The Housing & Planning Bill receives Royal Assent

Fri May 13 11:17:44 BST 2016

Following agreement by both Houses (The Commons and Lords) on the text of the Bill, The Housing & Planning Bill received Royal Assent on 12 May. The Bill is now an Act of Parliament (law).

Controversial Housing Bill passed after parliament 'ping-pong'
by Shane Croucher
May 12, 2016 
Ref: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/controversial-housing-bill-passed-after-parliament-ping-pong-1559721

The government's controversial Housing and Planning Bill, which includes policies such as discounted "starter homes" for first-time buyers and larger rents for higher-earning council tenants under so-called "pay-to-stay" terms, will pass into law after a bruising few months in parliament.

A convoluted battle had ensued between the Lords and Commons over technical changes to the wide-ranging bill over which neither legislative arms could agree. A parliamentary process called "ping-pong" ended after crossbench peer Lord Kerslake dropped the last disputed amendment holding up the legislation. The bill, intended to speed up housebuilding and homeownership, is set for Royal Assent on 12 May.

Peers had been trying to water down some of the bill's key elements, forcing the government to make concessions on certain policies by handing ministers 13 defeats in the House of Lords during its final reading. But Kerslake's amendment could not be resolved between the government and peers, despite the bill having been accepted by MPs in the elected House of Commons.

In the bill, councils will be compelled to sell off their highest-value vacant housing stock to fund the construction of new affordable housing and the extension of Right-to-Buy to housing association tenants. Kerslake's amendment would have required the replacement properties to be of similar proportions to those sold off, but the government rejected this.

"I reiterate what I said yesterday: the manifesto clearly states that the homes sold will be replaced by new homes," said Baroness Trafford, a minister at the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG), referring to the Conservative party's 2015 manifesto commitments.

"It does not say that there will be like-for-like replacement because that is not always what communities need. We want to ensure that new homes serve the needs of communities. That is why we want to retain flexibility in the legislation so that the government, working with local places, can facilitate the development of the type of homes that communities need today."

The government invoked its financial privilege over the Lords, a convention where peers back down because their amendments would interfere with fiscal arrangements agreed by elected MPs, and Kerslake withdrew his amendment.

"In the end, any contest between this house and the other place will be an unequal one," Kerslake told fellow peers. "That is as it should be: it is elected and we are not. However, that should not dissuade us from making our case clearly and forcefully on issues that really matter. In this case the matters involved matter a great deal. The underlying concerns about this bill have been about its fairness, its commitment to localism and its deliverability. Most of all it has been about whether it will deliver the additional houses of all types and tenures that this country so desperately needs."

Among measures in the bill are the abolition of new lifetime tenancies for council tenants; so-called "Right-to-Rent", where landlords must conduct immigration checks on their prospective tenants; and allowing housing associations to voluntarily take part in the Right-to-Buy scheme.

[end]
*****************************************************

Summary of the Housing and Planning Act 2016
A Bill to make provision about housing, estate agents, rentcharges, planning and compulsory purchase. 

Source: http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2015-16/housingandplanning/documents.html

LORDS AMENDMENT 47

Clause 72

47   
Page 31, line 42, at end insert—
“If a local housing authority so wishes, and that authority can demonstrate, whether by reference to its local housing plan or otherwise, that there is a need in its area for social housing of the kind that it proposes to build, the Secretary of State shall enter into an agreement with that authority whereby it shall retain such part of the payment as may be required to fund the provision of a new dwelling to be let as social housing on terms (as to tenure, rent or otherwise) which are similar to those on which the old dwelling was let.”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment 47 for the following reason—

47A
Because it would alter the financial arrangements made by the Commons, and the Commons do not offer any further Reason, trusting that this Reason may be deemed sufficient.

LORDS NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

The Lords do not insist on their Amendment 47, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 47A, and propose Amendments 47B and 47C in lieu—

47B
Page 31, line 35, at end insert—
“If a local housing authority so wishes, and the Secretary of State agrees, the Secretary of State shall enter into an agreement with that authority whereby it shall retain such part of the payment referred to in section 67(1) as may be required to fund the provision of a new affordable home.” 

47C
Page 32, line 2, at end insert—
“If a local housing authority can demonstrate to the Secretary of State, whether by reference to its local housing plan or otherwise, that there is a particular need in its area for social housing, the authority shall retain such part of the payment referred to in section 67(1) as may be required to fund the provision of a new dwelling to be let as social housing on terms (as to tenure, rent or otherwise) which are similar to those on which the old dwelling was let.”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

The Commons disagree with Lords Amendments 47B and 47C for the following reason—47D
Because they would alter the financial arrangements made by the Commons, and the Commons do not offer any further Reason, trusting that this Reason may be deemed sufficient.

