I call the Minister for Social Development, the Lord Morrow of Clogher Valley, to move the Bill.

Moved. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Members will have a copy of the Marshalled List of amendments, which details the order for consideration. The amendments have been grouped for debate in the provisional grouping of amendments selected list. There are three groups of amendments, and we will debate the amendments in each group in turn. The first debate will be on amendment Nos 1 to 6, 8-10, 12, 16-26, 32, 38-43 and 46-51, which deal with the licensing of HMOs. The second debate will be on amendment Nos 7, 11, 13-15, 36, 37, 44, 45, 52 and 53 and the Minister for Social Development’s opposition to clause 83 stand part. Those amendments deal with technical and drafting changes. The third debate will be on amendment Nos 27-31 and 33-35, which deal with the register and information.

I remind Members who intend to speak during the debates on the three groups of amendments that they should address all the amendments in each group on which they wish to comment. Once the debate on each group has been completed, any further amendments in the group will be moved formally as we go through the Bill, and the Question on each will be put without further debate. The Questions on stand part will be taken at the appropriate points in the Bill. If all that is clear, we shall proceed.

Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 3 (Cases where person is treated as occupying accommodation as only or main residence)

We now come to the first group of amendments for debate. With amendment No 1, it will be convenient to debate amendment Nos 2-6, 8-10, 12, 16-26, 32, 38-43 and 46-51. These amendments deal with the licensing of houses in multiple occupation (HMOs). Members should note that amendment No 12 is consequential to amendment No 9. Amendment Nos 18 and 19 are consequential to amendment No 17. Amendment No 21 is consequential to amendment No 20. Amendment Nos 47, 48, 49, 50 and 51 are consequential to amendment No 46. I call the Minister for Social Development to move amendment No 1 and to address the other amendments in the group.

I beg to move amendment No 1:

In page 2, line 35, after "residence" insert "there".

The following amendments stood on the Marshalled List:

Nos 2-6, 8-10, 12, 16-26, 32, 38-43 and 46-51.

I should explain at the outset that I intend to comment on the more significant substantive government amendments to address concerns that were raised during Committee Stage. I am also bringing forward a small number of consequential and technical amendments that have arisen. My amendments have been arranged in three groups and have been discussed in some detail during the Social Development Committee’s clause-by-clause scrutiny of the Bill, apart from amendments to clause 78, which have recently been copied to the Committee Clerk. I am pleased that the Committee was able to support the amendments, and I thank its Chair and members for their constructive scrutiny of the Bill.

The amendments that relate to group 1 are as follows. Two amendments to clause 3 will add seasonal workers to the list of people considered to be occupying a property as their only or main residence. This subsection is solely aimed at those who have some other address that might arguably be their only or main residence. This change will now provide protection for people engaged in seasonal work.

On and after the introduction of the licensing scheme, any properties pending or already registered under the Housing Executive registration scheme will be automatically passported to the licensing scheme for the purposes of regulation. As a result, a pre-existing HMO operating under the registration scheme will not be subject to the same planning controls as a new application. A series of amendments have been made to clauses 9, 20, 21 and 67 to reflect this.

I propose two amendments to clause 10. This clause sets out the matters that are relevant for deciding whether an owner or managing agent is a fit and proper person. My amendments concern the inclusion of the word "locality", because the original draft conflicted with the findings of the 2005 judicial review as landlords have no power to deal with inappropriate tenant behaviour outside the HMO. With the amendments, the word "locality" remains but is now specified in the Bill as extending only to the living accommodation and its associated surroundings. I should say at this stage that the Attorney General has raised one competence issue for clause 10. He would like the reference to immoral purposes removed from the definition of antisocial behaviour at clause 10(7)(b). As this was raised after the deadline for the tabling of amendments, it is my intention to bring this amendment forward at the next stage. I ask Members to note the current amendment on that basis.

I put forward a series of amendments to clause 28. A number of concerns were raised about the process for obtaining a new licence for a change of ownership that may put tenants at risk of homelessness. My amendments will now allow for greater flexibility on change of ownership of a property by building in a specified period of time to obtain a new licence. Following on from the changes to clause 28, a readjustment has been made to clause 29 to ensure that the same practical process for the transfer of a licence will be replicated on the death of an owner.

As a result of a change to the definition of managing agent, on which I will shortly expand further, a number of amendments are proposed for clause 33 to ensure that the full range of HMO management activities are captured.

I further propose a number of amendments to clause 88. My amendments make several changes to the previous draft, which inadvertently captured and required letting agents to be included on the licence application.

A letting agent's duties are limited to viewing and letting the property, which may include collecting the initial first month’s rent and deposit, and therefore it is not essential for the letting agent to be listed on the licence application. Further clarification will be provided in regulations and guidance to assist councils in the operation of the scheme. A further amendment to clause 88 removes the reference to cousin in relation to "relative" in clause 88(3)(c). It is my view that three student cousins living together may have the same risks as three unrelated students sharing. This will reduce the risk of some student HMOs being inappropriately excluded from regulation.

I also propose some amendments to schedule 2. Concerns were raised that having a process of publicly displaying planning notices at the accommodation would single out HMOs, which may have implications for the safety of future tenants. My amendments will remove paragraphs 2 to 6, which relate to the public display of a notice. An additional amendment provides a power for my Department to make regulations and the process to be used for the use of a notice procedure to the making of HMO applications. As this regulation contains a significant level of technical detail, and is aimed at the operational side of the licensing scheme, it is my view that the future process would benefit from further engagement with the councils before its introduction; hence, it is more appropriate for inclusion in regulations than within the Bill.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. First of all, I thank the Minister for bringing the Houses in Multiple Occupation Bill to Consideration Stage. I am speaking on behalf of the Committee for Social Development.

As the Minister alluded to, the Bill was a long and complex one for consideration, with 91 clauses and eight schedules. It raised a wide range of issues, some of which were not directly related to the Bill. So, with your indulgence, Mr Speaker, it might be worth saying a few things up front on what the Bill is not about, because of the strength of feeling of a number of residents who have been impacted very negatively by their experiences, but it is not only residents.

The Bill is not about planning matters. In other words, it does not relate to the number of HMOs or any question of over-provision of HMOs in areas. Neither does the Bill seek to deal with antisocial behaviour of tenants in HMOs, although the Committee has made some recommendations relating to that issue in its report, and I will come to those in due course.

The Bill’s purpose is to enable better regulation of houses in multiple occupation. It introduces a system of licensing and new provisions about standards in housing. It also streamlines the definition of a house in multiple occupation and clarifies existing law. The proposed licensing system will mean that a person is acting illegally if they are not licensed to operate a property as a house in multiple occupation. That is a fundamental change to the existing system of voluntary registration and one that, I think, we can and all do very much welcome.

Members will note the high number of amendments to the Bill: there are 54 in total. The Committee had been told that a significant number of the amendments would be consequential, but, at least technically speaking, that is not the case. However, a large majority of the amendments are not substantive, as the Minister said. I will, therefore, be directing my comments on behalf of the Committee to those amendments that are substantive issues.

