rose to move, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the Local Authorities (Contracting Out of Anti-social Behaviour Order Functions) (England) Order 2007.
The noble Baroness said: The order was laid before the House on 9 January 2007. In summary, it enables local authorities, where they so wish, to enter into arrangements with organisations that manage their housing stock so that those organisations may exercise some or all of the local authority’s functions for seeking anti-social behaviour orders. The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 gives the Secretary of State the power to make an order specifying a body or type of body to which local authorities may contract out all or part of their anti-social behaviour order functions. We issued a consultation paper, Enabling Local Authorities to Contract their Anti-social Behaviour Order Functions to Organisations Managing their Housing Stock, in November 2005, and it forms the basis for the statutory instrument that we are discussing today. There were areas where we have advanced the policy in the light of the constructive comments from stakeholders, and, overall, the consultation provided a clear mandate for pursuing our proposal as put out to consultation.
Currently, agencies provided with the power to seek anti-social behaviour orders through the courts are restricted to those listed as relevant authorities in the Crime and Disorder Act. They include the police, local authorities, registered social landlords, transport police and county councils. At present, local authorities may not contract out their power to apply for an anti-social behaviour order to other bodies. We believe that enabling them to do so in the context of social housing stands to provide a number of advantages where the local authority has delegated the delivery of front-line services to other bodies. As the Committee will be aware, many local authorities in England have delegated operational functions to other organisations that manage some or all of their housing stock on their behalf, notably arm’s-length management organisations and tenant management organisations, as well as private finance consortia.
At the moment, every time an organisation, such as an arm’s-length management organisation, wishes to seek an anti-social behaviour order to protect the community, it must approach its parent local authority to make the application on its behalf. This can lead to delays and unnecessary red tape. A rapid response is often critical in building and maintaining public confidence in an agency’s ability and preparedness to act to stop anti-social behaviour. It is critical that residents have faith in those managing their housing and are reassured that they are suitably equipped to do the job. Officers working for arm’s-length management organisations or tenant management organisations will more often than not be leading on handling complaints and pursuing cases. They will be responsible for gathering evidence and taking decisions on how best to act. We see no reason why they should not be empowered, where the local authority sees fit, to carry the process through to resolution by pursuing an anti-social behaviour order application through the courts.
It is important to note that many housing management organisations already pursue applications through the courts for other forms of action to tackle anti-social behaviour, including possession cases and injunctions. That demands much the same level of judgment, capacity and expertise as anti-social behaviour order applications. Anti-social behaviour orders are powerful measures, and our primary concern is to ensure that they are used appropriately and only where they provide the best solution for protecting the community from anti-social behaviour.
We recognise that local flexibility must be coupled with proper accountability. We are conscious of the critical importance of making sure that those entrusted with these powers can be expected to be capable of exercising them responsibly. That is why we have made an explicit link between this initiative and Section 27 of the Housing Act 1985, which is the statutory process for delegating housing management functions. The effect of Section 27 is to regulate the process by which the local authority appoints another housing body to manage council homes. That process is primarily designed to protect tenants’ interests and ensures that housing management responsibilities may be delegated only to those with appropriate skills and resources. We believe that the requirement under Section 27 to have in place a robust management agreement between the local authority and the housing management organisation will ensure robust government and accountability and will provide a framework for ongoing performance management.
It is important to be clear that local authorities will remain fully accountable for how any contracted responsibilities are exercised. We will be issuing statutory guidance on the contracting out of ASBO functions to which local authorities and any organisations to which they may contract out must have regard. In preparing that guidance, we will take full account of issues raised through the consultation process and of points raised in this debate. This order will for the first time give tenant management organisations the power to apply for anti-social behaviour orders, where appropriate in the local context. The Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government focused on this issue in their announcement on 9 January, and I am pleased to say that the response we have received to date has been very positive.
Some concerns have been raised about whether by providing anti-social behaviour order powers we might provoke unchecked vigilante action where neighbours take out vendettas on each other through anti-social behaviour order applications. These concerns are unfounded and, it could be argued, betray a lack of awareness of the way that tenant management organisations are established and operated. Many tenant management organisations already have responsibility for the day-to-day running of the homes in their areas, and they are delivering excellent services. They are called upon to take on these responsibilities only when they have undergone a rigorous process of training and accreditation and they must secure the support of the community for taking on management functions. Many employ dedicated staff who manage large estates. We are not talking about giving powers to residents’ associations with informal constitutions but rather about delegating to highly professional organisations with established track records that are subject to robust accreditation and on-going monitoring.
Providing additional powers to TMOs, where appropriate, would give local residents a greater say in how their estates are run and would support them in ensuring that disruptive anti-social behaviour is dealt with swiftly and effectively. This order is relatively simple—I dare say that—and has been drafted to provide the local authority with the maximum flexibility to ensure that any arrangements it may wish to enter into are tailored to best fit the local context. The local authority retains full discretion about whether it wishes to make use of this provision. It may enter into contracting arrangements with one or more housing management organisations with which it holds management agreements. An authority will retain the power to discharge its anti-social behaviour order functions in its own right, regardless of whether it has entered into a contracting-out arrangement. The order allows local authorities full flexibility to restrict the circumstances in which the specified organisations are able to discharge the contracted-out functions if they so wish. The order also allows a local authority to attach other conditions, as it considers appropriate. These conditions must be adhered to by the housing management organisation.
We have included in the order a duty on the part of the organisation to which the local authority contracts to consult the parent local authority every time the housing management organisation wishes to apply for an anti-social behaviour order. A number of responses to the consultation asked that we made that explicit in the interests of supporting multi-agency working and the exchange of pertinent information. It is important that we recognise that that has been taken on board from the consultation process.
This order also expressly confirms that housing management organisations to which anti-social behaviour order functions are contracted out will be provided with full rights of audience to take cases through magistrates’ courts, which is essential in enabling them to lead on applications from the onset to the conclusion of a case. It is important to note that the majority of anti-social behaviour order applications are currently conducted in the magistrates’ courts, although they are also available in the civil courts alongside other applications.
My department, the Home Office and the Department for Constitutional Affairs are working together on new proposals to provide housing officers working for arm’s-length management organisations and tenant management organisations with rights of audience in the civil courts. If enacted, this will, in due course, allow them to pursue anti-social behaviour order applications in the civil courts as well. At the moment, the right of audience in the civil courts is subject to judicial discretion.
In many situations arm’s-length management organisations and tenant management organisation officers will already be well practised in taking cases. However, we will make clear through the issue of guidance that local authorities will need to work closely with housing management bodies in ensuring that those responsible for taking cases in court are fully trained and competent to do so. In more complex cases, it is likely that the housing management organisation will continue to work closely with a local authority’s legal team or commission specialist legal support.
This order gives local authorities the flexibility to make local decisions about how anti-social behaviour is tackled, enabling them to be responsive to changes in the way in which their communities are served. It will assist in delivering more efficient and effective working practices and would further equip those on the front line to be better able to tackle anti-social behaviour. I commend the order to the House.
Moved, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the Local Authorities (Contracting Out of Anti-social Behaviour Order Functions) (England) Order 2007.—(Baroness Morgan of Drefelin).
Local Authorities (Contracting out of Anti-social Behaviour Order Functions) (England) Order 2007
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 21 February 2007.
It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Local Authorities (Contracting out of Anti-social Behaviour Order Functions) (England) Order 2007.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
689 c86-90GC Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:50:39 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378325
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378325
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378325