My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. I note everything that she said about what has taken place since we discussed this issue last in May. However, the situation remains that HIPs are nothing without the energy performance certificate; the documentation required under a HIP is minimal and putting together that information does not take an enormous amount of time or effort. It is a survey that requires effort and brings comfort to the people who are buying property. As we have said all along—and nothing that the Minister has said will change this—a proper survey will have to be carried out by everyone who is buying a property. I have seen no information about the level of the home condition report on which mortgage companies will feel able to rely in order to lend money. The home condition report is now voluntary. We were perfectly happy with that—it would have been a perfectly acceptable situation—but it was never going to be what was required in the home-buying area.
We have not moved against the regulations for the introduction of energy performance certificates. They will give valuable information about how much it will cost to increase the energy efficiency of a property. However, the inclusion of EPCs in HIPs will not increase the speed with which houses are sold. In fact, as I have suggested, their inclusion will hold the process up. If they were a requirement on their own, they could be introduced much more quickly than if they were limited to the sale of houses. The fact that the EPC is being introduced in social housing shows that it has nothing to do with the HIP and nothing to do with the sale of property. We have all been saying that this ought to be done as a completely separate entity. Without the EPC, what does the HIP give you? Remarkably little. It does not produce anything much and, despite all the efforts of the Minister and the Government, it still has not improved an enormous amount on the way through the system.
There should be a complete rethink about the energy performance certificates. They should be introduced on their own. They should not be part of the HIP process, which does not look as if it will be of benefit to buyers. The noble Lord, Lord Graham, asked how much it will cost. I can assure noble Lords that the cost will be put on to the sale price. I cannot see that the seller will do anything other than make sure that he gets his money back. It is not going to be free to the buyer.
We have had many debates on this matter. It is our view that the HIPs are still flawed. I beg leave to test the opinion of the House.
On Question, Whether the said Motion shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 180; Not-Contents, 160.
Housing Act 2004 (Commencement No. 8) (England and Wales) Order 2007
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hanham
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 18 July 2007.
It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Housing Act 2004 (Commencement No. 8) (England and Wales) Order 2007.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
694 c278-9 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:53:41 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412028
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412028
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412028