I am glad to say that many of these amendments were proposed a result of the discussions the Committee had with officials and stakeholders during the Committee Stage. I would like to thank the Department officials for their proactivity in that regard. Explanation and clarification often sufficed in respect of concerns raised by the Committee, and where this did not, the Committee was content with amendments proposed by the then Minister to address those concerns. These engagements were very positive and, in relation to the Department, reflect a mature, collaborative approach between the Committee and the Department to address a complex Bill in a relatively short time. Suffice it to say that the Committee was, therefore, content with the amendments presented by the Department during Committee Stage, and we support the amendments today in the House.

I would like to highlight a number of points that are of relevance to the Bill and to stakeholders by referring to some recommendations the Committee made in its report. I will then specifically address the amendments in group 1.

In addition to agreeing the amendments brought by the Department, the Committee made a number of recommendations in its report. A number of them relate directly or indirectly to addressing the antisocial behaviour of tenants and the responsibility of landlords to assist with that.

Obviously, we all know of, and have heard about, the antisocial behaviour perpetrated, often in the name of students, in houses of multiple occupation. Certainly, there is a strong public perception of it. Everyone has heard about the whole issue in the Holylands in the last number of years. Of course, having been a representative of that area for a number of years, I am very mindful of it. I am also equally struck by the fact that the vast majority of students in those houses are very well behaved and, not only that, are exemplars of good citizenship. Nevertheless, there has been an issue associated with HMOs, and residents have been very negatively impacted by it.

Therefore, to the Committee's mind, the development of purpose-built managed student accommodation has the potential to help address that problem. Well-managed properties, such as those with tenancy agreements that include behavioural standards for tenants, could alleviate the pressure on residential areas where there is currently over-provision of HMOs. Where these should be situated is, of course, a planning matter, although Belfast, for example, has a HMO subject plan which, at least, underpins such planning applications. The Committee believes that this approach should continue, even though such buildings will not be technically designated as HMOs when the Bill is in force.

The Committee also recommends that there should be robust arrangements in all HMO tenancy agreements to help address antisocial behaviour by tenants and seeks the Department’s agreement that this should be included in the guidance to accompany the Bill. Indeed, we have also suggested that the Department should liaise directly with the PSNI and the Department of Justice to address this matter in the time ahead.

The Committee believes that the inclusion of behavioural standards in tenancy agreements must be mandatory to ensure consistency, and that breaching them would be, ultimately, grounds for eviction if the rules continued to be blatantly ignored. The Committee recommends that this proposal should be considered in a wider review of the private rented sector.

Landlords and managing agents should also be required to attend training on any code of practice developed, in order to raise professional standards in the sector. Indeed, the Committee recommends that an accreditation scheme should be developed for landlords and managing agents and that, once such a scheme is established, they must be accredited under it before they can apply for, or be named as, the managing agent on a licence.

Before moving on to the amendments, I point out that the Committee supported a system that was cost-neutral to councils. It would be helpful to get the Minister’s up-to-date position on that matter.

We need to recognise that HMOs are an essential part of the housing sector. They provide comparatively cheap accommodation for people who cannot afford to rent their own place. However, a property that is rented to several unrelated individuals, perhaps for only part of the year, presents health and safety issues, as well those relating to standards. These are the issues that the Bill aims to address. They include, for example, the number of people that the property is suitable for, the facilities in the property, the size of room etc.

I am sure that the vast majority of HMO landlords aim to provide a high-quality, safe environment, with the number of tenants being appropriate to the size of the property, and with the appropriate quality and number of facilities. However, there is sufficient concern about the sector that suggests that a voluntary approach to regulation is far too light a touch and is not acceptable. There has been evidence of poor quality standards in some HMOs which present health and safety risks to the tenants, and legislation is required to address those issues. I, and the Committee, believe that the Bill will help to address those issues.

I turn to the amendments in group 1, which relate mainly to licensing. There are 34 amendments in the group and the Committee is supportive of them all. As I said in my opening remarks, I intend to focus on the key amendments under our consideration.

Amendment Nos 1 and 2 relate to clause 3, which relates to:

"Cases where person is treated as occupying accommodation as only or main residence".

The Committee listened to concerns about the absence of seasonal and migrant workers from the clause, and raised that with the Department. The Department indicated that it was always its intent to capture these groups in the clause, based on an assumption that, due to their transient nature, any accommodation could be taken as being their main residence and, therefore, the groups did not need to be specified. However, because seasonal workers may have an address other than their main address — they may stay elsewhere while they are working away from home — the Department decided to amend clause 3 to specify seasonal workers. The Department did not include migrants, as it is assumed that they will have only one main residence. The Committee is content with that explanation and the amendments.

Amendment Nos 5 and 6 relate to clause 10, the "Fit and proper persons" test. The Committee welcomed the introduction of a fit and proper person test to an owner or managing agent of a HMO under clause 10. There were originally some concerns regarding the inclusion of the word "locality" in the clause, which the Minister referred to earlier, and which suggested to the Landlords’ Association that landlords would be responsible for the antisocial behaviour of their tenants, even if that took place outside the curtilage of the property.

The Committee, however, was content that the word locality applies only to a definition of living accommodation as detailed in clauses 2(5)(a) and 2(5)(b). The amendment to clause 10 is a slight reworking of the original clause to refer to "relevant living accommodation". The Committee was content with those amendments, but it had quite a number of reservations. As I said, the incoming Minister will be asked to liaise directly with the Department of Justice and the PSNI to try to resolve these matters on a more satisfactory basis for local residents in particular.

Amendment No 8 relates to clause 20, "Renewal of licence", and it is important. The renewal of licences in areas where there is already over-provision was raised in Committee. In other words, some residents wanted to try retrospectively to reduce the number of HMOs in any given area, and I can understand why. The Bill will allow councils to prevent new HMO licences being issued where there is already over-provision in an area. The argument was made, however, that the renewal of a licence in an area of existing over-provision should not be denied because of that. The Bill does not seek retrospectively to address over-provision of HMOs in areas by denying owners a licence purely because it is up for renewal. That appeared to the Committee to be simply unfair. The Committee was, therefore, content with this and other aspects of amendment No 8.

Amendment Nos 16, 17, 18 and 19 are substantive amendments to clause 26 to ensure that the changes brought about by amendments to clause 28 — "Change of ownership: effect on licence" — take into account all joint ownership cases. New subsection (5) reflects a situation in joint ownership in which a licence transfer occurs as a result of new ownership, and one person who was a licensee before the transfer continues to be an owner after the transfer has taken place. That gives councils the powers to vary a licence in such circumstances following an application to renew the licence by the existing licensee and the new owner. The Committee was content with the proposed amendments to clause 26.

Amendment Nos 20 and 21 relate to clause 28, "Change of ownership: effect on licence". The Bill as introduced did not allow for licences to be transferred when there is a change of ownership. The Committee recognised that that would cause uncertainty for tenants of such a HMO and the proposed new owner. Clause 28, as amended, allows for the transfer of a licence as long as the proposed new owner applies for a licence before the transfer takes effect. A council, of course, still has to consider an application in the normal way, and a transferred licence will cease to have effect at a particular date if a new licence is granted or if the application is refused. That approach, however, at least builds in more time for tenants and a proposed new landlord when there is a question over the licensing of a HMO. This is all about guaranteeing security.

