---

Housing and Regeneration Bill

The amendment would remove the ability of the Secretary of State and the appropriate Minister to extend or modify a statutory undertaker’s functions. It may not be immediately obvious to the noble Lord and others what the power and the further clauses that he seeks to repeal are aimed at achieving, so I shall try to take him through that and provide an answer to his questions. I am sure that noble Lords will be aware that statutory undertakers are a particular class of public body and that the term ““statutory undertakers”” derives from planning legislation—the noble Lord, Lord Dixon-Smith, made that point. They include, as an example, persons authorised to carry on any railway, light railway, tram system or network, road or water transport, aviation, or gas, water and electricity services. They are therefore fairly fundamental. Statutory undertakers have as a consequence special status in legislation and—as the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, will appreciate—particular rights to go with their responsibilities. Noble Lords will notice that these bodies, because of their nature, are likely to have duties to own, or have rights over, land in particular locations or to place what is technically called ““apparatus”” on land belonging to others. The schedule seeks to cater for situations arising from that need. For example, Part 2 applies where apparatus of a statutory undertaker is situated on, under or over land of the Homes and Communities Agency and the statutory undertaker needs to remove or re-site that apparatus because of a development. In a similar vein, Part 3 of Schedule 2 gives statutory undertakers a right to make representations to the Secretary of State and the appropriate Minister to enable them to continue providing services on land which has been acquired by the HCA that would otherwise not be provided or satisfactorily provided. The statutory undertaker can make representations to the Secretary of State and the relevant Minister to have its functions modified to secure the provision of its services, so that, for example, it may enter that land to continue to carry out those functions. Equally, Part 3 of Schedule 2 gives a right to the Homes and Communities Agency to make representations to modify the functions of a statutory undertaker so as to secure the provision of new services, or perhaps the extension of existing services, in relation to such land. The other paragraphs that the noble Lord wishes to strike out set the notification and objection-making procedures that must be followed before an order of this nature can be made. It is perhaps worth adding that the power to make an order under paragraphs 16 and 17 of the schedule are subject to special parliamentary procedure, so the degree of analysis of the issues should not be underestimated before an order can be made. These powers are not about giving statutory undertakers greater or wider powers; rather, they should be seen as ensuring that this class of body continues to provide the functions that it is meant to provide—for example, railways, water and access to other services. The provisions are modelled on those contained in the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, which governed the relationship between the Urban Regeneration Agency—now English Partnerships—and statutory undertakers, as well as on the Town and Country Planning Act 1997. I say in response to the noble Lord that the powers are rarely used. Their function is to provide an incentive for developers and statutory undertakers to reach agreement where the activities of one come into contact with the other. There is interdependency in many instances. Removal of the powers would remove the incentive to sort and make sure that arrangements are put in place. If we were to take away the powers, I suspect that one might see lengthy and costly delays in resolving important development issues. I therefore caution against removing these parts of the legislation because they have a value, even though I admit that the powers will not need to be used with great regularity. They ensure a degree of certainty that statutory undertakers will be required to continue to provide their functions and that there is no loss of service. I am sure the noble Lord will appreciate that that is important to all concerned if developments are to work.