:00:07. > :00:14.Surely the real answer, rather than just having these sort of false
:00:15. > :00:17.states where people certainly get renewed, is to build more housing so
:00:18. > :00:20.that the very people at the moment of those on the waiting list can
:00:21. > :00:26.come off the waiting list into social housing. It's actually both.
:00:27. > :00:33.It's to build more housing and it also to check it and review
:00:34. > :00:39.intervals, whether the housing that is being provided for say a family,
:00:40. > :00:46.continues to be that need or perhaps they need something else. But that's
:00:47. > :00:49.the purpose of it, to just... Perhaps the honourable lady can
:00:50. > :00:53.assure me here that no family with children of the age where they go to
:00:54. > :00:57.local schools would ever be asked to leave a council house or council
:00:58. > :01:02.home under one of these secured tendencies. Can to give assurance to
:01:03. > :01:08.the House? What I can do, the Gardens will make it absolutely
:01:09. > :01:12.clear on children of school age, but come on my lords, if a family had
:01:13. > :01:18.six children and five of those children left home and there was
:01:19. > :01:22.one, think of every permutation and commendation of family
:01:23. > :01:25.circumstances, but if of those six children five had left home, there
:01:26. > :01:32.was only one child left at home then there might be a conversation there
:01:33. > :01:37.where the family perhaps downsize, within the local area, but the
:01:38. > :01:45.continuation of the child's education would be paramount. When
:01:46. > :01:48.is this guide is to be produced? That's a very good question, my
:01:49. > :01:56.lords. Due to the timeline of guidance I'm a it will all be good
:01:57. > :01:59.for us by the end of this week. Reassured by some of what she said
:02:00. > :02:03.there, but actually I do think we need to see this guidance to test
:02:04. > :02:09.the government on this, because I think for many terms this is a
:02:10. > :02:12.deeply worrying set of provisions. The interaction between family life
:02:13. > :02:17.and secure tendencies and people's aspirations when they live in a
:02:18. > :02:19.local community is very intense. I think it's creating a sense of
:02:20. > :02:26.insecurity on many of our counsel states. There's a disincentive to
:02:27. > :02:30.people to invest in their homes, which they do. To not only look
:02:31. > :02:34.after their homes, but improve their homes. If you are not sure of being
:02:35. > :02:39.able to stay on, as you see your child getting to be point where he
:02:40. > :02:46.or she is going to leave school or whatever, or if you're just a couple
:02:47. > :02:53.living in a house, isn't that likely to result in a decline in the
:02:54. > :02:59.investment that people make in the homes was that it does huge credit
:03:00. > :03:05.to many tenants now. My lords, I've seen many different types of social
:03:06. > :03:09.housing, some which is incredibly well looked after, others which is
:03:10. > :03:12.not so well looked after at all. It does, living somewhere for a long
:03:13. > :03:19.time, does provide incentives, but my lords, will some of the biggest
:03:20. > :03:23.incentives and I will feel a boo going across this House, is when
:03:24. > :03:25.someone buys their homes. I can tell that someone has bought their home
:03:26. > :03:32.because those houses are you back to it. They may be immaculate for five
:03:33. > :03:37.years, or seven years, and then when you go back you can see the houses
:03:38. > :03:42.that weren't bored by people as the tenets which were then sold on. So
:03:43. > :03:47.you got two stages and I can assure the honourable lady that in many
:03:48. > :03:53.estates, the buy to let our running down of property is actually,
:03:54. > :04:00.infuriated council tenants who didn't buy and also those who did
:04:01. > :04:04.and stayed. I believe that people who bought their own pop homes -- on
:04:05. > :04:12.Homestake a great pride. But we should agree to differ. Not a
:04:13. > :04:16.progression for personal view. We know that over 40% of council
:04:17. > :04:22.housing that was sold under Right to Buy has been cycled into buy to let.
:04:23. > :04:27.We know that the. In some places... The point I was making is that I can
:04:28. > :04:30.tell a house that has been bought because, generally, they are in very
:04:31. > :04:35.good condition. I'm not starting to make the argument about how this
:04:36. > :04:41.that have and so on through tertiary or subsequent sales to write to buy.