Amendment Nos 22 and 23 relate to clause 29, "Death of sole licence holder: effect on licence". The Committee acknowledged stakeholders' concerns that the three months referred to in the clause may not be sufficient to wind up a licence holder’s estate. The amendment satisfied the Committee that it would afford councils greater flexibility to extend this period if necessary.

Amendment Nos 24, 25 and 26 relate to clause 33. The Committee was content with the amendment that clarifies that it is an offence for an owner to appoint someone to act as a managing agent if that person is not named on the licence and that it is an offence for a person to act as a managing agent if they are not named on the licence. That ensures that the licence must have a bona fide representative named as a managing agent, who will act in a legal capacity for a HMO. The agent must also be named on the register, which should bring greater transparency as to who the responsible parties are for each and every HMO. That is to do with accountability about who owns a property. The Committee, therefore, was content with the clause as amended.

Amendment Nos 40 to 43 relate to clause 88, "Interpretation". During discussions with the Department, officials noted that the original definition of a managing agent would also inadvertently include a letting agent, as a letting agent often accepts the first month’s rent. Subsequently, a letting agent has nothing further to do with the management of a property. Amendment Nos 40, 41 and 43 clarify that issue.

The Committee was content with the amendments and the agreement from the Department to clarify in guidance the requirement to notify tenants who the managing agent is.

Amendment No 42 removes "cousins" from the definition of "relative", and the Minister has already dealt with that. The Committee was content with the amendment.

Amendment Nos 46 to 51 relate to schedule 2. Amendment No 46 makes a significant change to the schedule regarding the publication of an application for a HMO licence. That relates to the information required to be included in the HMO register under clause 62, the amendments to which will form part of the group 3 debate. The key issue in amendment No 46, however, is that the detail required in the giving of notice for making a HMO application will be included in regulation, and that may incorporate the level of information required to be published, how that is to be publicised, the role of the council in the process and the consequence of failing to comply with the requirements of the regulations. <BR/>The changes stem from landlords' concern about the level of detail to be included about them in the HMO register and the potential threat to their security. The Committee noted that the Department will consult councils and other stakeholders when drawing up the regulations, which will, of course, come before the Committee for Social Development, or, more appropriately, the Committee for Communities, for scrutiny in the time ahead. The Committee was content with the amendment.

Amendment Nos 47 to 51 are consequential to amendment No 46, and the Committee is content with those. That is all that I have to say as Chairperson on the amendments in the group.

I will now make a couple of brief comments as an MLA. The Committee was very conscious of and alive to the concerns raised by a range of stakeholders, not least the residents whose lives have been very negatively impacted on by the over-provision of HMOs in a number of areas. The Committee listened to all their concerns. As local representatives, many of us have had direct experience of trying to intervene and intercede on people's behalf. Members of the Committee are satisfied with the good work done by the Committee, its officials, departmental officials and the Minister, who took on board if not all the concerns, certainly the vast majority.

We believe that this is a good Bill and, as I said in my opening remarks, a comprehensive one. It is about raising the standards for housing conditions; ensuring maximum accountability for tenants and landlords; and ensuring far greater health and safety for people who live in HMOs. The Bill does not deal with antisocial behaviour per se or the number and density of HMOs permitted in any street, so the Committee has made and will make very strong recommendations that those matters be taken forward with the relevant authorities by the incoming Department.

I will make a few comments as a member of the Social Development Committee. I thank the Minister for bringing the Bill to Consideration Stage, and I agree with the previous contributor that there was huge scrutiny at Committee Stage. As a result of that and the Chair's analysis of the amendments, I will keep my remarks to a minimum.

Our party supports the amendments tabled by the Minister and is pleased that, as a result, there will be better regulation of houses in multiple occupation.

I thank the Chair for his leadership and fellow members of the Social Development Committee for the way in which the Bill has progressed. Personally, I found it to be a very positive experience. I see that some of the DSD officials are here today, and they were more than helpful in directing and supporting us to get the Bill to this stage. I thank the Committee Clerk and officials who also guided us along the way.

In my East Belfast constituency, the ever-changing social demography has led to an increase in the demand for HMOs as an affordable housing option in the rented sector.

I certainly agree with the Chair that we come across situations where there are major difficulties. However, I hope that the Bill will provide major change as well as help and support for MLAs who deal with some of these difficult issues.

I want to say a few words about licensing. I am pleased to say that every house in multiple occupation must be licensed under the Bill. That is a huge change. I welcome the introduction of a system of licensing and new provisions on standards in housing that will mean that a person is acting illegally if they do not have a licence to manage a property as a house in multiple occupation.

I agree with the Minister on clause 10, which relates to the fit-and-proper-person test. Those people need to be fit and proper, because many of us have experience of fly-by-night landlords who are not licensed and cause huge problems in communities. I certainly agree with the Minister in relation to clause 10.

This licensing Bill brings fundamental change to the existing system of voluntary registration that I welcome. The Bill will introduce a new mandatory licensing scheme that will bring Northern Ireland into line with other UK jurisdictions. Again, I pay tribute to the Minister for the amendment to clause 88 in relation to relatives. There is the same risk for three cousins living in the same house as three unrelated people sharing the accommodation.

We met a number of residents' groups, including the Holylands residents' group, which raised many concerns. We have tried to take account of some of those concerns in these clauses. Again, I thank the Minister for bringing significant and substantive government amendments to address concerns raised by the Committee, reflecting those of residents. Some of those concerns were also raised by Housing Rights Northern Ireland. I believe — I hope I am right on this — that they raised a number of major issues, every one of which has been incorporated into the Bill.

I am pleased to support all the Minister's amendments. It is good legislation, and it will make a difference.

I join others in thanking the Committee and departmental staff for their assistance during the passage and consideration of the Bill. Like others, we think that the Bill will make landlords more accountable and protect tenants and the communities in which the HMOs are situated. I would like to put on record our thanks to Minister Morrow and his predecessor, Minister Storey, who tried to work alongside the Committee and have listened not only to the Committee's concerns but to those raised by stakeholders, who also played an important part in enabling us to better understand the impact of the legislation and, indeed, the reality of living in HMO areas. <BR/>Our party supports the Bill. We think that it has been a good piece of work. I will speak on one or two amendments in particular, but the Chair did an excellent job of detailing and explaining the Committee consideration of the amendments. We particularly welcome amendment Nos 1 and 2. Amendment No 1 is technical. We are also very supportive of amendment No 2, which is aimed at people who have another address that, arguably, is their main residence. That is particularly the case with seasonal and migrant workers, who are afforded much better protection. We also welcome the fit-and-proper-person test, which is critical. We all know, as representatives, how difficult it is to track down landlords at times. Both the registration of landlords and the additional accountability mechanisms in respect of HMOs will make our jobs and the jobs of others much easier when trying to secure property, and they will ensure that tenants work with the local community and are integrated well into it.

I also welcome some of the concerns that have been raised by landlords. They play an important role in providing a housing mix at a time when there are huge numbers of people on waiting lists. That does not, as others have said, apply just to students. We all know the high costs of accommodation, particularly in our cities. Therefore, we have to listen to the landlord fraternity as well to ensure that people will provide accommodation not only to students but to workers and professionals living in our city centres in particular.

