Housing (Interim Management Orders) (Prescribed Circumstances) (England) Order 2006

We have discretionary scope for additional licensing, and selective licensing that can also be applied under specific circumstances. So it is not as if we were simply looking at one regime. In the monitoring process we shall consider whether there are things that we have missed, along with looking at the effectiveness of what we are doing. We drew the line at houses of three stories occupied by five persons. The noble Baroness referred to the consultation, and a great deal of discussion went into making that the distinction, because these are the highest risk HMOs across the field of raising standards and pose the greatest management challenges. In that context, perhaps I could talk briefly about the question that was raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham, about amenities and the landlord. I am sure that she knows, in the context of the debate on washbasins, bathrooms and hygienic facilities, there were two sorts of arguments being put—either that the original definition of the requirement, that it should apply to all HMOs, should be maintained, or that it should be restricted to a smaller number that met the licensing standards. What happened in the interval between 2004 and 2005 and the release of the consultation document was that, having started off with the notion that the regime should apply, as the previous guidance did, to all HMOs, we agreed after discussion and consultation that it was better applied to those houses that were licensable and had five or more tenants in them. We narrowed the scope so that it was consistent with the guidance. That was done because we believed that larger houses with larger numbers of people were the ones where there was the greatest pressure on resources—bathrooms, toilets and washbasins—and therefore by bringing shared houses within the scope of HMOs, as we have done in that definition, we are providing what we need where we need it. The counter-argument is that it is still draconian for the landlord. We have narrowed the scope and made clear that local authorities will have discretion to allow landlords time to make the changes. Licences will not be withheld because landlords cannot put a washbasin in in the next fortnight. We are allowing a considerable time for landlords to make the necessary adjustments. As a housing Minister, I have seen the speed of construction and the way that bathrooms seem to be able to be modified and changed quite quickly these days. There is a range of new equipment that goes into bathrooms of different sizes. Providing those amenities is less onerous than it might have been some years ago. The requirement is proportionate because there is scope for the landlord to make the adjustments with the support of the local authority. The other questions asked by the noble Baroness were about the cost of licences and about Section 257. We decided local authorities should be left to decide the cost of licences. We did that, for example, with high hedges, because it is a local issue, but I am not going to be drawn into high hedges. Evidence suggests that there is wide variation, so I cannot tell the noble Baroness what the average cost will be. In the regulatory impact assessment, we suggested that it would be about £500. The cost in some local authorities will be lower and in others, it will be higher and we will watch that. It is important to bear in mind that those costs have to be applied to the costs of the licence and are not to be used for anything else. The fees are supposed to cover the costs undertaken by the local authority. They are to do a particular job as judged best by the local authority, but we will watch them. I shall return to the other point about antisocial behaviour, but HMOs are still included in registration schemes made by local authorities under Section 257 of the 1985 Act. A further set of regulations that deal specifically with them will be made. I take the point about the timing. We aim to make the regulations in July so that they will be in force in October. The problem is, as the noble Baroness, Lady Maddock, said, that they have been a long time in delivery, and we do not want to delay if we can possibly avoid it. There has been consultation on this.