:04:42. > :04:47.I'm talking about, I was just making a comment to the noble lord about
:04:48. > :04:50.people taking pride in the House. Sorry to restrict the Noble Lady,
:04:51. > :04:56.but I just don't want to diverge it into that point. The Minister said
:04:57. > :05:02.before them are applied to intervention, that the reduced usage
:05:03. > :05:06.of rooms would be in consideration on review. In other words, if
:05:07. > :05:09.someone left then the local authority that about one of the
:05:10. > :05:15.consideration to the local authority have in that review? Is he just
:05:16. > :05:21.reducing rooms? My lords, we will be coming to that. If the noble lord
:05:22. > :05:28.will bear with me. I do have some news that the noble lord will take,
:05:29. > :05:36.that is the guidance for publishing in time of the commencement of the
:05:37. > :05:43.provisions. LAUGHTER That is absolutely idiotic. The
:05:44. > :05:47.guidance will be published at the time which the legislation is in.
:05:48. > :05:52.That the Noble Baroness really mean that? Surely, we've got to see that
:05:53. > :05:55.guidance before it's implemented. Well, my lords we will see the
:05:56. > :06:00.guidance before it's implemented, but I'm just saying that it will be
:06:01. > :06:13.published. It will be published in time. I'm grateful the noble lord,
:06:14. > :06:17.grateful. My lords, I don't believe that providing social housing on a
:06:18. > :06:21.long-term basis to households that make on the experience temporary
:06:22. > :06:25.need is a good use of scarce social housing. I don't think it's right to
:06:26. > :06:29.lead to strong and conducive communities. I'm not going to give
:06:30. > :06:38.way. If the Noble Lady wants to come back later, she can. After I
:06:39. > :06:40.finished. But, my lords, the Noble Lady, lady hollies, talked about
:06:41. > :06:45.protecting the rights of those in most need. Local authorities will be
:06:46. > :06:49.able to find the appropriate level of stability to those with longer
:06:50. > :06:54.term needs, such as the disabled and older people through the granting of
:06:55. > :07:01.further social tendencies, whether in the same or in a different more
:07:02. > :07:07.suitable social home. My lords, I've outlined, or had the provisions in
:07:08. > :07:10.the bill to restore a sense of fairness to social housing, ensuring
:07:11. > :07:14.that is properly focused on those who really need it. If I could now
:07:15. > :07:21.turn to the amendment tabled by Noble Lords, Kennedy and Beauchamp,
:07:22. > :07:28.my Lords amendments, 82 GAE seeks a public feud but about restricting
:07:29. > :07:34.lifetimes tendencies on rough sleeping. In each local authority
:07:35. > :07:37.area. I would like to thank the Noble Lords for the amendment and
:07:38. > :07:40.for raising the issue of homelessness. I agree with them that
:07:41. > :07:44.it is important that the government of all he can to reduce the number
:07:45. > :07:47.of homeless households. The government has always been clear
:07:48. > :07:50.that we are committed to supporting the most vulnerable people in our
:07:51. > :07:57.society and one person without a home is one too many. That is why
:07:58. > :08:02.we've increased both central and local government funding, maintained
:08:03. > :08:07.and increased it over the next four years. However, while I sympathise
:08:08. > :08:10.with the intention behind the amendment, I believe it may be
:08:11. > :08:16.unnecessary because local housing authorities already recorded review
:08:17. > :08:22.of the incidences of homelessness and rough sleeping and must produce
:08:23. > :08:29.a homelessness strategy... I don't think we've got to these yet, have
:08:30. > :08:37.we? Could be Noble Lord Reagan amendment? I think is a type of.
:08:38. > :08:43.We're in the wrong Clause. I'm yet again speaking to amendments that we
:08:44. > :08:51.haven't got to. Sought, I shall... Before the Minister sits down.
:08:52. > :09:00.Sorry, carry on. Amendment 62 GAE is in this group. It's correct. OK.