On the other amendments in group 3, while there was significant concern from landlords about the amount of information on the HMO register linking them to their properties, the SDLP believes that access to such information is a matter of public interest, and we agree with the Committee's position that sufficient information should be made available to ensure that residents can address concerns regarding HMOs. The amendments seem to be a good middle ground in ensuring the safety of landlords and their families whilst providing a suitable amount of information to those with a genuine interest in the property. I note as well that statutory bodies will still have access to the full register.

Amendment No 33 inserts a new clause relating to the sharing of information between councils. We believe that giving councils the power to share information amongst themselves for the purposes of carrying out statutory functions will prove to be beneficial to the smooth running of the new HMO system. We all know how the Data Protection Act has in some ways disabled the sharing of information amongst statutory agencies. I think this will give greater clarity about the responsibilities of councils in sharing information to have better safeguards for tenants and local communities.

Amendment Nos 34 and 35 are related to amendment No 33 and insert a new clause into the relevant —

Can I point out that those are group 3 amendments?

Sorry; I beg your pardon. I am ahead of myself.

I was trying to catch your eye. We are doing quite well, but you are doing even better.

[Laughter.]

I will cut back later on then, Mr Speaker. Apologies for that. In conclusion — I need not draw this out needlessly — I very much welcome the legislation, the passage of the Bill, the scrutiny and the cooperation and collaboration between the Department, the Committee and, indeed, the stakeholders.

I, too, put on record my appreciation of the work of our Committee in helping to coordinate our scrutiny; the departmental officials, who were frequently there to answer many questions; and the range of people who came to give oral evidence and those who provided written evidence. There was a good balance to enable us to take account of all points of view.

Having considered the Bill in detail during the Committee's scrutiny and having received wide-ranging evidence, I continue to support it, its general thrust and the amendments that have been tabled by the Minister. They are largely a result of discussions with the Committee. Many of them are technical amendments that are consequential to some of the changes that have been agreed. There has been a useful engagement between the Committee and the current and preceding Ministers. That has been beneficial in trying to improve our legislation.

Bearing in mind that the legislation is designed to improve the lot of tenants and to recognise the additional risk that occurs with those living in houses of multiple occupation, it is important that there is licensing, which is the main aspect of the group 1 amendments. I agree with others that it is good that there is a fit-and-proper-person measurement to ensure that we have responsible landlords looking after their tenants. I will not comment on every amendment and clause but will just try to pick out some of the key changes.

I notice that amendment No 2 includes:

"A person who occupies living accommodation for the purpose of engaging in seasonal work".

Again, that could have been an area that would have been overlooked. Risks would have existed to seasonal workers from poor, or even unsafe, accommodation. It is right that we include them in order that they have that degree of protection.

I note the Minister's comment about the Attorney General, and that he intends to leave one of the amendments to a latter stage because of some concerns. Hopefully, that issue can be resolved.

There are several amendments on the transfer of the licence — I am looking at amendment Nos 17 and 20 — which is an important aspect. I certainly view the changes that have been made regarding the transfer of the licence as being beneficial to everyone. It is not in the interests of the tenant or the landlord if a licence cannot be transferred. We have to remember that if it is not able to be transferred smoothly, there will not be permission for the house to remain as a house of multiple occupation. Potentially, some of the tenants would then lose their homes. It is important that, where change does occur for whatever reason — for example, as a result of financial changes with the landlord, or the landlord becoming deceased — there is a smooth mechanism of transferring ownership so that, ultimately, the tenants do not suffer.

Representation was also made to us that, should someone decide to sell the property, it was important that there was a degree of security and that the licence would transfer with that ownership. It is right that we have built that provision in through the amendments. Were that not the case, we might have found that some buildings had to be emptied before they were sold, or there might have been very limited interest in purchasing such buildings, given that there was a great deal of insecurity about what might follow the sale. Again, the new owner will have to pass a fit-and-proper-person test like everyone else.

Amendment No 43 in particular is worthwhile. There is often confusion as to who is responsible for managing an agent, and the Bill helps to clarify that. Amendment No 43 followed a representation being made by some of the letting agents who highlighted the fact — and this is something I was not fully aware of — that frequently a letting agent may just be responsible for the letting. In the past, the tenant might have assumed that the letting agent was also responsible for reporting ongoing maintenance issues to the landlord. This gives clarification that there is such a thing as a letting agent who simply lets the property, with all the maintenance and ongoing responsibility for managing that house still lying with the landlord or his managing agent, who may be a different person. That information will be available to the tenant so that there is clarity and no confusion. That will allow those who have engaged in the letting of properties to continue, but there will be clarity for tenants so that, if they have issues with their property, they must go either to the landlord or to those who have been appointed as his letting agent.

As others have said, we have reached a high level of consensus and a balanced viewpoint. That should bring about improvement in the standards of houses in multiple occupation. Also, it should bring about benefits for neighbours, because responsibility will fall to be managed within the property, very clearly, with regulations there. As others have rightly said, landlords cannot be expected to manage behaviour outside of the property that they own, and it is a reasonable balance that that was not included.

All in all, this is a good piece of legislation, and I hope and expect that it will improve the lot of tenants, bring about a greater degree of clarity and bring about improvement in the lives of tenants and their neighbours.

I, too, thank not only the current Minister but his predecessor, our Committee Clerk and officials, and officials from the Department for the work that they did as we prepared our report. I acknowledge the suggestions that were taken up by officials and the way in which the Minister has brought forward all of the amendments. Colleagues from the Committee have already spoken. The Chairperson and three other members have spoken on the value of the amendments, some of which are technical, and others propose changes that are important for the competence of the Bill. I do not intend to add further to that debate. Suffice it to say that the Alliance Party is supportive of the Bill at this Stage and will continue to support it to Final Stage.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I also thank the former Minister and the current Minister for the work that they have done with the Department to bring the Bill to the House today. You will be happy to hear that I had a long-winded, drawn-out speech, but Alex threatened me at the start of the process and said, "Look. Just keep it as short as possible".

Legislation on houses in multiple occupation has been brought to the Assembly a number of times over the past number of years. It is a live issue out there. I think that many people have had concerns about the management, running and conditions that exist in such properties. I happen to believe that we could have dealt with a lot of this back then, but we adopted a light-touch approach when there should have been a more robust effort to try to tackle and deal with HMOs, as there has been with this Bill. I know of many communities, not only in this city but in other parts of the North, that have suffered as a result of mismanagement, poor conditions and being unable to get in touch with landlords.

I went through a number of the amendments, and some jumped out at me. The question of a fit-and-proper-person test is essential in trying to get to terms with some of the difficult problems that exist. The explanatory notes give a fairly detailed rundown on what would be expected or the types of people who would not be fit to be a landlord. The other issue that came across was the terms of the letting agencies and letting agents, and that came through, at times, during the questioning of people who came to the Committee to give evidence and the Department. I believe that this should encompass everybody, but it was explained to us that there may be letting agents whose only contact is the first month's rent and, after that, they have no control.

