenancy.

(7) The court may not entertain proceedings for an order for possession under this section unless-

(a) the landlord has served notice in writing on the tenant-

(i) stating that the landlord requires possession of the dwelling-house, and

(ii) specifying a date after which proceedings for an order for possession may be begun, and

(b) that date has passed without the tenant giving up possession of the dwelling-house.

(8) The date mentioned in subsection (7)(a)(ii) must fall after the end of the period of four weeks beginning with the date on which the notice is served on the tenant.

(9) On an application to the court for an order for possession under this section, the court must make such an order if it is satisfied that subsection (5) applies to the tenancy.

(10) The tenancy ends when the order is executed."

(2) In Part 3 of Schedule 2 to that Act (grounds on which court may order possession of dwelling-house let on secure tenancy if reasonable and if alternative accommodation is available) after Ground 15 insert-

"Ground 15A

The dwelling-house is in England, the accommodation afforded by it is more extensive than is reasonably required by the tenant and-

(a) the tenancy vested in the tenant by virtue of section 89 (succession to periodic tenancy) or 90 (devolution of term certain) in a case where the tenant was not the previous tenant's spouse or civil partner, and



20 July 2011 : Column 1486

(b) notice of the proceedings for possession was served under section 83 (or, where no such notice was served, the proceedings for possession were begun) more than six months but less than twelve months after the relevant date.

For this purpose "the relevant date" is-

(a) the date of the previous tenant's death, or

(b) if the court so directs, the date on which, in the opinion of the court, the landlord (or, in the case of joint landlords, any one of them) became aware of the previous tenant's death.

The matters to be taken into account by the court in determining whether it is reasonable to make an order on this ground include-

(a) the age of the tenant,

(b) the period (if any) during which the tenant has occupied the dwelling-house as the tenant's only or principal home, and

(c) any financial or other support given by the tenant to the previous tenant."

(3) In section 7 of the Housing Act 1988 (orders for possession of assured tenancies) after subsection (6) insert-

"(6A) In the case of a dwelling-house in England, subsection (6)(a) has effect as if it also referred to Ground 7 in Part 1 of Schedule 2 to this Act."

(4) In Part 1 of Schedule 2 to that Act (grounds for possession of dwelling-houses let on assured tenancies: grounds on which court must order possession) in Ground 7 (devolution of tenancy under will or intestacy)-

(a) in the first unnumbered paragraph, after "tenancy)" insert ", or a fixed term tenancy of a dwelling-house in England,",

(b) in the second unnumbered paragraph-

(i) omit "periodic", and

(ii) after "period" insert "or length of term", and

(c) after that paragraph insert-

"This ground does not apply to a fixed term tenancy that is a lease of a dwelling-house-

(a) granted on payment of a premium calculated by reference to a percentage of the value of the dwelling-house or of the cost of providing it, or

(b) under which the lessee (or the lessee's personal representatives) will or may be entitled to a sum calculated by reference, directly or indirectly, to the value of the dwelling-house.""

Amendment 178ZD agreed.

Clauses 141 to 144 agreed.

Amendments 178A and 178AA not moved.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: I am most grateful to the Lord Speaker. This is the last day that she will be performing this particular function, and it is coming to a rather different conclusion than expected, with amicable agreement. It would not be normal for me to stand up at this time, but of course I was not allowed to come in while the Lord Speaker was on her feet calling amendments. I am most grateful to her for stopping at this moment.

There have been discussions in the usual channels. I am grateful, too, for the assistance of the Convenor of the Cross Benches. Agreements have been reached whereby business will be able to be concluded-we estimate within about half an hour. I am most grateful to Members of all Benches, who have agreed that, on this occasion, they will not be moving their amendments.

20 July 2011 : Column 1487

Clearly, there has to be one exception to this, and that is with regard to those government amendments which have been tabled; these will need to be dealt with. Agreements have been reached within the usual channels about the appropriate way in which that might be handled. I am, unusually, going to advise my noble friend the Minister, from a standing position, that she will be able merely to move her amendments without speaking to them. I anticipate that the opposition Front Bench, and the coalition Benches, will be able to support the Motion that those amendments be added to the Bill. My anticipation is that, as a result of these discussions, all other Peers will be saying "not moved" as their amendments are called.

