Clause 66 - Selective licensing of other residential accommodation
Housing Bill
9:10 am
Mr John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings, Conservative)
But we will come to those matters later, Mr. Conway. I mention them now because if we have inconsistent application of licensing, we could end up in the curious situation in which different rules apply to an owner with different managers—for example, an owner who uses different management agencies to run properties in different areas . The confusion that would result from inconsistency would be highly undesirable in terms of ensuring that the Bill is received well and is implemented effectively.
To achieve the objective that I describe, we suggest that the national authority should play a bigger part. There will be those who say that that would be injurious to the principles of local democracy, and I can see that argument welling up on the lips of the hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Mr. Davey). Had he not so assiduously already written his speech, I could almost do it for him, but I do not underestimate the assiduity of the hon. Gentleman. He is smiling benignly, so I assume that he disagrees with nothing that I have said.
The argument for local diversity and discretion is less persuasive than the argument for the need to ensure that the legislation is consistent. The arguments are finely balanced: there will be differences between localities, and I do not disregard the arguments for local diversity, which is important, but on balance the argument in favour of consistency is stronger. My hon. Friend the Member for Poole (Mr. Syms) described the situation in a seaside town, where properties along the seafront may be located in different local authority areas. The argument is just as profound in neighbouring boroughs or suburbs of a conurbation, but is perhaps less applicable in rural areas, where settlements are more widely spread. However, I imagine that the problem of inconsistency will be profound in many towns and cities, and it is not one that we should underestimate. During the past few weeks, that case has been put to me by several representative organisations.
In addition, a question mark hangs over the competence of local authorities to make decisions about the most appropriate management structures and funding arrangements. That is why we tabled amendment No. 304. By inserting
''the guidance on fitness tests supplied by the appropriate national authority'',
application will at least be consistent with the guidance that the national authority—the Government, for example—has provided, and a local authority will avoid the danger of inappropriateness in the way in which it defines management structures or funding arrangements for licensing.
The amendments are designed to ensure that the Bill is effective and that local authorities are not placed in a position in which they cannot implement its provisions, but can perform their responsibilities in a way that they can properly handle. Once again, we, as the official Opposition, have, in our humble way, done our best to make a positive contribution to the Bill. As I said at the outset, the question of consistency will permeate our discussions. The balance between the need for local discretion and variety and the simultaneous need to ensure equity and consistency has already been mentioned several times, and I suspect that it will be again. It is important that to achieve the right balance, but I am not yet convinced that the Bill as drafted does so.