I had a concern, which I raised with the Department, in and around the private rented sector, because I had viewed them as two sides of the one coin: one may provide multiple lettings, but the other provides single lettings. In the past, both have led to the destruction of the residential nature of many communities in this city because of over-provision. I believe that both should have been tackled at the same time. No matter where you go, whether it is when canvassing or when you bump into people, one of the big concerns that people tell you about relates to how you deal with antisocial behaviour. Whilst the Bill may not deal entirely with antisocial behaviour, there are built-in mechanisms that may allow tenants to go to landlords and expect a return by way of them dealing with the problem.

Sinn Féin obviously supports the Bill. We support the amendments, but we look forward to additional information and an additional Bill coming so that everything will be tightened up and life made easier for tenants and, at the end of the day, landlords.

It was interesting to note that everyone spoke on a positive note and was very complimentary. I was just saying to my colleague here that it is a pity that every day is not like this. I suspect that it will not be.

Van Morrison might write a song.

Yes.

I thank all those who have taken part. I have listened carefully to what they have said. As I said, most of it was complimentary and welcoming of the Bill and what it is trying to do. I believe that it will do all the things that it says and that, as a result, the situation will be better as we go forward.

The introduction of mandatory licensing of HMOs will ensure that higher physical and management standards are adopted before an HMO can be classed as licensed. The policy intention is to prevent new areas becoming overprovided with HMOs in future; it does not have the scope to reduce overprovision in existing areas with an already high number of HMOs, such as the Holylands. My Bill will give a council the discretionary power to refuse to grant an HMO licence if it considers that there is or that the granting of a licence would result in overprovision for the locality. As planning is now devolved to the 11 councils, the Department will liaise with them on the detail of how HMO overprovision can be prevented. The most straightforward way to achieve this is likely to be the inclusion by councils of thresholds similar to those in operation in the HMO subject plan for Belfast in local area development plans.

Turning to antisocial behaviour, which the last Member to speak mentioned, the Committee report recommended that guidance should be completed by the Department to address antisocial behaviour. I can confirm that the guidance for landlords will include model tenancy agreements that will specify and outline acceptable tenant behaviour and detail tenant activities or practices that a landlord would not consider tolerable. Landlords will be encouraged to ensure that tenants are aware of their responsibilities and any possible consequences should they breach the conditions. Antisocial behaviour is also being given further consideration in my wider private rented sector review, which is presently under way. That review will also explore initiatives to raise professional standards in the private rented sector.

In relation to funding, the Department has set up a stakeholder group to take forward the transfer and will work with councils on funding arrangements. A business case will be required to estimate the cost of the transfer of the HMO function to the 11 councils. Councillors will decide how best to deploy the budget as to whether they will each assume the service or agree a suitable shared service delivery model. I will ensure that sufficient resources are allocated to councils for them to operate the new licensing scheme effectively.

Amendment No 1 agreed to.

Amendment No 2 made:

In page 2, line 36, at end insert

&quot;(2A) A person who occupies living accommodation for the purpose of engaging in seasonal work is to be treated, at all times during that person’s residence there, as occupying that accommodation as the person’s only or main residence.&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 3, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 4 to 8 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 9 (Breach of planning control)

Amendment No 3 made:

In page 6, line 37, leave out paragraph (b). — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 4 made:

In page 6, line 39, leave out &quot;and (i)&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 9, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 10 (Fit and proper persons)

Amendment No 5 made:

In page 7, line 34, leave out from &quot;living&quot; to end of line 35 and insert

&quot;relevant living accommodation whilst in the accommodation, or&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 6 made:

In page 7, line 37, leave out subsection (7) and insert

&quot;(7) In subsection (6)?—

&#x0027;anti-social behaviour&#x0027; means?—

(i) acting or threatening to act in a manner causing or likely to cause a nuisance or annoyance to a person residing in, visiting or otherwise engaging in a lawful activity in residential premises or in the locality of such premises, or

(ii) using or threatening to use residential premises for immoral or illegal purposes;

&#x0027;relevant living accommodation&#x0027; means living accommodation of which P is or was the owner or managing agent.&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 10, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 11 to 17 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 18 (Revocation of temporary exemption notice)

We now come to the second group of amendments for debate. With amendment No 7, it will be convenient to debate amendment Nos 11, 13 to 15, 36, 37, 44, 45, 52 and 53, and the Minister for Social Development's opposition to clause 83 stand part. Members should note that amendment No 45 is consequential to amendment No 44, and that amendment Nos 52 and 53 are both consequential to amendment No 20. I call the Minister to move amendment No 7 and to address the other amendments in the group.

I beg to move amendment No 7:

In page 12, line 11, leave out &quot;under section 67&quot; and insert &quot;in accordance with section 67(4)&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

The following amendments stood on the Marshalled List:

Nos 11, 13 to 15, 36, 37, 44, 45, 52 and 53.

Amendment No 7 and the others in the group provide the technical and drafting amendments for the Bill. In revisiting clause 28, as mentioned under group 1, it was noted that, in order for it to operate effectively, a technical alteration was also needed. That has resulted in the amendments to clause 26.

I propose two amendments to clause 78. The need for the amendments has been brought to my attention only recently and, hence, was not discussed at Committee Stage. The policy intent has always been that the power of entry with a warrant would extend to any property outside of the HMOs in question owned or operated by the owner or managing agent. The current drafting of clause 78 would not allow it to operate like that in practice. Two amendments, replacing the words &quot;the&quot; with &quot;any&quot; at lines 15 and 18 of clause 78 will ensure that the clause operates as originally intended.

I give notice of my intention to oppose the Question that clause 83 stand part of the Bill. During Committee Stage, members made it clear that they were uncomfortable with that provision, as it was their view that it might result in a tenant having to continue to pay rent for substandard accommodation. After further consideration, it was noted that the provision was not required as it would be covered under common law in Northern Ireland. The redraft of the Bill now reflects that change.

I have two amendments to schedule 1. I agree with the concerns raised by the Committee and am grateful to it for raising this important issue for buildings that would no longer be treated as HMOs with my officials. The amendments bring housing association and Housing Executive properties that are contracted out to voluntary bodies, such as a hostel or women’s refuge, back under HMO definition. All those types of property hold some of the most vulnerable members of society. It is my belief that they would continue to benefit from being regulated under the HMO regime.

I do not intend to say very much on the group 2 amendments. We have covered quite a lot of ground, and the Minister has already referred in some detail to aspects that the Committee raised because most of the amendments are technical and drafting amendments.

I will, however, draw attention to clause 83, as did the Minister, and the Minister's opposition to the clause. The Committee had real concerns about clause 83, which would ensure that the tenancy agreement remains in place, and therefore that the tenant continues to pay rent, even in situations where landlords have not fulfilled their obligations under the legislation. The Committee was concerned that that potentially undermined the rights of the tenant in seeking redress for a landlord's failure to address substandard accommodation. As a result of the Committee's reservations and with reference to the view of the Attorney General that the clause was not required as the provisions are covered under common law, the Department fortunately decided to remove clause 83. The Committee welcomes that and is also content with the remaining amendments in this group.