I am sorry to presume upon the patience of the Lord Speaker, because I realise that she will indeed have rather a large speaking role in guiding us, as she always does, so deftly through business.

Noble Lords: Hear, hear.

Lord McKenzie of Luton: Can the noble Baroness please explain to me this: if we are going to forbear and not move our amendments today on the basis that they could all come back at Report, why does not the same run for the government amendments?

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, there have been discussions about this. There are circumstances in which that happens, and it was a possibility. As the noble Lord, Lord McKenzie, will know, it is a procedure that is happily adopted in Grand Committee, whereby if there is agreement, a government amendment may go in; later on, if the Opposition find that they have not had time for proper thought, and find the amendment totally objectionable, it is possible for an amendment to be brought at Report, by agreement within the usual channels. If a government amendment is accepted and thereby inserted it into the Bill, but this subsequently appears to have been done in a way that the Opposition did not quite expect-if they have found out information later on and, had they known it then, the amendment would have been objectionable to them-then the assurance that I can give both to the noble Lord, Lord McKenzie, who was a distinguished Minister himself so I know he has been through this, and to the House is that they can bring an amendment at Report. There have been thorough-going discussions about how we may properly address issues at Report. I hope that satisfies the noble Lord.

Lord McKenzie of Luton: One further point: is the noble Baroness going to guarantee that we will have sufficient time at Report to bring back the amendments which we are forbearing to move? We have a lot to get through at Report in any event, quite apart from this. I would not want to feel that we were precluded, and end up in the same position as we have ended up in tonight, which has, frankly, mostly been a waste of time in terms of our chance to focus on the detail of these amendments.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The usual channels have taken those issues into consideration, and have come to an agreement which I hope will accommodate proper scrutiny at Report.



20 July 2011 : Column 1488

Lord Bassam of Brighton: Can I just press the noble Baroness the Chief Whip a little further? When we were in discussions a figure was mentioned. I think it might be helpful, and for the benefit of the House, if that figure was put on the record.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: I am most happy to do so. In the ordinary manner of things, we had planned for four days on Report, which is the usual length. The noble Lord, Lord McKenzie, is shaking his head-we accepted that that would not be appropriate, and there will be five and a half days provided on Report.

The Lord Speaker: The noble Baroness said that, as usual, I would speak a great deal tonight. In fact, I think it is the first time in five years. The Committee will have to have some patience, I fear.

Amendment 178B had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.

Clause 145 agreed.

Schedule 15 agreed.

Clause 146 agreed.

Amendment 178C not moved.

Clauses 147 and 148 agreed.

Clause 149 : Limits on indebtedness

Amendment 178D not moved.

Clause 149 agreed.

Amendment 178DA not moved.

Clauses 150 to 156 agreed.

Amendment 178DB had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.

Schedule 16 : Transfer of functions from the Office for Tenants and Social Landlords to the Homes and Communities Agency

Amendments 178DC to 178E not moved.

Schedule 16 agreed.

Clause 157 agreed.

Amendments 178EA to 17EB not moved.

Schedule 17 : Regulation of social housing

Amendments 178F to 178G not moved.

Schedule 17 agreed.



20 July 2011 : Column 1489

Clause 158 : Housing complaints

Amendments 179 to 181ZA not moved.

Clause 158 agreed.

Clause 159 agreed.

Clause 160 : Transfer of functions to housing ombudsman: supplementary

Amendment 181A not moved.

Clause 160 agreed.

Clause 161 agreed.

Amendments 181B and 181C

Moved by Baroness Hanham

181B: After Clause 161, insert the following new Clause-

"Tenants' deposits

Tenancy deposit schemes

(1) The Housing Act 2004 is amended as follows.

(2) In section 213 (requirements relating to tenancy deposits)-

(a) in subsection (3) (landlord's requirement to comply with initial requirements within 14 days of receipt of deposit) for "14" substitute "30", and

(b) in subsection (6)(b) (landlord's requirement to give tenant information within 14 days of receipt of deposit) for "14" substitute "30".

(3) Section 214 (proceedings relating to tenancy deposits) is amended as follows.

(4) In subsection (1) (grounds for an application to a county court) for paragraph (a) substitute-

"(a) that section 213(3) or (6) has not been complied with in relation to the deposit, or".