LORDS NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENT IN LIEU
The Lords do not insist on their Amendments 47B and 47C, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 47D, and do propose Amendment 47E in lieu—

47E
Page 31, line 42, at end insert—
“The amount of any reduction agreed under subsection (1) must be sufficient to fund the provision of at least one new affordable home outside Greater London, and at least two new affordable homes in Greater London, for each old dwelling.

Where the local housing authority can demonstrate, whether by reference to its local housing plan or otherwise, that there is a particular need in its area for social rented housing, the Secretary of State, as part of any agreement under subsection (1), must consider any application from the authority to fund the provision of a new dwelling to be let as social housing, in respect of each old dwelling.”

 	COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON
[The page and line references are to HL Bill 87, the bill as first printed for the Lords.]
LORDS AMENDMENT 47
Clause 72

47
Page 31, line 42, at end insert—
“If a local housing authority so wishes, and that authority can demonstrate, whether by reference to its local housing plan or otherwise, that there is a need in its area for social housing of the kind that it proposes to build, the Secretary of State shall enter into an agreement with that authority whereby it shall retain such part of the payment as may be required to fund the provision of a new dwelling to be let as social housing on terms (as to tenure, rent or otherwise) which are similar to those on which the old dwelling was let.”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON
The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment 47 for the following reason—

47A
Because it would alter the financial arrangements made by the Commons, and the
Commons do not offer any further Reason, trusting that this Reason may be deemed
sufficient.
LORDS NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU
The Lords do not insist on their Amendment 47, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 47A, and propose Amendments 47B and 47C in lieu—

47B
Page 31, line 35, at end insert—
“If a local housing authority so wishes, and the Secretary of State agrees, the Secretary of State shall enter into an agreement with that authority whereby it shall retain such part of the payment referred to in section 67(1) as may be required to fund the provision of a new affordable home.”

47C
Page 32, line 2, at end insert—
“If a local housing authority can demonstrate to the Secretary of State, whether by reference to its local housing plan or otherwise, that there is a particular need in its area for social housing, the authority shall retain such part of the payment referred to in section 67(1) as may be required to fund the provision of a new dwelling to be let as social housing on terms (as to tenure, rent or otherwise) which are similar to those on which the old dwelling was let.”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON
The Commons disagree with Lords Amendments 47B and 47C for the following reason—
47D
Because they would alter the financial arrangements made by the Commons, and the Commons do not offer any further Reason, trusting that this Reason may be deemed sufficient.

LORDS NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENT IN LIEU
The Lords do not insist on their Amendments 47B and 47C, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 47D, and do propose Amendment 47E in lieu—

47E
Page 31, line 42, at end insert—
“The amount of any reduction agreed under subsection (1) must be sufficient to fund the provision of at least one new affordable home outside Greater London, and at least two new affordable homes in Greater London, for each old dwelling.
Where the local housing authority can demonstrate, whether by reference to its local housing plan or otherwise, that there is a particular need in its area for social rented housing, the Secretary of State, as part of any agreement under subsection (1), must consider any application from the authority to fund the provision of a new dwelling to be let as social housing, in respect of each old dwelling.”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON
The Commons disagree with Lords Amendment 47E for the following reason—

47F
Because it would alter the financial arrangements made by the Commons, and the Commons do not offer any further Reason, trusting that this Reason may be deemed sufficient.

> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: "Mark Brown mark at tlio.org.uk [TheLandIsOurs]" <TheLandIsOurs at yahoogroups.com>
> To: TheLandIsOurs at yahoogroups.com
> Date: 09 May 2016 at 18:35
> Subject: [TheLandIsOurs] Kill the Housing Bill Campaign Update
> 
>  Ref: <http://killthehousingbill.wordpress.com/>.
> 
> 
> 

> 
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: killthehousingbill at gmail.com
> To: KtHBannounce <kthbannounce at googlegroups.com>
> Date: 08 May 2016 at 22:11
> Subject: [kthbannounce] kill the housing bill Campaign Update

