Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Mike Hancock (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 27 November 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Housing and Regeneration Bill.


Housing and Regeneration Bill

Yes, or the girls for that matter. I am also curious to know who will set the punishments that will be afforded to those who offend against Oftenant's regulations. The right hon. Member for North-West Hampshire (Sir George Young) raised two fundamental points that have been generally ignored. One concerned the need for a national mobility scheme to enable tenants to move between authorities. I have seen very good results when people have been given that opportunity. Nowadays a person must be on a witness protection programme to move from, particularly, a London authority. The right hon. Gentleman was also right to question the commitment to our armed forces. How easy it is for a service marriage to break down. The serviceman leaves the married quarters, and within days—hours in some cases—a notice to quit is put through the door, telling his wife and children that they are no longer eligible for service accommodation. Where do they go? Do they go to the local authority where the married quarters are, or do they return to the part of the country from which they came, with no help whatever from the military? If the Bill is really to cater for the needs of service families, the Government should understand one of the biggest issues facing conurbations such as mine in south Hampshire—and, for that matter, in north Hampshire and Colchester—where large service units are sited. Fifty per cent. of all naval accommodation is in the greater Portsmouth area, and marriage break-ups in the area cause much suffering among people in that position. We have not heard much about regeneration. It will work only if local authorities, housing associations and the private sector and their tenants are brought together in an equally sided triangle. It cannot be forced down people's throats, and it cannot be generated simply by the willingness of a private developer to say, ““I will put money into this area, provided that you do what I want you to do.”” That will immediately alienate the tenants, and probably the local authority as well. The issue needs to be thought through seriously. While I agree with many of those who have said that there is much to be welcomed in the Bill, I think that the Minister should consider a sunset clause when it comes to the Homes and Community Agency. It ought to be conditional on whether Labour stays in power. I should be very reluctant to see a Tory Minister with the power that such an agency would deliver. Like Labour Members who have spoken, I was in local government when the Conservatives were in power, and I know how difficult it was. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for North-East Bedfordshire (Alistair Burt) is commenting from not a sedentary but a horizontal position. If he cares to interrupt and put me right, I shall be only too pleased to hear from him. I remember from my days in a local authority the way in which local authorities that wanted to develop council housing were punished by the Conservatives, and I should be extremely reluctant to give them the power that goes hand in glove with the establishment of a Homes and Community Agency. I should be extremely nervous if an election ever went the other way.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
468 c192-3 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Construction Council housing Housing Finance Environment protection Infrastructure Landlord and tenant Low incomes Planning Social rented housing Regeneration Homes and Communities Agency
Legislation
Housing and Regeneration Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk