Clause 14
Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill
6:00 pm
Danny Alexander (Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Work & Pensions; Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey, Liberal Democrat)
I have a few questions to add. The clause looks innocuous, but one or two matters could usefully be fleshed out to help us to understand how the clause would be implemented should the Bill become law. I appreciate that the Minister’s throat is getting a bit dry after the number of speeches that he has been making, but I suspect that this will be his last, at least for today.
The clause relates to the transfer of property rights and liabilities from the Secretary of State to the commission and vice versa. It would be useful if the Committee could understand how the Minister envisages that working in practice. I presume, although the Minister should clarify this, that the measure applies to buildings currently occupied by the CSA, computers currently used by them and other fixtures and fittings of their buildings. Presumably, those things would be transferred to the commission. The clause is needed because the CSA is an Executive agency and its property is currently owned by the Secretary of State. A transfer would mean that, in future, that property would belong to the commission.
If that is the case, perhaps the Minister could explain what rights or interests over transferred property the Secretary of State may seek to retain in the case of such a transfer of property to the commission. Would it be a controlling interest that would give the Secretary of State a veto over any future disposals that the commission may make? For example, if the commission decides that it wishes to sell property, will he have the right to veto that decision or could the money that might be raised from the sale of property be returned to the consolidated fund, rather than becoming additional money in CMEC’s account?
I think that I am right in saying that the CSA occupies seven regional centres throughout the United Kingdom. Is it the Minister’s intention for CMEC to have initial access to all those centres and that the commission will take decisions about its property needs in due course or might he be inclined to dispose of some of that property to raise funds for the Exchequer before the commission is set up?
Finally, is the Minister considering any disposals or alternative uses for the property? Reduction of staffing has been a constant feature of these debates, so that may be an issue in that there may be a need for less property and fewer centres. Under this Government as under previous Governments, there has been a tendency to centralise services, core centres and so on. Does he predict that that is likely to happen in the future, with relation to property, computer systems and other goods and chattels?
I shall stray slightly to talk briefly about property disposals that may take place. There have been several debates about the future use of property that is owned by the public sector in relation to meeting housing needs. If the Minister were to give directions to the commission, would he advise it about how it might seek to dispose of property should it wish to do so? That property could be used, for example, by housing associations or other housing providers to provide affordable housing. I am sure that that would satisfy the Opposition and meet demands for brownfield sites.
Does the clause enable the Minister to give such directions to the commission to ensure that, if it is disposing of property, it will be done in a way that could meet other Government objectives? The point that I have just made would be one such relevant objective and, with that in mind, I look forward to the Minister’s response.