Clause 45 - Designation of areas subject to additional licensing
Housing Bill
10:30 am
Mr John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings, Conservative)
It is extremely difficult for people like me, who have difficulty in coping with such complex matters, to move from one part of the Bill to another and turn pages backwards while doing so. However, I have struggled my way through it, and I am just about there. You, Mr. Conway, who are more skilled in such matters than I am, will realise that we are now back at page 29 and debating the subject of additional licensing.
This is an important matter. The clause creates discretion for local authorities to apply additional licensing when they deem it appropriate, as defined in clause 45. The clause makes specific reference to issues that may arise when an HMO that is being managed ''sufficiently ineffectively'' as to cause a range of problems for those who occupy the HMO or for members of the public.
The Committee will see that amendment No. 252 is a probing amendment. It obliges the Minister to explain how the Bill interacts and overlaps with, or even replaces, existing regulation. Powerful regulation is already available under the Housing Act 1985: as the Minister knows, that authorises local authorities to take action on badly run HMOs.
We do not seek to restrict local authorities from taking necessary action. However, by its nature, additional licensing is contentious. Landlords will be mindful of the fact that we are giving local authorities a significant power, and although the Bill describes the circumstances in which they might exercise that power in broad terms, it is important that the Government be more specific when the Bill is implemented. As has been said several times this morning, regulation will no doubt provide greater clarity.
Additional licensing will worry those who think that they might be unreasonably treated by an over-zealous local authority. Local authorities already have powers of entry to any property that they merely believe may be an HMO; and their discretion will allow them to define what, in practical terms, is ''ineffective management''. In such circumstances, existing legislation allows local authorities to issue a notice requiring work to be put in hand within 21 days; and, as we heard in a previous debate, local authorities already have the power to introduce local HMO registration schemes. Has the case for the necessity for additional licensing been made sufficiently persuasively? I am not entirely against it. On balance, my argument is not that the policy is indefensible, but that we need a persuasive case. When regulation extends as it does in this Bill—when powers are granted in addition to powers that already exist—a very persuasive case has to be made. As yet, the Minister has failed to convince me.
I do not imply any criticism of the Minister. He is an able man, but he is a busy man with other fish to fry. Perhaps he has not had enough time to devote to the subject, but unless he spends that time and uses all his powers of eloquence, all of his wit and wisdom, not only I will be unconvinced of the need to extend power in this respect, but the doubts of many landlords and organisations outside this place will be confirmed. I will waste no more time, because the Minister will want to be persuasive, as I suggested.