Like the Chair, I do not intend to speak very long as these are technical and drafting amendments, but, as this is my first opportunity to speak at Consideration Stage, I join my Committee colleagues in thanking all those involved in the HMO Bill. I thank the Minister and, of course, his predecessor Minister Storey for the work that was done. I thank the Clerks, the Department and all those who gave oral and written evidence. It certainly went some way to helping us to form and shape this very important Bill, which we believe is there to protect tenants.

I want to draw attention to what the Minister said about schedule 1 in his opening speech. The amendment will help those with vulnerabilities, especially those in hostels or women's refuges. I am sure that everyone will agree that we welcome that being brought back under HMO licensing, because we know that the HMO Bill is there to protect those tenants. Who do we need to protect more than the most vulnerable in our society? I welcome that amendment.

I will keep it even briefer, Mr Speaker, and just say that I welcome the Minister's comments on clause 83. He has reflected on the Committee's concerns.

On behalf of the Ulster Unionist Party, I want to put on record my support for the general technical and drafting amendments and briefly comment on amendment No 37. Whilst it is a very minor change of the word "the" to "any", it can be quite significant. The change will enable a council to apply to a lay magistrate to issue a warrant. A significant amount of information will have to be provided to convince a magistrate that it warrants such an investigation, but we have to recall that the difficulty or the evidence may not just be in one premises, and widening that to any living accommodation will allow evidence to be collected that may be beneficial to tenants. Therefore, I support that amendment, which would widen court access. Again, it is with a suitable warrant should evidence be available to justify it. I am content with the technical and drafting amendments in this group.

I will try to be even briefer, Mr Speaker. I support the amendments.

That was very brief.

I thank all those who have spoken and been very positive. It makes my job very easy today and leaves me very little to say other than to thank the Chair, the Deputy Chair and all the Committee members again for their very constructive approach. They obviously see the merits in what we are trying to do. I will leave it at that.

Amendment No 7 agreed to.

Clause 18, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 19 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 20 (Renewal of licence)

Amendment No 8 made:

In page 13, line 10, leave out from &quot;sections&quot; to end of line 11 and insert

&quot;the following provisions do not apply to applications to renew?—

(a) sections 8(2)(a) and 9 and paragraphs 8 to 10 of Schedule 2 (breach of planning control);

(b) sections 8(2)(d) and 12 (overprovision).&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 20, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 21 (Application to renew: effect on existing licence)

Amendment No 9 made:

In page 13, line 19, leave out paragraph (b). — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 10 made:

In page 13, line 25, leave out

&quot;if the council refuses the application on any other ground&quot;

and insert &quot;if the application is refused&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 11 made:

In page 13, line 28, leave out &quot;under section 67&quot; and insert &quot;in accordance with section 67(4)&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 12 made:

In page 13, line 33, leave out subsection (3). — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 21, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 22 to 25 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 26 (Joint licence holders)

Amendment No 13 made:

In page 15, line 21, leave out &quot;(2)(b)&quot; and insert &quot;(2)&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 14 made:

In page 15, line 22, after second &quot;the&quot; insert &quot;owner or&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 15 made:

In page 15, line 23, after &quot;particular&quot; insert

&quot;, in a case falling within subsection (2)(b)&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 16 made:

In page 15, line 28, leave out from first &quot;in&quot; to end of line 32 and insert

&quot;(a) there is a transfer of ownership of a licensed HMO,

(b) as a result of the transfer one or more joint licensees (but not all of them) cease to be an owner of the HMO,&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 17 made:

In page 15, line 35, leave out subsection (5) and insert

&quot;(5) Where?—

(a) there is a transfer of ownership of a licensed HMO,

(b) as a result of the transfer there is a new owner (or more than one), and

(c) at least one person who was a licensee before the transfer continues to be an owner after it,

the new owner (or any of them) may apply to the council to be added as a joint licensee.

(5A) The council must?—

(a) treat an application under subsection (5) as an application to renew the licence made jointly by the existing licensee and the new owner, and

(b) if it decides to grant the application, vary the licence accordingly.&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 18 made:

In page 15, line 41, after &quot;subsection&quot; insert &quot;(5A) or&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 19 made:

In page 15, line 43, at end insert

&quot;(8) In this section?—

&#x0027;transfer of ownership&#x0027; includes the creation of a new estate;

&#x0027;new owner&#x0027; means a person who is an owner after the transfer but was not an owner before it.&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 26, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 27 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 28 (Change of ownership: effect on licence)

Amendment No 20 made:

In page 16, line 7, leave out subsections (1) and (2) and insert

&quot;28.—(1) A licence may be transferred to another person only in accordance with this section.

(2) Accordingly, except as set out in subsection (2A), where?—

(a) there is a transfer of ownership of a licensed HMO,

(b) as a result of the transfer there is a new owner (or more than one), and

(c) no person who was a licensee before the transfer continues to be an owner after it,

the licence ceases to have effect on the date of the transfer.

(2A) If?—

(a) there is a transfer of ownership of a licensed HMO, and

(b) before the date of the transfer, the proposed new owner (or any of them) applies for a licence in respect of the HMO (a “new licence”),

the licence which is already in effect in respect of the HMO (“the existing licence”) is to be treated as being held, from the date of the transfer, by the person or persons who made the application for the new licence (“the transferee”).

(2B) But the existing licence ceases to have effect on the date mentioned in subsection (2C).

(2C) That date is?—

(a) if the transferee’s application is granted, the date from which the new licence has effect (determined in accordance with section 19(1) or (4)(a));

(b) if the transferee’s application is refused?—

(i) one month after the last date on which the decision to refuse the transferee’s application may be appealed in accordance with section 67(4), or

(ii) if such an appeal is made, one month after the date on which the appeal is finally determined.

(2D) Subsection (2B) and (2C) are subject?—

(a) to sections 23 (revocation) and 27 (surrender), which provide for a licence in certain circumstances to cease to have effect earlier than as provided by this section, and

(b) if the transferee dies, to section 29, which provides for a licence in certain circumstances to cease to have effect earlier than, or later than, as provided by this section.&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 21 made:

In page 16, line 12, leave out &quot;subsection (2)&quot; and insert &quot;this section&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 28, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 29 (Death of sole licence holder: effect on licence)

Amendment No 22 made:

In page 16, line 22, after &quot;period&quot; insert

&quot;for which the licence has effect beyond the date&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 23 made:

In page 16, line 28, leave out subsection (5) and insert

&quot;(5) Subsections (1)(b) and (2) are subject?—

(a) to sections 23 (revocation) and 27 (surrender), which provide for a licence in certain circumstances to cease to have effect earlier than as provided by this section, and

(b) if the personal representatives of the licensee transfer ownership of the HMO, to section 28, which provides for a licence in certain circumstances to cease to have effect earlier than, or later than, as provided by this section.&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 29, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 30 to 32 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 33 (Agents not named in licence)

Amendment No 24 made:

In page 18, line 23, leave out from &quot;do&quot; to end of line 24 and insert

&quot;act as a managing agent in relation to the HMO, and&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 25 made:

In page 18, line 28, leave out paragraph (a) and insert

&quot;(a) A, on behalf of the owner of a licensed HMO, acts as a managing agent in relation to the HMO,&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 26 made:

In page 18, line 32, at end insert

&quot;(2A) For the purposes of this section, a person acts as a managing agent in relation to an HMO if the person?—

(a) does, in relation to the HMO, any of the acts mentioned in paragraph (i), (ii) or (iv) of the definition of “managing agent” in section 88(1), or

(b) engages in any other activity or course of activity which constitutes, or assists in, the management of the HMO.&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 33, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 34 to 61 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 62 (HMO register)

We now come to the third group of amendments. With amendment No 27, it will be convenient to debate amendment Nos 28 to 31 and amendment Nos 33 to 35. Members should note that amendment No 30 is consequential to amendment No 29 and that amendment Nos 34 and 35 are both consequential to amendment No 33. I call the Minister to move amendment No 27 and to address the other amendments in the group.