:09:01. > :09:05.Would the Noble Lords like to discuss it or should we discuss
:09:06. > :09:18.it... Would Noble Lords like to draw it? Be really clear about what she
:09:19. > :09:21.said about guidelines. So, if this is about regulations and it's about
:09:22. > :09:26.guidelines of. I'm now looking at the policy fact sheet which the
:09:27. > :09:31.department has published, and that makes it clear that there are going
:09:32. > :09:38.to be a single set of regulations for these measures. That is the
:09:39. > :09:45.facing out of lifetime tendencies. But the regulations will be subject
:09:46. > :09:51.to be an affirmative procedure, not the negative procedure. Minister's
:09:52. > :09:56.confirmation of that fact, it then says that the regulations will be
:09:57. > :09:58.developed in discussions with local authorities and he regulations and
:09:59. > :10:03.provisions of the bill will come into force early next year. That,
:10:04. > :10:07.therefore, is early 2017. It is, therefore, easy to share the
:10:08. > :10:13.guidelines that are going to be written because they do Mac there is
:10:14. > :10:19.from now approximately ten months for those two have been shared. Just
:10:20. > :10:29.to help colleagues. This amendment 92, GAE. We will speak on it
:10:30. > :10:34.tonight. My lords, it was grouped with 82 and... Well, it will be
:10:35. > :10:39.helpful if the House were advised earlier than at this stage of the
:10:40. > :10:44.evening, because the noble lord much done that must have had a chance to
:10:45. > :10:47.do group it earlier. This has never been in a previous thing. Will the
:10:48. > :10:52.Noble Lady started to speak to him and we asked what is this because
:10:53. > :11:00.obviously we had to amendments which squarely go together. Course, we are
:11:01. > :11:05.now seeing the paper. It clearly is a mistake and I really apologise to
:11:06. > :11:12.be Noble Lord. If you might have waited all this time. I was trying
:11:13. > :11:18.to say to My Noble friend that I come into the chamber, I wish to
:11:19. > :11:21.intervene, guiltily, but we have patiently gone through six days in
:11:22. > :11:25.this committee. We have had many opportunities to look at groupings.
:11:26. > :11:28.I think it is a courtesy to the House is Noble Lords who have a
:11:29. > :11:32.problem with the groupings, which are published and they are out
:11:33. > :11:35.there, and we picked them all out, make clear before that they are not
:11:36. > :11:40.happy with the groupings. Otherwise, I think the House is entitled to
:11:41. > :11:58.expect that those things grouped together will be discussed together.
:11:59. > :12:07.It is due to be debated tonight. WHISPERING Excuse me a second, my
:12:08. > :12:16.lords. I've actually got a paper from Thursday. It is a typo. This is
:12:17. > :12:21.the sheet on Thursday, it's got the two amendments down and My Noble
:12:22. > :12:26.friend's name. And they appear today. I don't produce the
:12:27. > :12:30.government's sheet for debates, but it was on a Thursday which we signed
:12:31. > :12:36.up to, as Mike to Noble Friends to remember. Nothing else. Would Noble
:12:37. > :12:42.Lords like to hear it tonight? Or Thursday? I'm not going to waste
:12:43. > :12:44.anymore time on this then, and if I could just finish my comments where
:12:45. > :12:52.I should have finished them. And just say to the noble lord,
:12:53. > :12:57.obviously I have guidelines, guidance, when I have it, I am very
:12:58. > :13:02.happy to share it with them. What I'm trying to get at is that if the
:13:03. > :13:05.regulations have to come to your lordships House under the
:13:06. > :13:08.affirmative procedure, my she explained the guidelines at that
:13:09. > :13:11.point? Rather than keeping them from separate from the regulations. I
:13:12. > :13:21.would like to do just that, my Lord. Then I will be withdrawing my
:13:22. > :13:26.amendments. LAUGHTER I can see that the Noble Baroness is
:13:27. > :13:31.troubled and waiting for something to happen, so my lords, I'd be very
:13:32. > :13:35.intrigue and what the noble ladies have to say. I've been a little bit
:13:36. > :13:40.reassured him abut I sat there thinking about it a bit, and I'm not
:13:41. > :13:45.as reassured as I was because back in 1971, when I left home to go to
:13:46. > :13:51.university in 1972, that left Mike or mother in her counsel home on her
:13:52. > :13:55.own with a spare bedroom. -- Mike or mother. Is ridiculous legislation,
:13:56. > :13:59.had he been in place at time, no doubt she would've added visit from
:14:00. > :14:03.her local council inviting her to move to yet a smaller accommodation.