(5) After subsection (1) insert-

"(1A) Subsection (1) also applies in a case where the tenancy has ended, and in such a case the reference in subsection (1) to the tenant is to a person who was a tenant under the tenancy."

(6) In subsection (2) (conditions for a remedy)-

(a) in the opening words-

(i) for "Subsections (3) and (4)" substitute "Subsection (3) (subject to subsection (3A)) and subsection (4)",

(ii) omit "such", and

(iii) after "application" insert "under subsection (1)", and

(b) for paragraph (a) substitute-

"(a) is satisfied that section 213(3) or (6) has not been complied with in relation to the deposit, or".

(7) After subsection (3) insert-

"(3A) Subsection (3) does not apply in a case where the tenancy has ended at the time of the application under subsection (1), and in such a case the court may order the person who appears to the court to be holding the deposit to repay all or part of it to the applicant within the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the making of the order."

(8) In subsection (4) (amount of penalty payment)-

(a) omit "also", and

(b) for "equal to" substitute "not less than the amount of the deposit and not more than".

(9) Section 215 (sanctions for non-compliance) is amended as follows.



20 July 2011 : Column 1490

(10) In subsection (1) (prevention of service of notice under section 21 of the Housing Act 1988)-

(a) at the beginning insert "Subject to subsection (2A),", and

(b) for paragraph (b) substitute-

"(b) section 213(3) has not been complied with in relation to the deposit."

(11) In subsection (2) (prevention of service of notice under section 21 of the Housing Act 1988) at the beginning insert "Subject to subsection (2A),".

(12) After subsection (2) insert-

"(2A) Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply in a case where-

(a) the deposit has been returned to the tenant in full or with such deductions as are agreed between the landlord and tenant, or

(b) an application to a county court has been made under section 214(1) and has been determined by the court, withdrawn or settled by agreement between the parties."

(13) In Schedule 10 (provisions relating to tenancy deposit schemes) in paragraph 5A(9)(b) (modification of section 213(3)) for "14" substitute "30"."

181C: After Clause 161, insert the following new Clause-

"Houses in multiple occupation

Exemption from HMO licensing for buildings run by co-operatives

(1) In Schedule 14 to the Housing Act 2004 (buildings which are not HMOs for the purposes of that Act (excluding Part 1)) after paragraph 2A insert-

"Buildings controlled or managed by a co-operative society

2B (1) A building where-

(a) the person managing or having control of it is a co-operative society whose rules are such as to secure that each of the conditions set out in sub-paragraph (2) is met, and

(b) no person who occupies premises in the building does so by virtue of an assured tenancy, a secure tenancy or a protected tenancy.

(2) The conditions are-

(a) that membership of the society is restricted to persons who are occupiers or prospective occupiers of buildings managed or controlled by the society,

(b) that all management decisions of the society are made by the members (or a specified quorum of members) at a general meeting which all members are entitled to, and invited to, attend,

(c) that each member has equal voting rights at such a meeting, and

(d) that, if a person occupies premises in the building and is not a member, that person is an occupier of the premises only as a result of sharing occupation of them with a member at the member's invitation.

(3) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (1) "co-operative society" means a body that-

(a) is registered-

(i) as a co-operative society under section 1 of the 1965 Act, or

(ii) is a pre-2010 Act society (as defined by section 4A(1) of the 1965 Act) which meets the condition in section 1(2) of the 1965 Act, and

(b) is neither-

(i) a non-profit registered provider of social housing, nor

(ii) registered as a social landlord under Part 1 of the Housing Act 1996.

(4) In this paragraph-

"the 1965 Act" means the Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies and Credit Unions Act 1965;



20 July 2011 : Column 1491

"assured tenancy" has the same meaning as in Part 1 of the Housing Act 1988;

"protected tenancy" has the same meaning as in the Rent Act 1977;

"secure tenancy" has the same meaning as in Part 4 of the Housing Act 1985."

(2) Until the coming into force of section 1 of the 2010 Act, the paragraph 2B inserted by subsection (1) of this section has effect as if for sub-paragraph (3)(a) of that paragraph there were substituted-

"(a) is a society registered, or treated as registered, under section 1 of the 1965 Act in the case of which the condition in section 1(2)(a) of that Act is fulfilled (bona fide co-operative society),".

(3) Until the coming into force of section 2 of the 2010 Act, the paragraph 2B inserted by subsection (1) of this section has effect as if in sub-paragraph (4) of that paragraph "Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1965" were substituted for "Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies and Credit Unions Act 1965".

