Asked by Lord Kennedy of Southwark To ask His Majesty’s Government
why they did not proceed with the planned abolition of leasehold
for flats in the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill. Lord Kennedy
of Southwark (Lab Co-op) My Lords, in begging leave to ask the
Question standing in my name on the Order Paper, I refer the House
to my relevant interests, as set out in the register, and the fact
that I am a leaseholder. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary
of...Request free trial
Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government why they did not proceed with the
planned abolition of leasehold for flats in the Leasehold and
Freehold Reform Bill.
(Lab Co-op)
My Lords, in begging leave to ask the Question standing in my
name on the Order Paper, I refer the House to my relevant
interests, as set out in the register, and the fact that I am a
leaseholder.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for
Levelling Up, Housing & Communities () (Con)
My Lords, the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill contains a
substantial package of measures to increase leaseholders’ rights
as consumers and home owners. We have prioritised the most
significant measures that will help existing leaseholders now. We
remain committed to continuing our leasehold and commonhold
reforms, and the Bill is a major step forward. The best way to
help leaseholders now is to make the existing leases fairer and
more affordable. Our focus is on legislating where we can in
order to make genuine improvements to leaseholders’ daily lives
straightaway.
(Lab Co-op)
My Lords, although many of the measures in the Bill are very
welcome, we have been told for years that the Government would
abolish, as they put it, this “feudal” leasehold housing tenure.
The Bill had been promised in the third Session of this
Parliament. Here we are in the last Session of the Parliament,
and the abolition of leasehold is completely left out of the
Bill. It was then confirmed that the Government would introduce
amendments later on, but only to abolish leasehold houses, with
leasehold flats, which comprise 75% of leasehold, here to stay.
That is not good enough. Will the Minister take the opportunity
to apologise, given the Government’s pledge to abolish the feudal
leasehold housing tenure?
(Con)
My Lords, I will not apologise; the measures in the Bill will
benefit owners of flats and houses alike. The majority of houses
have always been provided as freehold, and there are few
justifications for building new leasehold houses, so the
Government will ban them, other than in exceptional
circumstances. However, flats have shared fabric and
infrastructure and therefore require some form of arrangement to
facilitate management. This has been facilitated by a lease. None
the less, the Government recognise the issues in the leasehold
system and remain committed to reinvigorating the commonhold
system so that developers and home owners have an alternative to
leasehold ownership.
(Con)
My Lords, further to the question from the noble Lord, Lord
Kennedy, the Secretary of State made his views absolutely clear
when he said:
“I don’t believe leasehold is fair in any way. It is an outdated
feudal system that needs to go”.
But the Bill does not do that—it does not even mention
commonholds. When I asked about this in the previous exchange, I
was told by the noble Baroness, Lady Penn:
“When it comes to reforms to commonhold, we continue to consider
the Law Commission’s report in detail to find the best way
forward”.—[Official Report, 30/11/2023; col. 1180.]
The commission reported in 2020. When will we learn the
Government’s conclusion?
(Con)
I assure my noble friend that we remain committed to continuing
our leasehold and commonhold reforms, and the Bill is a major
step forward. The Government remain committed to a widespread
take-up of commonhold for flats, and we have been reviewing the
Law Commission’s recommendations to reinvigorate commonhold as a
workable alternative to leasehold, alongside working with the
Commonhold Council to consider practical steps to prepare
consumers and the markets.
(LD)
I congratulate the noble Lords, Lord Kennedy and Lord Young, on
their persistence in this matter. We took a Question on this on
30 November, replied to by the noble Baroness, Lady Penn, in
which she said that
“commonhold provides a potential way forward to move away from
leasehold”.—[Official Report, 30/10/2023; col. 1181.]
That we know. She also promised to explain in writing the
complications of abolishing leasehold in flats, to which she
referred. Can the Minister explain what the delay is in
implementing commonhold and what the complications are perceived
to be?
(Con)
My Lords, I can only reiterate what I have said. We are reviewing
this, and it is a complex matter that has ramifications
throughout housing law. We are looking at and reviewing the Law
Commission’s recommendations, and we are working with the
Commonhold Council. It is an important matter, and we will come
forward with further steps on it in due course. It is a complex
issue, and I am more than happy to meet noble Lords as we move
into the Bill. If any noble Lords would like to meet me and my
team, I am very happy to do so.
The Lord Speaker ()
My Lords, the noble Lord, , is participating
remotely.
