New Clause 27 - Compliance with building regulations
Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Bill
4:45 pm
Malcolm Wicks (Minister for energy, Department of Trade and Industry; Croydon North, Labour)
I am glad to be able to support the intentions of the new clause, which seeks to extend the time limit within which local authorities may bring prosecutions for breaches of part L of the building regulations. It would also require Ministers to report to Parliament on the steps being taken to secure greater compliance with part L. I know that my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning takes this issue very seriously, and such a report should provide a useful opportunity to demonstrate the extent of the Government’s action to achieve that.
Extending the time limit within which councils may bring prosecutions for breaches of part L should make it more difficult for those who fail to comply with the regulations to escape the rigours of the law. A key change is for the time limit to be triggered by discovery of the breach. It is all too easy for latent and other defects to come to the attention of the authority only a while after the six-month time limit has started to run. That can sometimes make it difficult to pursue a case. In making such changes, it is important to ensure that they are reasonable and in line with the accepted approach to prosecutions for summary offences.
Officials in the Department of the Minister for Housing and Planning have been considering the matter and taking detailed cross-governmental advice. They are considering a formula that is similar in nature but has different provisions, which I hope that my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, North and Leith will be prepared to accept as one that would command support throughout Parliament. Under that formula, the limit for taking proceedings would remain at six months, not 12, but with one fundamental change, as requested by representatives of local authority building control bodies, whereby the period would be triggered when the local authority had sufficient evidence of the offence.
The overall period in which proceedings for an offence could be brought would be capped at two years, not three, and the proposal would seek to set out in more detail the process that would apply. In essence, discovery of the offence would mean when there was in the opinion of the prosecuting authorities sufficient evidence to justify prosecution, not when the offence is committed, as is currently the case.
Once prosecuting authorities were at the point of having sufficient evidence, a six-month period to launch proceedings would give them reasonable time to launch the investigation. It is in keeping with the need to expedite justice. The six-month period is also consistent with a general default period for bringing prosecutions that apply to the vast majority of summary offences, as section 127(1) of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980 makes clear.
Additionally, in relation to summary offences, where provisions have differed from the general default period, there are examples of a six-month period from the date when the authorities have sufficient evidence. I am advised that we should refer to sections 12(4A)(b) and (4B)(a) of the Theft Act 1968 and section 71(a) of the Animal Health Act 1981. An overall time limit of two years is consistent with the Government’s drive to get summary cases heard more quickly and to ensure that such prosecutions are given the priority that they deserve.
If my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, North and Leith can endorse that approach, which has been discussed with and, more importantly, agreed to by representatives of local authority building control bodies, we hope to bring forward, subject to finalising cross-Government support, a suitably drafted replacement clause for consideration on Report.
Finally, I should acknowledge to the Committee that changing enforcement provision in relation to one part of the regulations is a somewhat novel proposal. The Bill, however, gives us an important opportunity to send a clear signal about how seriously we take compliance with part L. It is the intention of my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning to seek colleagues’ agreement to extend the provisions across the regulations at the earliest opportunity. It is on that basis that we are making the change.