Housing and Regeneration Bill

This is an important debate and I hope that I can reassure the noble Viscount and the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee. The description that the noble Viscount gave of the HCA’s character and of its separate paths coming together to form the new body was absolutely right. He was also right to conclude that, as we have said many times, essentially we hope to create an agency that helps other agencies to do their work better. Therefore, one is looking for facilitation and balance in the use of powers and in the enabling mechanisms that are available. This is not a top-down agency with powers to impose or direct. We have had many variations on that debate as the Committee has proceeded. Perhaps I may address the central point about the power of direction. Essentially, we are looking at powers which are similar to those that were available to the Urban Regeneration Agency and the Housing Corporation. Indeed, as the noble Viscount knows, similar powers are in place for the vast majority of non-departmental public bodies. The power of direction is a necessary safeguard to ensure that the agency delivers its objects effectively. However, as the noble Viscount will also know, the important point is that the power of direction, whether it is specific or general, is likely to be used sparingly because it is such a powerful tool for ensuring that the agency delivers effectively against its objects. Although related to the powers of the Secretary of State to issue guidance, there is an important difference in how this power will be used. The power of direction is separate and independently necessary. While the guidance that the Secretary of State is likely to issue will probably be mainly about how the agency works, directions are more likely to be about what tasks the agency carries out. Both powers should be able to be used generally or specifically; the Secretary of State should be able to specify the general set of circumstances in which the HCA would have to abide by directions. The amendment would restrict the ability of the Secretary of State to influence the behaviour of the HCA by requiring her to issue only specific directions. The majority of direction issued is likely to be specific in nature, but even those specific directions have been extremely sparing; there are no more than a handful. The noble Viscount has identified some used by the Housing Corporation to dispose of certain loans and to issue an annual accounts direction, which directs the Housing Corporation to include certain financial information within its annual accounts, over and above that required by the Companies Acts. Directions have also been issued to English Partnerships in the past—and I have four examples of how that has happened, but only four since 1997. There was the direction to English Partnerships to purchase land on the Greenwich peninsula; in July 2000, the direction to dispose of relevant land, together with the Millennium Dome; in 2001, there was the direction revoking the July 2000 direction and instructing English Partnerships to enter into agreement with Legacy plc; and, in November 2005, the direction to purchase the freehold of the Stratford City site, to comply with the terms of agreement with the Secretary of State for Transport. Those directions are very specific indeed. The noble Viscount is right in the sense that issuing a general directive would be extremely rare. The Secretary of State is likely to issue specific directions in fairly limited circumstances, as I have suggested, to focus the agency on a particular government priority in a more immediate, formal and public manner than would be achieved through adjusting the agency’s tasking framework. It may be that these circumstances will always be addressed perfectly well by a specific direction; however, there may be occasions and circumstances in which there would be a need for a general direction. The noble Viscount asked me whether there have been historical instances, whether I could name them and how we envisaged that power being used in future. To my knowledge, the general power of direction has not actually been used, but the sort of thing that we might see—and it is extremely important that we keep the power—is a general direction that is necessary so that a Secretary of State could envisage the HCA exercising specific powers contained in the Bill. That might be a use of a general direction, but I assure the noble Viscount that we have no current plans to issue any general directions. As I have said, the power that the general direction implies is an important safeguard for the Secretary of State, but it does not imply that there is in any sense a top-down overriding intention to use this in such a way that would be undemocratic or inappropriate. This was a useful opportunity to clarify that and put it on the record.