I beg to move amendment No 27:

In page 32, line 32, leave out &quot;its register available for public inspection&quot; and insert

&quot;any entry relating to an HMO available for inspection, by any person who falls within subsection (8A) in relation to that entry,&quot;.

The following amendments stood on the Marshalled List:

Nos 28 to 31 and 33 to 35.

Group 3 provides the amendments to the clause relating to the HMO register and associated information. I am content that my amendments to clause 62 will ensure that an appropriate balance is struck between the public interest in the information publicly available and the safety and security of landlords and their families. The reference to an individual receiving a copy of the register is removed, leaving only access to an extract from the register, and the person making the request must have a genuine interest in the property. Those new amendments will take account of concerns raised, and the arrangements in the new Bill will now mirror that which is in place under the present HMO registration scheme.

My Department intends to provide further clarification in guidance for councils. When examining how councils would operate the HMO register in practice, it was felt that the Bill would benefit from some strengthening. A provision was drafted to ensure the adequate exchange of information between councils for the purposes of HMO regulations. That has been achieved through the amendment that introduces clause 73A.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Amendment Nos 27 to 31 relate to clause 62 on the HMO register. The Chartered Institute of Housing, the Landlords' Association NI and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors all voiced concern about the potential threat to landlords' safety should their names, property addresses and contact details be included in the register and made available for public consultation. That obviously generated considerable debate in Committee. The Committee acknowledged the concerns that were expressed but took the clear view that it was a public interest matter and that sufficient information should be made available to ensure that residents can address their concerns regarding an HMO; for example, where there is antisocial behaviour of tenants to the landlord and/or managing agent.

Amendment Nos 27 to 31 seek to strike a balance between those two interests. Amendment No 27, for example, will allow access to an entry in the register, rather than to the entire register. The person must also have a genuine interest in the property, as defined in amendment No 29. Importantly for elected representatives who have regularly been involved in these matters and have to deal with complaints from constituents about HMO-related antisocial behaviour, the Department confirmed that it will also be able to access a relevant entry in the register. That, the Committee believes, strikes the appropriate balance between addressing the security concerns of landlords and providing access to a relevant entry in the register to a person who is concerned with the information in that entry. The Committee is, therefore, content with the amendments.

On amendment No 33, the Committee welcomes new clause 73A, which provides for the sharing of information between councils in respect of their functions under the Act. Amendment Nos 34 and 35 are consequential to amendment No 33.

With that, a Cheann Comhairle, I conclude my comments on behalf of the Committee on the group 3 amendments. We support the amendments.

I will also be brief with my comments. On the new subsection proposed to clause 62, the Minister said that a balance had been struck, and I think that is exactly where we wanted to get to. As the Chair said, there were witnesses who threw up concerns about the clause and how it would affect them. We heard not only from landlords and those who represent landlords but from Housing Rights. Again, as I say, the balance most definitely has been struck. I support the amendments.

As I pointed out, there has been good collaborative working and a bit of listening has been done. I welcome that balance. This is the way to go to get good legislation. If there is a bit of compromise, everybody gets what they want. It is certainly very good legislation overall.

As others have said with regard to amendment Nos 27 to 29, it is difficult to get the balance right in providing information about a house in multiple occupation, such as who manages it and who owns it etc. The original wording was that it would simply be publicly available, but, as indicated by others, representations made to us indicated that there was genuine concern from some about their security. As a result, I am in agreement with the amendments, which will ensure that all residents have straight access to it without any difficulty and others who can show that they are sufficiently concerned with the information in the entry will have access too.

It is a good balance. The information will be available to those who need it, and a degree of privacy will be afforded to landlords.

With regard to the new clause proposed in amendment No 33, I support sharing information between councils. It is a simple thing, but relevant information may be held by one council that would be useful to another. This seems to be starting, in a small way, to do joined-up government. I welcome the amendment and support the other technical and consequential amendments in the group.

I wish to be brief on the matter, but I want to refer to the points that Mr Beggs made, particularly with regard to access to information about landlords. It is clear that we should strive to have maximum openness. However, it was reasonable for the Committee to listen to the concerns that were raised. At the end of the day, openness should not equate to nosiness, and it should be relevant to those who wish to have and require to have the appropriate information. We are content to support all the amendments.

It sounds like consensus has broken out again. It demonstrates what some have said: when there is collaboration with the Committee, it paves the way for a good end.

I am grateful to Members for their contributions and am pleased with the consensus of support for the Bill across the Assembly. I thank the Chair of the Committee and the Committee members for the positive way in which they have scrutinised the Bill and for, as I explained in my earlier remarks, agreeing to the proposed amendments.

As I indicated earlier, a stakeholder group has been formed to take forward the transfer and will work with councils on funding arrangements, including potential set-up costs. Future monitoring arrangements for HMOs will be discussed and agreed with councils. It is envisaged that a new reporting/governance framework for councils will be put in place. Subject to the successful passage of the Bill, district councils will thereafter need some time to complete the preparations necessary to administer the new licensing scheme. Therefore, the main provisions of the Bill will come into operation on a date appointed in an order made by my Department following liaison and agreement with councils.

That concludes on the government amendments. However, with your permission, Mr Speaker, I will briefly address some recommendations made in the Social Development Committee’s report, particularly those linked to the guidance that my Department is preparing to assist councils with the new scheme implementation. The Committee recommended that the Department provide guidance to address antisocial behaviour in HMOs. I confirm that my Department intends to provide guidance for landlords that will include model tenancy agreements that will specify and outline acceptable tenant behaviour and detail tenant activities or practices that a landlord would not consider tolerable. Landlords will be encouraged to ensure that tenants are aware of their responsibilities and of any possible consequences should they breach the conditions.

Antisocial behaviour is also being given further consideration in my wider private rented sector review, which is under way. That review will also explore initiatives to raise professional standards in the private rented sector. A stakeholder group has been set up to take forward the transfer and will collaborate to publish an appropriate code of practice and guidance for councils, landlords and managing agents to help them meet the requirements of the regulations. I reassure members that my Department will provide the support and funding required for councils to operate the HMO function effectively.

Amendment No 27 agreed to.

