Lembit Öpik (Shadow Minister (Housing), Department for Communities and Local Government; Montgomeryshire, Liberal Democrat)

I notice that the Minister has resorted to quoting John F. Kennedy, which is appropriate because the Bill has such a wide remit that technically it could organise a moon landing and not go beyond the limits of its involvement.

Iain Wright (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Communities and Local Government; Hartlepool, Labour)

I think we need a debate on whether the agency will be a direct provider of the moon launch, because I know that the hon. Gentleman is interested in space and asteroids. Would it help to facilitate that moon landing, or would it be a direct provider?

Lembit Öpik (Shadow Minister (Housing), Department for Communities and Local Government; Montgomeryshire, Liberal Democrat)

My understanding from our previous debate is that the agency would be able to operate the rocket as long as it was rented. If the rocket were  bought, the agency would have to get someone else to look after it. Although I am not asking to do so, if called upon by the nation I would be happy to offer my services and perhaps knock a few asteroids out of the way in the process.

In a more mundane context, I have a simple question about the guidance that the HCA can give

“to such persons as it considers appropriate about any matters relating to its objects.”

Clauses 48 and 49 make it clear that there is a difference between guidance and directions. Although those clauses relate to the Secretary of State, presumably there is some distinction between guidance and directions. Due to my inexperience of my portfolio there may be a standard answer that I do not know, but will the Minister clarify the matter? How binding is the guidance that the HCA gives? Is it mandatory, or is it, within the more conventional meaning of the word, exactly that—guidance and advice? I hope the question makes sense to the Minister, and that he can provide some clarification.

Nick Raynsford (Greenwich & Woolwich, Labour)

My question to the Minister is on a different tack. I assume that the main purpose of clause 43 is to allow the agency to give guidance to providers and others involved in the provision of social housing and regeneration in the way that both the Housing Corporation and English Partnerships do at present.

Within the current arrangements, another area has always been problematic: the relationship between the regulatory function of the Housing Corporation and its investment function. The question has always been how to maintain a proper distinction between those two functions, but without allowing nonsense to develop whereby the investment side puts money into an organisation that is subject to concern from the regulatory side. That will be part of the framework under the new arrangements whereby the regulator will be a different body from the funder and there will at times be questions about whether it is sensible for regulatory action to be taken in respect of an organisation that is seen to be in difficulty.

We know that in general the record over the past 30 years or so has been good in terms of successful housing associations. When problems have arisen, the Housing Corporation has been able to intervene and the problems have generally been overcome without loss of public money or threat to tenants. However, as the recent case involving Ujima housing association highlighted, unhappy circumstances can rapidly develop in which an association that had previously been regarded as a safe recipient of investment finance may seem to be getting into financial difficulties or to be acting not entirely properly in its financial decisions, and regulatory intervention may become necessary. In the Ujima case, questions were asked about whether action was taken early enough when the first warning signals appeared about the organisation not performing as well as it should. My question is: does guidance in clause 43 extend to guidance being issued by the agency to the regulator in such circumstances?

It will be essential to have a clear understanding and a mechanism to ensure the sharing of information between the two bodies, where there are doubts about the performance of individual bodies, and where regulatory action may be necessary. If it is not provided under this part of the Bill, where will arrangements be  defined to ensure that there can be a proper and appropriate system for sharing information between the agency and the regulator in such circumstances?

Andrew George (St Ives, Liberal Democrat)

I launched the probing contributions made so far. Indeed my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire launched a space probe a moment ago. I was not quite sure which planet he was coming from, but I was reassured because in the end it was a very thoughtful contribution.

Lembit Öpik (Shadow Minister (Housing), Department for Communities and Local Government; Montgomeryshire, Liberal Democrat)

You are supposed to be on my side.

Andrew George (St Ives, Liberal Democrat)

Just to reassure my hon. Friend, I fully support him.

Presumably, the HCA will be giving guidance to RSLs and others—local authorities and so forth. Chapter 5 refers to guidance and direction from the Secretary of State. To what extent will the HCA be expected to offer formal guidance to Government agencies, to the Treasury and the Secretary of State? That is not clear, so perhaps the Minister could point out where it is formally provided for in the Bill?

We have noted that the HCA produces an annual report. A lot of bodies that provide housing—RSLs for example—will be making representations to Government, and they would be greatly strengthened if the HCA itself endorsed the concerns of those agencies. An example is the manner in which stamp duty applies to shared equity properties. In many parts of the country when such a property is purchased, the contribution of the occupant is well below stamp duty level but they still have to pay stamp duty because the value of the whole property is above the stamp duty threshold. In those circumstances, and given the fact that it is not open market housing, I hope that the HCA would support social housing providers by endorsing that concern. The Government need to address the anomaly whereby people they and the HCA are attempting to support through low-cost shared equity properties are penalised by having to pay stamp duty. In that instance, it would be appropriate for the HCA to make representations not just to the Secretary of State but to the Treasury itself. Can the Minister reassure us that it would be a right and proper thing for the HCA to do?

Iain Wright (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Communities and Local Government; Hartlepool, Labour)

I am grateful to Members for that interesting line of questioning. On the point raised by the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire about whether the word guidance is to be understood in the conventional sense, I reassure him that guidance is guidance.

It might be helpful if I set out what sort of guidance we expect the agency to provide. It could provide guidance on anything relating to its objects and we have discussed at length improving the supply and quality of housing, regeneration and community development. The sort of guidance the agency might issue could be similar to what English Partnerships and the Housing Corporation have been doing. For example, in relation to its investment functions, the Housing Corporation issues a piece of main guidance called the capital funding guide, designed to help registered social landlords understand the procedures and requirements relating to capital grant.