moved Amendment No. 23:
23: Clause 2, page 2, line 2, at end insert—
““( ) to support a proportion of social homebuy in developments promoted by it,””
The noble Lord said: I was going to begin by saying that my words follow on fairly easily and naturally from those of the Minister, but she is not present to hear me. They follow on because we are talking about the Homes and Communities Agency, and during the previous debate I had the thought that on the whole I feel rather sorry for the chief executive elect, Sir Bob Kerslake, whom I met for the first time last week. If he is reading the Hansards of this Committee—I have no doubt that he is, as the job he is taking on at the HCA will absorb him fully for a number of years—he will see this amendment, as he saw the previous one and probably one or two more by the time we have finished, and he will say, ““Oh my God, how ever am I going to fulfil all these ambitions?””. Whether the Government accept the amendments is neither here nor there; the Government, through their Ministers, are accepting the implicit pledges behind those amendments. That is a wonderful thing.
Amendment No. 23 is directed at the issue of social homebuy, which is part-purchase or whatever. The Homes and Communities Agency will be without question the prime mover as the provider of social housing across the broad spectrum of housing provision and new housing. Not the least of the problems one faces in a mobile community is that as people fall back into social housing, and the present housing crisis is unfortunately going to increase that demand, equally, other people want to get out of social housing if they can. Social homebuy helps to provide that route. We have discussed the impossibility of the HCA fulfilling every aspiration, but the fact is that we are dealing with a society with a considerable degree of mobility. There will always be some people who unfortunately are moving down, and we hope there will always be some people seeking to move up. Social homebuy is one of the ways that that can be achieved.
Social homebuy is also important for the Homes and Communities Agency because, where it is providing social homes, it will also provide a revenue stream and a return of capital that can then be reinvested in more housing. It can create a virtuous circle. We heard in the last debate about the criteria for key worker provision and the access that they might have to social homebuy. That is an important aspect of the work of the Homes and Communities Agency.
I have no doubt that we shall have the same argument about what to put in the Bill as its function, but there is always in the background—which has not yet been mentioned in this debate so I will mention it for the first time—the fact that what a Minister says in reply to a point raised is relevant, if things come to a court case, as an indication of what the Government’s intentions behind a Bill were when it was passed. I look forward to the Minister’s reply because I am sure that he is going to say something positive. Whether he likes it or not, it will be on the record as the Government’s intention. If it is there, and it is the Government’s intention, that may be useful at some point in the future if someone wishes to come to a judgment. I beg to move.
Housing and Regeneration Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Dixon-Smith
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 19 May 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Housing and Regeneration Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
701 c465-6GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:34:02 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474011
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474011
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474011