(4) In subsections (2) and (3) "the 2010 Act" means the Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies and Credit Unions Act 2010."

Amendments 181B and 181C agreed.

Amendments 182 to 182K not moved.

Amendments 182KA to 182KB had been retabled as Amendments 181B to 181C.

Amendments 182KC to 182KG not moved.

Amendment 182KH had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.

Amendments 182KJ and 182KL not moved.

Schedule 18 agreed.

Clauses 162 and 163 agreed.

Amendment 182L not moved.

Clauses 164 to 168 agreed.

Clause 169 : Transfer schemes: general provisions

Amendment 182LA

Moved by Baroness Hanham

182LA: Clause 169, page 160, line 45, leave out ", as from time to time amended,"

Amendment 182LA agreed.

Clause 169, as amended, agreed.

Clauses 170 and 171 agreed.

Amendment 182LAA not moved.

Schedule 19 : Housing and regeneration: consequential amendments

Amendments 182LB and 182LC

Moved by Baroness Hanham

182LB: Schedule 19, page 379, line 12, at end insert-

"Greater London Authority Act 1999 (c.29)

35A The Greater London Authority Act 1999 is amended as follows.

35B (1) Section 38 (delegation) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (2) (persons to whom functions exercisable by the Mayor may be delegated) before paragraph (e) insert-

"(db) the Homes and Communities Agency;".



20 July 2011 : Column 1492

(3) In subsection (3) (cases where delegation to body requires its consent) after "In the case of" insert "the Homes and Communities Agency,".

(4) In subsection (7) (power to exercise delegated functions where no existing power to do so) before paragraph (c) insert-

"(bb) the Homes and Communities Agency,".

(5) Before subsection (9) insert-

"(8B) An authorisation given by the Mayor under subsection (1) above to the Homes and Communities Agency in relation to a function does not prevent the Mayor from exercising the function."

35C (1) In section 73(6), in the substituted subsection (2) of section 5 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 (reports by monitoring officer), the definition of "GLA body or person" is amended as follows.

(2) Before paragraph (d) insert-

"(ca) the Homes and Communities Agency, when exercising any function of the Greater London Authority in consequence of an authorisation under section 38 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999;".

(3) Before paragraph (h) insert-

"(gb) any committee or sub-committee of the Homes and Communities Agency when exercising any function of the Greater London Authority in consequence of an authorisation under section 38 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999;".

(4) Before the closing words insert-

"(mb) any member, or member of staff, of the Homes and Communities Agency when exercising, or acting in the exercise of, any function of the Greater London Authority in consequence of an authorisation under section 38 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999;"."

182LC: Schedule 19, page 380, line 23, at end insert-

"43A In section 4(6) (application of rules about the exercise of the Homes and Communities Agency's specific powers) before the "and" at the end of paragraph (a) insert-

"(aa) subsection (2) does not apply to the exercise of a function by the HCA in consequence of an authorisation under section 38 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999 (delegation by Mayor),"."

Amendments 182LB and 182LC agreed.

Schedule 19, as amended, agreed.

Schedule 20 : Abolition of London Development Agency: consequential amendments

Amendment 182LD

Moved by Baroness Hanham

182LD: Schedule 20, page 383, line 16, at end insert-

"4A In section 38(8) (application of section 101 of the Local Government Act 1972) after paragraph (a) insert "or"."

Amendment 182LD agreed.

Schedule 20, as amended, agreed.

Clause 172 agreed.

Clause 173 : Designation of Mayoral development areas

Amendment 182M not moved.

Clause 173 agreed.

Clause 174 agreed.



20 July 2011 : Column 1493

Schedule 21 : Mayoral development corporations

Amendments 182N to 182Q not moved.

Schedule 21 agreed.

Clauses 175 and 176 agreed.

Clause 177 : Object and powers

Amendment 182QA

Moved by Baroness Hanham

182QA: Clause 177, page 165, line 39, at end insert-

"(aa) subsection (4) does not apply to the exercise of a function by an MDC in consequence of an authorisation under section 38 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999 (delegation by Mayor),"

Amendment 182QA agreed.

Clause 177, as amended, agreed.

Clause 178 : Functions in relation to Town and Country Planning

Amendment 182R not moved.

