Housing and Regeneration Bill

Well, it sounds as though the noble Baroness is. We need Amendment No. 97A, simply because many of the functions and assets of existing bodies will be transferred to the HCA. We anticipate that only a skeleton body may be left in place pending dissolution, so there is not much point in having a fully staffed board in those circumstances or requiring the Secretary of State to replace members who have resigned or left the board. Therefore, we seek to include a provision to reduce the minimum number of members of the board of the URA. It currently consists of such a number as the Secretary of State appoints and has to have a minimum of six. I ask Members of the Committee to agree that we may reduce the minimum number of members required to two. That is the logic. On Amendment No. 97P, I think that the noble Baroness’s noble friend Lord Greaves made the same point while she was not in her place, and that we gave assurances then that there was no issue about pre-emption. Actually, we will take her advice and not move it, just in case we accidentally disadvantage noble Lords by leaving it where it is.