Amendment No 28 made:

In page 32, line 35, leave out from second &quot;a&quot; to &quot;who&quot; on line 36 and insert

&quot;an entry relating to an HMO to any person who falls within subsection (8A) in relation to that entry and&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 29 made:

In page 32, line 36, at end insert

&quot;(8A) A person falls within this subsection in relation to an entry if the person appears to the council?—

(a) to have an interest or prospective interest in the HMO,

(b) to be a resident of the HMO, or

(c) to be otherwise sufficiently concerned with the information contained in the entry.

(8B) In subsection (8A), an “interest” is?—

(a) a freehold or leasehold estate;

(b) a mortgage, charge or lien.

(8C) The council must, on the request of any statutory authority?—

(a) make its register available for inspection by the authority;

(b) supply a certified copy of its register, or of an extract from it, to the authority.&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 30 made:

In page 32, line 38, after &quot;(8)&quot; insert &quot;or (8C)&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 31 made:

In page 32, line 39, after &quot;an&quot; insert &quot;entry in or other&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 62, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 63 to 66 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 67 (Appeals)

Amendment No 32 made:

In page 36, line 14, leave out from &quot;unless&quot; to end of line 16. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 67, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 68 to 73 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

New Clause

Amendment No 33 made:

After clause 73 insert

&quot;Sharing of information between councils

73A.—(1) A council may provide to any other council any information held by the council in connection with its functions under this Act.

(2) Information may be provided under subsection (1) only on the request of the other council; and may be used by that council only in connection with its functions under this Act.

(3) This section?—

(a) has effect notwithstanding any restriction on the disclosure of information imposed by any statutory provision or rule of law, and

(b) does not limit the circumstances in which information may be used or provided apart from this section.&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

New clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 74 (Failure to comply with notice under section 71, 72 or 73)

Amendment No 34 made:

In page 41, line 17, after &quot;73&quot; insert

&quot;or a request under section 73A&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 74, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 75 (Unauthorised disclosure of information obtained under section 73)

Amendment No 35 made:

In page 41, line 31, after &quot;73&quot; insert &quot;or 73A&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 75, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 76 and 77 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 78 (Powers of entry: with warrant)

Amendment No 36 made:

In page 43, line 15, leave out &quot;the&quot; and insert &quot;any&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 37 made:

In page 43, line 18, leave out &quot;the&quot; and insert &quot;any&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 78, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 79 to 82 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 83 (HMOs occupied in breach of Act)

The Minister's opposition to clause 83 has already been debated.

Question, That the clause stand part of the Bill, put and negatived. Clause 83 disagreed to.

Clauses 84 and 85 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 86 (Regulations and orders)

Amendment No 38 made:

In page 47, line 8, after &quot;14(3)&quot; insert &quot;or paragraph 2 of Schedule 2&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 86, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 87 (General notices)

Amendment No 39 made:

In page 47, line 21, leave out &quot;or paragraph 2(4)&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 87, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 88 (Interpretation)

Amendment No 40 made:

In page 48, line 16, after &quot;accommodation&quot; insert

&quot;(but this is subject to subsection (7))&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 41 made:

In page 48, line 18, leave out sub-paragraph (iii). — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 42 made:

In page 49, line 5, leave out &quot;, niece or cousin&quot; and insert &quot;or niece&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 43 made:

In page 49, line 26, at end insert

&quot;(7) Where?—

(a) a person (“the agent”) has introduced a prospective tenant or other occupier to the owner of accommodation,

(b) the prospective tenant or other occupier enters into a tenancy or other occupation agreement under which periodical payments are to be made in respect of the occupation, and

(c) the agent (acting on behalf of the owner) receives the first of those periodical payments,

then, for the purposes of the definition of “managing agent” in subsection (1), the receipt by the agent of that payment is not to be regarded as the receipt of rent or another payment from that occupier.&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Clause 88, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 89 to 91 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Schedule 1 (Buildings or parts of buildings which are not houses in multiple occupation)

Amendment No 44 made:

In page 50, line 12, leave out heads (a) and (b). — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 45 made:

In page 50, line 18, at end insert

&quot;(2) A building where the person managing it is?—

(a) the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, or

(b) a housing association registered under Part 2 of the Housing (Northern Ireland) Order 1992.&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Schedule 1, as amended, agreed to.

Schedule 2 (Applications for HMO licences: requirements and procedure)

Amendment No 46 made:

In page 52, line 36, leave out paragraphs 2 to 6 and insert

&quot;2.—(1) The Department must make regulations providing for the giving of notice of the making of HMO applications.

(2) Regulations under sub-paragraph (1) may in particular?—

(a) require the applicant to cause notice of an application to be displayed on or near the HMO in question, or to cause such notice to be published in one or more newspapers circulating in the locality of the HMO;

(b) permit or require the council to cause such notice to be displayed or published, either at the council’s expense or at the applicant’s expense;

(c) specify information which must be displayed or published in or together with notice of an application, which may include notice of a right to make representations about the application and of the manner and period in which such representations must be made;

(d) specify requirements as to the form and manner of notice of an application, and the period for which it must be displayed or published;

(e) provide (subject to such conditions as may be specified in the regulations) for exceptions from any requirement to display or publish notice, in particular where the council is satisfied that displaying or publishing a notice would be likely to jeopardise the safety or welfare of any persons or the security of any premises;

(f) provide for the consequences of failing to comply with requirements imposed by the regulations (and such consequences may include permitting or requiring the council to cease to consider the application in question).

3. The council must send a copy of any application for an HMO licence to the statutory authorities.&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 47 made:

In page 54, line 29, leave out &quot;paragraph 2, 3 or 5&quot; and insert &quot;regulations under paragraph 2&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 48 made:

In page 54, line 34, leave out from &quot;is—&quot; to end of line 39 and insert

&quot;is to be set out in, or determined under, regulations made by the Department&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 49 made:

In page 56, line 10, leave out &quot;paragraph 2, 3 or 5&quot; and insert &quot;regulations under paragraph 2&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 50 made:

In page 56, line 32, leave out &quot;paragraph 2, 3 or 5&quot; and insert &quot;regulations under paragraph 2&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Amendment No 51 made:

In page 57, line 1, leave out from &quot;paragraph&quot; to &quot;5&quot; on line 2 and insert &quot;regulations under paragraph 2&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Schedule 2, as amended, agreed to.

Schedule 3 agreed to.

Schedule 4 (Variation and revocation of HMO licences: procedure)

Amendment No 52 made:

In schedule 4, page 64, line 37, leave out &quot;under section 67&quot; and insert &quot;in accordance with section 67(4)&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Schedule 4, as amended, agreed to.

Schedule 5 (Part 4 notices: further provision)

Amendment No 53 made:

In schedule 5, page 67, line 12, leave out &quot;under section 67&quot; and insert &quot;in accordance with section 67(4)&quot;. — [Lord Morrow (The Minister for Social Development).]

Schedule 5, as amended, agreed to.

Schedules 6 to 8 agreed to.

Long title agreed to.

That concludes the Consideration Stage of the Houses in Multiple Occupation Bill, and the Bill stands referred to the Speaker. Thank you all very much.

The Business Committee agreed to meet five minutes ago, so I propose, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm.

The sitting was suspended at 1.04 pm.

On resuming (Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr Beggs] in the Chair) —