:14:04. > :14:06.I don't think that is a particularly constructive way to approach things,
:14:07. > :14:09.and to I think it would have been in her interest or local communities,
:14:10. > :14:16.because she was a bit of a terrier in her place. So, my lords, I think
:14:17. > :14:18.this is a seriously deficient piece of legislation which doesn't really
:14:19. > :14:22.achieve what we really need to do here. That is to create more social
:14:23. > :14:27.housing for people to have access to, rather than spreading but we've
:14:28. > :14:31.got more family, but recycling basics. And forcing people out of
:14:32. > :14:34.their homes and out of their communities. Which is really the
:14:35. > :14:38.point behind my MMF. I shall give you some further thought before we
:14:39. > :14:41.get to report states, but I do actually think that the secretary of
:14:42. > :14:44.state were to think long and hard about this whole issue of community
:14:45. > :14:50.cohesion, but I think it's good that the Noble Lady, the Baroness, is the
:14:51. > :14:54.policyholder for that because I can see that it is something that she
:14:55. > :14:57.cares passionately about. I think she am along with the Secretary of
:14:58. > :15:00.State, needs to reflect on this issue. Having said that, I'm happy
:15:01. > :15:04.to withdraw my admin to. Oh, hello. LAUGHTER
:15:05. > :15:08.I think the Minister hasn't replied to the question I asked about
:15:09. > :15:15.review, which I've now asked twice. I did ask what review meant. What
:15:16. > :15:18.considerations will be look forward to? I think he has misread my
:15:19. > :15:24.amendment. The review is actually a review that the amendment calls on
:15:25. > :15:34.by the Secretary of State, not by the local authority. I have
:15:35. > :15:41.withdrawn. Is it your Lordship's pleasure that amendment 82 AAB
:15:42. > :15:45.withdrawn? The amendment is withdrawn, the question is that
:15:46. > :15:52.Clause 90 state part of the bill. Contrary not content. The content
:15:53. > :15:58.have it. It should be debated from a supplementary sheet. And Lord
:15:59. > :16:11.Beauchamp, not moved? Not move. In schedule four, amendment 82 BZA,
:16:12. > :16:14.Baroness Williams. My lords, at this somewhat late hour and after another
:16:15. > :16:18.long day in committee, I am pleased that I can provide a further break
:16:19. > :16:22.for the Minister, although it is a technical one and somewhat brief. It
:16:23. > :16:27.may not be necessarily time for the ice creams. My lords, this is a
:16:28. > :16:32.consequential amendments. Relating to the abolition of the disposals
:16:33. > :16:35.proceeds fund. Which is one of the deregulatory measures included in
:16:36. > :16:39.the bill. Certain properties developed with public funding
:16:40. > :16:43.subject to the statutory right to acquire. This consequential
:16:44. > :16:47.amendment maintains that position by defining public funds without
:16:48. > :16:52.referencing the disposal proceeds fund. These amendments to schedule
:16:53. > :16:57.four will ensure that this is the case. My lords, this is, as I said
:16:58. > :17:01.earlier, a technical amendment resulting from the office of
:17:02. > :17:06.national statistics concerns about public sector concerned the Mac
:17:07. > :17:09.control over housing associations. And those being introduced to
:17:10. > :17:18.address those concerns. I beg to move. A minute please. Page 115.
:17:19. > :17:30.Question is that this member that about those content? Not content?
:17:31. > :17:37.The content have it. The question is that this amendment be agreed to.
:17:38. > :17:43.Content? Contrary, not content. The content have it. The question is
:17:44. > :17:48.that schedule for, as amended, the in the bill. As many of that opinion
:17:49. > :17:54.was that content? Content. Contrary not content? Contents have it. The
:17:55. > :17:57.question is that agile five be the fifth schedule to be built. As many
:17:58. > :18:04.of that opinion was that content? Content. Oh! As you work, my lords.
:18:05. > :18:09.I beg your pardon. The first question is that causes 91-97
:18:10. > :18:17.standard part of the bill. Content? Content. Contrary, not content?
:18:18. > :18:22.Contents have it. That schedule five be the fifth commitment to bill.
:18:23. > :18:27.Content? Not content? The contents have a. The next is that causes
:18:28. > :18:32.98-110 stand part of the bill. As many of that opinion that content?
:18:33. > :18:36.Content. Contrary, not content? Contents have it. At schedule six B
:18:37. > :18:44.the sixth schedule to be built. As many say content. Not content? The
:18:45. > :18:46.contents have it. Laws is 111 and 112 stand part of the bill. Content?
:18:47. > :18:55.Not content. Because it's habit.