I support my noble friend’s amendment. In some ways there is very little to add to what the noble Lord, Lord Best, said. He brings great expertise to the Committee, for which I am grateful. I share his concerns about the amount of money that will be available to encourage and promote rural housing. That is why I particularly like my noble friend’s amendment, which calls for the HCA to take particular account of the viability of rural communities. I know that the CRC is doing a review on affordable housing and linking economic affordability with sustainability.
The noble Lord, Lord Best, reflected on more than 30 years of housing. The sad thing is that, with a few exceptions, we are not much further forward than we should be pro rata if one looks at what has happened over those 30 years to housing in urban areas. Clearly there has been much more progress in those areas. It is there to see, so I very much support my noble friend’s amendment. I am quite concerned that the board members, whoever they are, may not necessarily have rural affordable housing at the back of their minds, because it is a very small part of the overall pattern of housing compared with the bigger urban needs. Even more, there should be someone on the board who is recognised for having a particular skill, ability or understanding of what happens.
The other thing to remember is that, within the classification of rural housing, one could be talking about a small hamlet of 100, 70 or 50, compared with 10,000. People living in a community of 10,000 obviously have a greater say, because more people are involved in the community and understand it, than do people in a few villages where only one, two or three affordable houses are needed. I very much have a mind to support the amendment, and I hope that the Minister will take on board my noble friend’s comments.
Two other issues are tied up with this matter. My noble friend has called for the viability of rural communities. I am sure that Members of the Committee will be as anxious as I was to see the announcement in the press this weekend not only that 2,500 post offices will close, many of which are in rural areas, but that 4,000 more may close. If you start ripping out the heart of rural communities, even if they are small, by closing things such as rural post offices and schools—in the same way, the Government currently give more money to children who are educated in urban areas than they do for children in rural areas, in some cases by nearly half the same amount again—there is real proof that, unless someone speaks up for rural communities, they get lost. This is the Government’s problem; rural communities have a very small number of people compared with urban areas.
I hope simply that, if the Minister cannot accept the amendment, the Government will duly consider the best way in the Bill to help and encourage those who want to live and work in rural areas. The Bill is a once-in-a-lifetime sort of Bill. We are setting up the HCA and we should not let this occasion go by without addressing the concerns of rural communities.
Housing and Regeneration Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Byford
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 3 June 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Housing and Regeneration Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
702 c6-7GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:36:26 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_476226
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_476226
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_476226