Clause 178 agreed.

Clauses 179 to 193 agreed.

Clause 194 : Transfer schemes: general provisions

Amendment 182S

Moved by Baroness Hanham

182S: Clause 194, page 174, line 36, leave out ", as from time to time amended,"

Amendment 182S agreed.

Clause 194, as amended, agreed.

Clauses 195 to 198 agreed.

Schedule 22 : Mayoral development corporations: consequential and other amendments

Amendments 182T to 182V

Moved by Baroness Hanham

182T: Schedule 22, page 387, line 35, at end insert-

"Local Government Act 1974 (c. 7)

2A In section 25(1) of the Local Government Act 1974 (authorities subject to investigation by a Local Commissioner) after paragraph (bd) insert-

"(bda) a Mayoral development corporation,"."

182U: Schedule 22, page 394, line 12, at end insert-

"(4) After subsection (8) (further delegation, and Mayor's power to continue to continue to exercise delegated functions) insert-

"(8A) An authorisation given by the Mayor under subsection (1) above to a Mayoral development corporation in relation to a function does not prevent the Mayor from exercising the function.""

182V: Schedule 22, page 394, line 18, at end insert-

"45A (1) Amend section 68 (disqualification and political restriction) as follows.

(2) In subsection (2) (application of disqualification and political restriction to certain bodies) after paragraph (b) insert-

"(ba) a Mayoral development corporation."



20 July 2011 : Column 1494

(3) In subsection (3) (person appointed by Mayor as a member of his staff under section 67(1) not disqualified from becoming an unpaid member of Transport for London) after "Transport for London" insert "or a Mayoral development corporation".

(4) In subsection (6) ("statutory chief officer" to include chief finance officer)-

(a) after "London," in paragraph (a) insert "and

(aa) of a Mayoral development corporation,", and

(b) after "member of Transport for London" insert "or, as the case may be, a Mayoral development corporation".

(5) After subsection (6) insert-

"(6A) In the application of section 2 of that Act in relation to a Mayoral development corporation by virtue of subsections (1) and (2) above, any reference to the person designated under section 4 of that Act as its head of paid service is to be taken as a reference to the chief executive of the Mayoral development corporation."

45B (1) In section 73(6), in the substituted subsection (2) of section 5 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 (reports by monitoring officer), amend the definition of "GLA body or person" as follows.

(2) After paragraph (b) insert-

"(ba) a Mayoral development corporation, when exercising any function of the Greater London Authority in consequence of an authorisation under section 38 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999;".

(3) After paragraph (g) insert-

"(ga) any committee or sub-committee of a Mayoral development corporation when exercising any function of the Greater London Authority in consequence of an authorisation under section 38 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999;".

(4) After paragraph (m) insert-

"(ma) any member, or member of staff, of a Mayoral development corporation when exercising, or acting in the exercise of, any function of the Greater London Authority in consequence of an authorisation under section 38 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999;"."

Amendments 182T to 182V agreed.

Schedule 22, as amended, agreed.

Clause 199 : Delegation of functions by Ministers to the Mayor

Amendments 183 to 184ZA not moved.

Clause 199 agreed.

Clauses 200 and 201 agreed.

Schedule 23 agreed.

Clauses 202 to 206 agreed.

Amendment 184A

Moved by Baroness Hanham

184A: After Clause 206, insert the following new Clause-

"Part 7ACompensation for compulsory acquisition

Taking account of planning permission when assessing compensation

(1) The Land Compensation Act 1961 is amended as follows.

(2) In section 14 (assumptions as to planning permission)-

(a) before subsection (1) insert-

"(A1) This section applies only if the relevant land is in Wales.", and



20 July 2011 : Column 1495

(b) in the side-note for "permission" substitute "permission: land in Wales".

(3) After that section insert-

"14A Taking account of actual or expected planning permission: England

(1) This section is about assessing the value of land in accordance with rule (2) in section 5 for the purpose of assessing compensation in respect of a compulsory acquisition of an interest in land in England.

(2) In consequence of that rule, account may be taken-

(a) of planning permission, whether for development on the relevant land or other land, if it is in force at the relevant valuation date, and

(b) of the prospect, on the assumptions set out in subsection (5) but otherwise in the circumstances known to the market at the relevant valuation date, of planning permission being granted on or after that date for development, on the relevant land or other land, other than-

(i) development for which planning permission is in force at the relevant valuation date, and

(ii) appropriate alternative development.