> 
> The Housing Bill is still being held up in Parliament; it goes back to MPs  and
> the Lords again on Mon 9th and Tue 10th.   If opposition is determined  enough
> to keep challenging it past this Thursday the Bill could be delayed
> significantly.
> 
> 
> Can you *email or phone key MPs and Lords in the next 48 hours *asking them to
> keep up the opposition?  See our statement below challenging the  Government's
> arguments, with some key names to contact.
> 
> 
> We will be *outside Parliament this Wed 11th from 12 noon* at Old Palace Yard
> SW1P 3JY  in protest - come with banners and placards if you can.
> 
> 
> Other campaign dates
> *Sat 21 May*   10am - 1pm  *Still kill the housing bill: *organising next steps
> .  All welcome:   at Bloomsbury Central Baptist church 235 Shaftesbury Ave,
> London WC2H 8EP
>                           1pm  Parliament Square  Gypsy Traveller march against
> the Housing Bill
> 
> 
> *18 June *      second national march against the Housing Bill
> 
> 
> Contact MPs and Lords with our statement (see below):
> 
> Key opposition MPs
> John Healey (Labour, Housing) john.healey.mp@*parlia*ment.uk
>  <http://parliament.uk/>  T: 020 7219 6359, 01709 875943, @johnhealey_mp
> <https://twitter.com/JohnHealey_MP>
> Roberta Blackman-Woods (Labour, Planning) woodsr at parliament.uk  T: 020 7219
> 4982,  0191 374 1915, @robertabwmp <https://twitter.com/robertabwMP>
> Teresa Pearce (Labour, Housing ) teresa.pearce.mp at parliament.uk  T: 020 7219
> 6936   *@tpearce003* <https://twitter.com/tpearce003>
> Rosie Winterton (Labour, chief whip)  rosie.winterton.mp at parliament.uk  T: 020
> 7217 3000 - ask for her office
> Jeremy Corbyn (Labour leader) jeremy.corbyn.mp at parliament.uk  T: 020 7219 3545,
> *@jeremycorbyn* <https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn>
> Caroline Lucas (Green MP)  caroline.lucas.mp at parliament.uk  T: 020 7219 7025
>  *@carolinelucas* <https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas>
> 
> 
> Key Lords
> Lord (Roy) Kennedy  (Labour, Housing)  kennedyro at parliament.uk  T: 020 7219 1772
> *@lordroykennedy*
> 
> 
> <https://twitter.com/LordRoyKennedy?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor>
> Lord (Jeremy) Beecham (Labour, Housing)  beechamj at parliament.uk  T: 020 7219
> 5353 @jeremybeecham <https://twitter.com/JeremyBeecham>
> Lord (Steve) Bassam (Labour chief whip)   via  contactholmember at parliament.uk
>  T: 020 7219 5353
> Lord Kerslake (cross bench) via contactholmember at parliament.uk  T: 0207 219 5353
> Lord Best (crossbench) best at parliament.uk  T: 020 7219 6799
> 
> Kill the Housing Bill  campaign statement  7.5.16
>  We oppose the Housing and Planning Bill because it means more insecurity,  high
> rents and housing anxiety now and for generations.  We welcome many of the
> amendments and concessions conceded due to opposition in the Lords, but remain
> extremely worried about the overall detrimental impact of this Bill,  and cannot
> see any positive reason to support even an amended version.
> 
> We call on MPs and Lords who share our concerns to continue the opposition.
>  Action to delay the legislation and expose the lack of consensus around it,
> will help in future challenges.
> 
> 
> Many of the most potentially damaging measures in the Bill were not part of the
> Government’s Manifesto.  The Manifesto promise of more starter homes did not say
> this would be at the expense of existing and future council and housing
> association homes for rent.
> 
> This Bill is not a ‘financial measure’ and so the Parliament Act should not  be
> used to obstruct legitimate opposition.  It is a far-reaching attempt to reshape
> housing provision by undermining non-market alternatives and tenant  rights.  It
> is not a ‘financial measure’ unless every central or local government  change
>  is also to be classed in this way.
> 
> Already 69% of people in Britain say we are in a housing crisis [*details  here*
> <http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/apr/30/housing-crisis-poll-city-country-split-blame>].
> 
> 
>  The Bill will make the crisis worse by: raising rents (through Pay to Stay tax
> and pushing more into private renting), ending secure tenancies, loss of council
> and housing association homes for rent, reducing Traveller  sites, subsidised
> ‘starter’ homes for sale replacing really-affordable homes for rent, planning
> changes to speed up loss of public land and reduce obligations on developers to
> provide genuinely affordable homes, and failure to control rents or improve
> security for private renters.

> 
> 
> We call for determined and continued opposition in and outside Parliament to
> stop this Bill.
> 
> 
> Please see our *evidence to Lords here*
> <http://www.defendcouncilhousing.org.uk/dch/resources/KtHBLordsevidence20216.pdf>
>  and our Briefing on the Housing Bill here:
>  <http://killthehousingbill.wordpress.com/>.
> 
> 
> -
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "KtHBannounce" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> > email to kthbannounce+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> > To post to this group, send an email to kthbannounce at googlegroups.com.
> > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/kthbannounce.
> > To view this discussion on the web, visit
> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kthbannounce/aa2fd425-913c-4178-860b-e5542a7cc973%40googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.