Clause 1 - Meaning of ``residential property'' and other expressions
Homes Bill
4:30 pm
Mr Nick Raynsford (Minister of State, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions; Greenwich and Woolwich, Labour)
Other professionals could well become inspectors—indeed, the members of a number of other professions are interested in becoming qualified inspectors; there will certainly be more than the 9,000 who are currently available. My point is that is no shortage.
The second issue is training. Of course there will be a training need if inspectors are to perform the functions according to the regulations that we will publish—that is essential to provide a scheme that commands public confidence. However, the estimate of additional costs given by the hon. Member for East Worthing and Shoreham (Mr. Loughton) is somewhat wide of the mark. The RICS estimates that the approximate cost per inspection carried out for the introduction of the accreditation arrangement will be 50p. I accept that that is additional expenditure, but it is not of the order of magnitude that the hon. Gentleman suggests. To suggest that huge additional costs will result from the introduction of the accreditation system is wide of the mark.
However, there will obviously be a need for training, both initial and on-going, as professionals need to keep in touch with changes in software, for example. The hon. Gentleman acknowledged that there have been changes in the technology since the introduction of home energy ratings in the late 1980s. I was a member of the National Energy Foundation, which was responsible for one of the ratings, and I am well aware that there has been progress in technology since that time. Obviously there will be a need for continuing training, but that is a normal part of the process of providing a professional service.
The hon. Gentleman mentioned the Government's record on reducing emissions. He made a gratuitous and unwarranted attack on my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister, who has done substantial service on that issue—for example, by agreeing the Kyoto agreement, which gave a real boost to the reduction of emissions and showed that Britain was in the lead in terms of reaching international agreements to reduce unwanted emissions. In addition, this country has made enormous progress internally. We expect to achieve a 15 per cent. reduction in UK emissions between 1990 and 2000, which puts us well on track to achieve our domestic goal of a 20 per cent. reduction by 2010.
Further measures are being introduced from April with the climate change levy and the new home energy efficiency scheme. That scheme is particularly important to low-income households, which are especially vulnerable to the problems of high energy costs resulting from inefficiently insulated housing and inefficient heating systems. The Committee will be aware of all the measures that we have taken to tackle the scandal in this country of far too many old people suffering and dying from the cold in winter, because of a combination of low incomes and houses that are difficult or expensive to keep warm.
The winter heating supplement, which the Conservatives are pledged to abolish, shows the Government's commitment to tackle the scandal. We will take no lessons from the Conservatives on energy efficiency measures. We have the right policies to help people, to improve the condition of the housing stock and to establish a proper system for giving information at the point of sale of a property, so that new home owners know what can be done to improve their home's energy efficiency, the costs and the payback period. That is all part of a key strategy to tackle the problem of energy inefficiency, and I warmly commend the Government's position. I urge Opposition Members to withdraw their amendment. If they do not, I urge my hon. Friends to vote against it.