(3) In addition, it may be assumed that planning permission is in force at the relevant valuation date for any development that is appropriate alternative development.

(4) For the purposes of this section, development is "appropriate alternative development" if-

(a) it is development, on the relevant land alone or on the relevant land together with other land, other than development for which planning permission is in force at the relevant valuation date, and

(b) on the assumptions set out in subsection (5) but otherwise in the circumstances known to the market at the relevant valuation date, planning permission for the development could at that date reasonably have been expected to be granted on an application decided-

(i) on that date, or

(ii) at a time after that date.

(5) The assumptions referred to in subsections (2)(b) and (4)(b) are-

(a) that the scheme of development underlying the acquisition had been cancelled on the launch date,

(b) that no action has been taken (including acquisition of any land, and any development or works) by the acquiring authority wholly or mainly for the purposes of the scheme,

(c) that there is no prospect of the same scheme, or any other project to meet the same or substantially the same need, being carried out in the exercise of a statutory function or by the exercise of compulsory purchase powers, and

(d) if the scheme was for use of the relevant land for or in connection with the construction of a highway ("the scheme highway"), that no highway will be constructed to meet the same or substantially the same need as the scheme highway would have been constructed to meet.

(6) In subsection (5)(a) "the launch date" means whichever of the following dates applies-

(a) if the acquisition is authorised by a compulsory purchase order, the date of first publication of the notice required under section 11 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 or (as the case may be) paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 to that Act,

(b) if the acquisition is authorised by any other order-

(i) the date of first publication, or

(ii) the date of service,

of the first notice that, in connection with the acquisition, is published or served in accordance with any provision of or made under any Act, or



20 July 2011 : Column 1496

(c) if the acquisition is authorised by a special enactment other than an order, the date of first publication of the first notice that, in connection with the acquisition, is published in accordance with any Standing Order of either House of Parliament relating to private bills;

and in paragraph (a) "compulsory purchase order" has the same meaning as in the Acquisition of Land Act 1981.

(7) In subsection (5)(d) references to the construction of a highway include its alteration or improvement.

(8) If there is a dispute as to what is to be taken to be the scheme mentioned in subsection (5) ("the underlying scheme") then, for the purposes of this section, the underlying scheme is to be identified by the Upper Tribunal as a question of fact, subject as follows-

(a) the underlying scheme is to be taken to be the scheme provided for by the Act, or other instrument, which authorises the compulsory acquisition unless it is shown (by either party) that the underlying scheme is a scheme larger than, but incorporating, the scheme provided for by that instrument, and

(b) except by agreement or in special circumstances, the Upper Tribunal may permit the acquiring authority to advance evidence of such a larger scheme only if that larger scheme is one identified in the following read together-

(i) the instrument which authorises the compulsory acquisition, and

(ii) any documents published with it.

(9) For the purposes of the references to planning permission in subsections (2)(a) and (b)(i) and (4)(a) and section 14B(1)(c), it is immaterial whether any planning permission was granted-

(a) unconditionally or subject to conditions, or

(b) on an ordinary application, on an outline application or by virtue of a development order,

or is planning permission that, in accordance with any direction or provision given or made by or under any enactment, is deemed to have been granted.

14B Planning permission to be assumed for acquiring authority's proposals

(1) In a case where-

(a) the relevant land is in England,

(b) the relevant interest is to be acquired for purposes which involve the carrying out of proposals of the acquiring authority for development of the relevant land or part of it, and

(c) planning permission for that development is not in force at the relevant valuation date,

it is to be assumed for the purposes of section 14A(2)(a) and (b)(i) and (4)(a) that planning permission is in force at the relevant valuation date for the development of the relevant land or that part of it, as the case may be, in accordance with the proposals of the acquiring authority.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b), no account is to be taken of any planning permission so granted as not to enure (while the permission remains in force) for the benefit of the land and of all persons for the time being interested in the land."

(4) In section 15 (assumptions not directly derived from development plan) before subsection (1) insert-

"(A1) This section applies only if the relevant land is in Wales."

(5) In section 16 (special assumptions in respect of certain land comprised in development plans)-

(a) before subsection (1) insert-

"(A1) This section applies only if the relevant land is in Wales.", and

(b) in the side-note after "land" insert "in Wales".

