Andrew George (St Ives, Liberal Democrat)

I beg to move amendment No. 36, in clause 54, page 23, line 17, at end insert—

‘(3A) The Secretary of State shall make provision for the continuation of the functions of the Commission for the New Towns in respect of workshops and industrial building, through the transfer of those functions to another authority.’.

Having listened to the debate on clause 52, I feel that my amendment is deficient in some respects. However, I shall use this as an opportunity to probe the Minister, who is aware of my concerns. The clause should be made more explicit to protect the valuable work of English Partnerships, which otherwise could easily be lost or submerged in the clear objectives set out in clause 2. English Partnerships has always supported the provision of employment floor space, which is one of the outputs against which it has been measured since it was established. The agency has progressed specific programmes on, for example, priority sites and network space, designed to deliver employment floor space in areas where the private sector is reluctant to invest.

That key provision could easily be neglected in the Bill. Perhaps unbeknown to some, English Partnerships has developed workshops in communities where no social housing remains—communities in which the HCA might not be interested. None the less, such communities have a need for employment opportunities and the prospect that local businesses could flourish, but the  private sector might find that it is not commercially viable or attractive to set up workshops and employment space in such places. In those circumstances, English Partnerships has made a significant difference, and its work should not be overlooked. From the perspective of those concerned about the future of rural areas, it is important that that important work is not lost.

The statutory background to English Partnerships’ support for employment floor space can be found in section 159 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, which sets out the objects of the Urban Regeneration Agency. Section 159(4)(b) states:

“by developing, or encouraging the development of, existing and new industry and commerce”.

I acknowledge that the Bill includes powers to allow the HCA to support existing or new businesses and these are set out in clauses 31 to 33 which were debated earlier. The Bill, in clause 42, would also allow the HCA to provide advice. What concerns me is that in those clauses, particularly clause 33, the provision of work space in the context which I described earlier is not sufficiently explicit. If a list is going to be made then something could easily be overlooked or submerged in the future work of the agency. I urge the Minister, therefore, to look very carefully at this issue and see whether he could bring forward proposals or perhaps work together on a proposed amendment which would allow this to be more explicit.

Targets are set through English Partnerships’ corporate planning process and agreed with Ministers. English Partnerships’ core targets cover housing units and other issues but also employment floor space and private-sector investment attracted. In 2006-97, English Partnerships provided 326,000 sq m of employment floor space which matched well against their target of 300,000 sq m. I do not see anything in the Bill where such a target would be permitted or required of the HCA to ensure that employment floor space of this type is produced and that is why I hope that the Minister will consider carefully the need to make more explicit that important function, which I fear otherwise will be lost and submerged.

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

I pay tribute to the hon. Gentleman who has been tenacious in this line of questioning. He has been so throughout the debate, from oral evidence sessions onwards, in a very sincere manner. I suggest that such a provision is not necessary in respect of his concerns because the powers of the agency are already sufficiently wide to provide industrial building or workshops, should the regeneration or sustainability of a community or area warrant such development. I draw his attention to clause 33 which contains the phrases

“encourage or develop existing or new businesses...provide business or employment services”.

Those specifically and sufficiently refer to encouraging or developing the matters to which he alluded.

We are reiterating and rehashing some of the earlier debate but it is important to reassure the hon. Gentleman that, while the focus of the agency may be towards increasing the supply of housing, it is also tasked with ensuring that any housing developed is supported by  the necessary infrastructure, which will include the provision of adequate employment facilities for the area in question should it be needed.

I have made the point on a number of occasions that I do not think that plonking 3 million homes in a field will be adequate. We need to ensure there is sufficient infrastructure, and an employment base is essential. The agency may facilitate the provision of these developments rather than develop itself but it has the power to do so which will be important in helping to fulfil its objects.

Andrew George (St Ives, Liberal Democrat)

The Minister used the expression that the provision of housing is supported by other infrastructure. The question that I raised in my opening remarks was that there are some communities where English Partnerships has developed its workshops where no social housing has been provided at the same time. In some villages, social housing has been lost because it has all been sold but English Partnerships still provided those workshops. If the Minister is saying that industrial floor space and workshops will only be provided in circumstances where there is also some housing development, I remain concerned.

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

I hope that the hon. Gentleman does not forget about the importance of regional development agencies, the sub-national review and the explicit requirement for local authorities to be involved in economic development. That triumvirate—local authorities, RDAs and the agency—will be essential in reassuring him with regard to the importance of that regeneration of necessary industrial floor space. I hope that he asks leave to withdraw his amendment.

Andrew George (St Ives, Liberal Democrat)

Having listened to what the Minister said, I still seek some further reassurance. I hope that he will take on board the concerns that I have raised, particularly in respect of rural areas, which are not necessarily scheduled to receive social housing of the type that we all want to see across the country in future. However, from a drafting and placing point of view, the issue that I am raising could be more appropriately drafted. I hope that the Minister will take this matter on board and consider the need for a more explicit statement in the Bill to reassure rural areas that these objectives will be met.

I am grateful for the Committee’s patience in allowing me to probe the issue. I am happy to beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.