(Lab) [V]
Is not the simple, unvarnished truth that, on leasehold for
flats, the Government are under intense pressure from powerful
institutions, which have sunk millions into freehold title, to
duck the big decision and delay? The Government’s response is to
leave it to the next Government to sort out. Is it not no more
than an income stream for lazy investors, greedy developers and
pension funds, all of which are squeezing the Government through
political pressure to back off, while leaseholders pay the price?
Labour will sort this out.
(Con)
That is not the case. If noble Lords have listened to some of the
things that the Secretary of State has said in the last many
months, they will know that we are committed to changing this. It
is complex, and we will take our time and do it properly.
(Lab Co-op)
It is very good to see the Minister back at the Dispatch Box. She
has read out very faithfully the Civil Service briefing. However,
we know from the Post Office scandal that Ministers are
ultimately responsible and should take responsibility. Her
Secretary of State was born and brought up in Aberdeen—and in
Scotland leasehold was abolished in 2000 by a Labour and Liberal
Democrat Government. Will the Minister go back to and say, “For goodness’ sake,
if it can be done in Scotland, do it in England as well”?
(Con)
I assure the noble Lord that I shall go back and take that
message to my Secretary of State, but I can also say that we are
looking at the Scottish model.
(CB)
My Lords, the Law Commission reported in 2020, and I understand
the Minister to say that the Government are taking their time—but
four years is far too long. It cannot be so complicated that
there cannot be a decision.
(Con)
It is extremely complex; it affects many other legal issues to do
with housing—with leaseholds and freeholds. We are looking at it
as we move through the Bill. What we are putting forward is a
very good first step, but it is not the end of the line. We will
be working further.
(Con)
My Lords, I am sure that many noble Lords are grateful to my
noble friend the Minister for saying that the Government are
still committed to commonhold. She keeps saying how complicated
the whole issue is. To ease the understanding of noble Lords and
others, will she commit to listing some of the complications in a
letter to me and other noble Lords, so that we too can understand
how complicated it is and why commonhold provisions have not been
brought forward at this stage?
(Con)
I shall certainly do that—I thought that my noble friend Lady
Penn had agreed to that letter, but I shall look into it and sort
out a letter. But I think that my offer of meeting noble Lords,
as we move into the Bill, is the correct way forward.
(Lab)
My Lords, millions of leaseholders across the country, such as
those in Vista Tower in Stevenage, have suffered extreme
financial distress, bankruptcies and inability to sell their
properties, because the issue of fire remediation has fallen
directly on them. When will those leaseholders have the
Government’s reassurance that this is going to be dealt with once
and for all?
(Con)
We are dealing with it—it is a big piece of work, but we are
dealing with it. It is happening all the time. What I have said
to the noble Baroness and others many times at the Dispatch Box
is that, if there are individuals who have complex issues and
want to discuss them, we have a team of people in the department
who will do that. I am happy to talk to her further about
that.
(Con)
My Lords, is the delay due in any way to the fact that we have
had a significant number of ministerial changes at Secretary of
State level?
(Con)
I thank my noble friend for that question—but not as far as I am
concerned, no.
(Lab)
What is to stop the Government and getting on a train, going to
Scotland, seeing the legislation there, bringing it back and
adopting the same regulations? What would be the problem with
that?
(Con)
I did not quite catch that—but with regard to going up to
Scotland and bringing back that legislation, the law is very
different in Scotland, and we have to look at it.
(Lab)
My Lords, I have listened carefully to this exchange, and we have
had similar ones in the past, initiated by my noble friend. What
is noticeable is that the Minister—not personally, of course; we
welcome her back—but politically, during this exchange, has found
herself friendless. There is virtually no one prepared to stand
up and defend the Government’s position, other than the Minister.
At the very least, as this place can be a bit of a cauldron for
making plain what opinion is, she should report back what I have
just relayed to her to her Secretary of State, and say, “Next
time I come to the Dispatch Box, please give me some better
arguments than you have given me so far”.
(Con)
I am not going to give noble Lords any different answer. We are
committed, and the Secretary of State has made it very clear that
we are committed as a Government, to commonhold. We are working
through it—but the best way in which to help leaseholders now is
to make existing leases fairer and more affordable. That is
exactly what is happening through the Bill, and I am pleased that
the Government are at last doing it. I hope that the noble Lord
opposite is also pleased that this Bill is in, because he has
asked me many times when it is coming.
|