(6) In section 17 (certification of appropriate alternative development)-



20 July 2011 : Column 1497

(a) in subsection (1) after "an interest in land" insert "in Wales",

(b) omit subsections (10) and (11) (which relate to the Norfolk and Suffolk Broads), and

(c) in the side-note for "development" substitute "development: Wales".

(7) After section 17 insert-

"17A Certificate of appropriate alternative development: England

(1) Where an interest in land in England is proposed to be acquired by an authority possessing compulsory purchase powers, either of the parties directly concerned may (subject to subsection (2)) apply to the local planning authority for a certificate containing whichever of the following statements is the applicable statement-

(a) that in the local planning authority's opinion there is development that, for the purposes of section 14A, is appropriate alternative development in relation to the acquisition;

(b) that in the local planning authority's opinion there is no development that, for the purposes of section 14A, is appropriate alternative development in relation to the acquisition.

(2) If-

(a) the authority proposing to acquire the interest have served a notice to treat in respect of the interest or an agreement has been made for the sale of the interest to that authority, and

(b) a reference has been made to the Upper Tribunal to determine the amount of the compensation payable in respect of the interest,

no application for a certificate under this section may be made after the making of that reference by either of the parties directly concerned except with the consent in writing of the other party directly concerned or the permission of the Upper Tribunal.

(3) An application for a certificate under this section-

(a) must contain whichever of the following statements is the applicable statement-

(i) that in the applicant's opinion there is development that, for the purposes of section 14A, is appropriate alternative development in relation to the acquisition concerned;

(ii) that in the applicant's opinion there is no development that, for the purposes of section 14A, is appropriate alternative development in relation to the acquisition concerned;

(b) must, if it contains a statement under paragraph (a)(i), specify-

(i) each description of development that in the applicant's opinion is, for the purposes of section 14A, appropriate alternative development in relation to the acquisition, and

(ii) the applicant's reasons for holding that opinion; and

(c) must be accompanied by a statement specifying the date on which a copy of the application has been or will be served on the other party directly concerned.

(4) Where an application is made to the local planning authority for a certificate under this section in respect of an interest in land, the local planning authority must not, without the agreement of the other party directly concerned, issue a certificate to the applicant before the end of 22 days beginning with the date specified in the statement under subsection (3)(c).

(5) If a certificate under this section contains a statement under subsection (1)(a) it must also-

(a) identify every description of development (whether specified in the application or not) that in the local planning authority's opinion is, for the purposes of section 14A, appropriate alternative development in relation to the acquisition concerned, and



20 July 2011 : Column 1498

(b) give a general indication-

(i) of any conditions to which planning permission for the development could reasonably have been expected to be subject,

(ii) of when the permission could reasonably have been expected to be granted if it is one that could reasonably have been expected to be granted only at a time after the relevant valuation date, and

(iii) of any pre-condition for granting the permission (for example, entry into an obligation) that could reasonably have been expected to have to be met.

(6) If a certificate under this section contains a statement under subsection (1)(a)-

(a) then, for the purposes of section 14A, development is appropriate alternative development in relation to the acquisition concerned if, and only if, it is of a description identified in accordance with subsection (5)(a) in the certificate, and

(b) the matters indicated in accordance with subsection (5)(b) in the certificate are to be taken to apply in relation to the planning permission that under section 14A(3) may be assumed to be in force for that development.

(7) If a certificate under this section contains a statement under subsection (1)(b) then, for the purposes of section 14A, there is no development that is appropriate alternative development in relation to the acquisition concerned.

(8) References in subsections (5) to (7) to a certificate under this section include references to the certificate as varied and to any certificate issued in place of the certificate.

(9) On issuing to one of the parties directly concerned a certificate under this section in respect of an interest in land, the local planning authority must serve a copy of the certificate on the other of those parties.

(10) In assessing any compensation payable to any person in respect of any compulsory acquisition, there must be taken into account any expenses reasonably incurred by the person in connection with the issue of a certificate under this section (including expenses incurred in connection with an appeal under section 18A where any of the issues are determined in the person's favour).

(11) For the purposes of this section and sections 18A to 20, the Broads Authority is the sole district planning authority for the Broads; and here "the Broads" has the same meaning as in the Norfolk and Suffolk Broads Act 1988."

