UK Parliament / Open data

Housing and Regeneration Bill

moved Amendment No. 102ZD: 102ZD: Clause 88, page 40, line 17, leave out subsection (1) and insert— ““(1) The regulator shall perform its functions in a manner which— (a) minimises interference, (b) is proportionate, consistent, transparent and accountable, (c) complies with any duty of the regulator under section 22 of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006 (c. 51) (code of practice), and (d) seeks to achieve the following objectives as far as possible.”” The noble Earl said: The group of amendments to which I shall speak is headed by Amendment No. 102ZD, which is tabled in my name and those of four other noble Lords. Clause 88 sets out 10 objectives for the regulator and states that, "““the regulator shall balance them as it thinks appropriate””." Objectives 1 to 9 include encouraging a supply of well managed social housing; ensuring protection and choice for tenants; tenant involvement in management; efficient, economical and properly managed providers that contribute to their local areas; and encouraging investment in social housing without burdening or misusing public funds. These objectives are all excellent, but they show what the regulator is expected to achieve. However: "““Objective 10 is to regulate in a manner which … minimises interference, and … is proportionate, consistent, transparent and accountable””." We believe that this objective is fundamentally different because it is not about the aims of the regulator but about how the regulator has to proceed and the manner in which it proceeds when seeking to achieve objectives 1 to 9. It is not in itself an objective. I suggest that the regulator should always operate in a manner that minimises interference and is proportionate, consistent, transparent and accountable in all the objectives it undertakes and in pursuing all its objectives 1 to 9. The regulator should not have to balance that against the other nine objectives as required in sub-section 13. That is why we have tabled Amendment No. 102ZD and its consequential amendment, Amendment No. 103C, which ensure that the obligation of proportionality applies to the way that the regulator pursues all its objectives. Amendment No. 103ZA is also in this group. It places an onus on the regulator to ensure that tenants have adequate information about the standard of their housing services. It would ensure that under objective 2 actual or potential tenants of social housing would have an appropriate degree of information about the management of their homes. That is essential if they are to have effective choice and be able to take part in management. As Professor Cave stated in his report, empowerment requires information. He reported that the Tenant Involvement Commission found that: "““Awareness of how housing associations perform is very low … Few tenants know how to find out how their association performs compared to others””." Tenants need information, but there is nothing in the regulator’s objectives that imposes an obligation on providers to provide that information. This amendment places an onus on the regulator to ensure that the information provided is directly relevant to the tenants and is adequate for them to make choices and be involved with the management without at the same time placing an undue burden on the provider. This information must be available for comparison at a local level. The Cave review accepted that providing local comparative information may be problematic for landlords who operate across many local authority areas. Professor Cave said that the regulator should play a key role in ensuring that the core information requirement is manageable and consistent across all areas. The optimum level at which information should be provided is for housing within a local authority area. That would enable tenants to make like-for-like comparisons. It would provide them with the material they need to consider whether their homes could be better run by another provider in the same area. The next amendment is Amendment No. 103E, which is given a definition by Amendment No. 104ZA. It would ensure a level playing field for the public, private and third sector providers of social housing property and services. Those involved in the provision of such housing fear that some types of provider will have an unfair advantage because the rules do not apply to all types of providers. An explicit requirement on the regulator to promote competitive neutrality would help to prevent the development of disadvantage in the regulatory framework as well as help to eliminate barriers to developing a more effective market in housing services. That would have the effect of empowering tenants and enable a lessening of regulation over time. I know that other amendments are grouped with mine and I want to give other Members of the Committee a chance to speak to them. I beg to move.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
702 c244-5GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top