(8) After section 18 (appeal to Welsh Ministers against certificate under section 17) insert-

"18A Appeal to Upper Tribunal against certificate under section 17A

(1) Where the local planning authority have issued a certificate under section 17A in respect of an interest in land-

(a) the person for the time being entitled to that interest, or

(b) any authority possessing compulsory purchase powers by whom that interest is proposed to be acquired,

may appeal to the Upper Tribunal against that certificate.

(2) On any appeal under this section against a certificate, the Upper Tribunal-

(a) must consider the matters to which the certificate relates as if the application for a certificate under section 17A had been made to the Upper Tribunal in the first place, and

(b) must-

(i) confirm the certificate, or

(ii) vary it, or

(iii) cancel it and issue a different certificate in its place,

as the Upper Tribunal may consider appropriate.

(3) Where an application is made for a certificate under section 17A, and at the expiry of the time prescribed by a development order for the issue of the certificate (or, if an extended period is at any time agreed upon in writing by the parties and the local planning authority, at the end of that period) no certificate has been issued by the local planning authority in

20 July 2011 : Column 1499

accordance with that section, the preceding provisions of this section apply as if the local planning authority has issued such a certificate containing a statement under section 17A(1)(b)."

(9) In section 19 (extension of sections 17 and 18 to special cases)-

(a) in subsection (1) (surveyor may apply for certificate) for the words after "certificate" substitute "under section 17 or 17A; and the provisions of sections 17 and 18 if the land is in Wales, or the provisions of sections 17A and 18A if the land is in England, apply in relation to an application made by virtue of this subsection as they apply in relation to an application made by virtue of section 17(1) or, as the case may be, section 17A(1).",

(b) in subsection (3) for "the said section seventeen" substitute "whichever of sections 17 and 17A is applicable", and

(c) in the side-note after "17" insert ", 17A".

(10) In section 20 (power to prescribe matters relevant to Part 3)-

(a) in the opening words after "seventeen" insert ", 17A",

(b) in paragraph (a) after "seventeen" insert "or 17A", and

(c) in paragraph (c) after "seventeen", in both places, insert "or 17A".

(11) In section 22(2) (interpretation of sections 17 and 18) after "eighteen" insert "and 17A and 18A"."

Amendment 184A agreed.

Amendments 185 to 186AA not moved.

Amendment 186AB had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.

Amendments 186AC to 186AG not moved.

Clause 207 agreed.

Schedule 24 agreed.

Clause 208 agreed.

Clause 209 : Orders and regulations

Amendments 186B and 186C not moved.

Amendment 186CA

Moved by Baroness Hanham

186CA: Clause 209, page 183, line 13, at end insert "or (Taking account of planning permission when assessing compensation);

(h) an order or regulations under section 210 which, in consequence of provision made by section (Taking account of planning permission when assessing compensation), amend or repeal a provision of an Act other than a local or private Act."

Amendment 186CA agreed.



20 July 2011 : Column 1500

Amendment 186D not moved.

Clause 209, as amended, agreed.

Clauses 210 and 211 agreed.

Schedule 25 : Repeals and revocations

Amendments 187 to 187AB

Moved by Baroness Hanham

187: Schedule 25, page 405, leave out lines 8 and 9

187A: Schedule 25, page 421, line 18, at end insert-

"Section 55(3)(b) and (d)."

187AA: Schedule 25, page 427, leave out line 40 and insert-

"In section 38-

(a) subsections (2)(d) and (7)(b), and

(b) in subsection (8), paragraph (c) and the

"or" preceding it."

187AB: Schedule 25, page 430, line 6, at end insert-

"Part 33Compensation for compulsory acquisition
ReferenceExtent of repeal

Land Compensation Act 1961 (c. 33)

Section 17(10) and (11).

Norfolk and Suffolk Broads Act 1988 (c. 4)

In Schedule 3, paragraph 3."

Amendments 187 to 187AB agreed.

Schedule 25, as amended, agreed.

Clause 212 agreed.

Amendment 187B not moved.

Clause 213 agreed.

Clause 214 : Commencement

Amendment 188 not moved.

Clause 214 agreed.

Clause 215 agreed.

House resumed.

Bill reported with amendments.

House adjourned at 7.54 pm.


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page