Public Disorder: Eviction from Social Housing

Baroness Hanham Excerpts

Thursday 15th September 2011 Lords Chamber

[Lord Dubs]

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with local authorities about the eviction from social housing of families with members involved in rioting or looting.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Communities and Local Government (Baroness Hanham)]

My Lords, during and since the riots, a number of discussions have taken place between Ministers and local authorities, and eviction was one of many issues discussed. The Department for Communities and Local Government is currently consulting on proposals to extend the existing discretionary ground for possession for anti-social behaviour to include tenants or family members who have been convicted of the sort of criminality witnessed during the recent riots, wherever that criminality took place.

[Lord Dubs]

My Lords, is the Minister aware that many people will find it shocking that innocent members of a family could be evicted because one member has committed a criminal offence? Are we to stand by and watch families and innocent children being turned out on the streets?

[Baroness Hanham]

My Lords, I think there would be a general view among the public that those who abuse social tenancies by whatever they do should not expect to continue to enjoy the privilege of those tenancies. It is already the case that those who are subject to anti-social behaviour orders and commit crimes within their locality are subject to eviction. The consultation on this will be a discussion of whether to extend the current powers. The noble Lord asked about the circumstances of families and children. The people who do this will be intentionally homeless, but local authorities will have the same responsibilities as they have currently.

[Baroness Hussein-Ece]

Is my noble friend aware that only 8 per cent of people in England are council tenants? Does she think it is fair or just that council tenants accused—some have just been accused and not even convicted—of riot-related offences should be selectively punished? Is she also aware that if and when these families are evicted, they will have to live somewhere? Councils will have a duty to house them, which may cost more public money?

[Baroness Hanham]

My Lords, I think there is probably a difference between people who are paying for their own accommodation and those who are being cared for or given accommodation by local authorities at a subsidised rent. As I said in my previous answer, this is not a matter that can be dealt with at the moment because the law would have to be changed to enable people convicted of anti-social behaviour or a crime committed not within their local area to be evicted. We have seen some spectacularly dreadful sights in our country recently and it is only right that we should be able to consider whether there are other ways of dealing with this. That is what is being done.

[Lord Kinnock]

My Lords, we are having difficulty getting answers from Ministers to the very specific Questions set out on the Order Paper, whether about consultations with the biggest of the trade unions in the British police service or on the question of families. As a compassionate woman herself, will the Minister tell us whether she believes that there should be a change in the law that would enable the families of people involved in and convicted of rioting offences to be evicted from their homes—yes or no?

[Baroness Hanham]

My Lords, I cannot possibly pre-empt consultation.

[Noble Lords]

Oh!

[Baroness Hanham]

Noble Lords may not like my answers, but I shall give my answers. It is not up to me to decide this matter at present. There is a consultation on whether the law around anti-social behaviour and criminality in social housing, and when people can be evicted, can or should be extended in the circumstances that we have seen in this country. I do not understand how much clearer I can be. That is the third time I have said it.

[Lord Hamilton of Epsom]

My Lords, surely we are talking here about parental responsibility. I do not think that anybody in this House can feel that parents should not be responsible for their children, particularly when they are involved in riots.

[Baroness Hanham]

My Lords, clearly, the answer to that is yes. It is also clear that a number of the parents of those who were involved in the riots did not know where their children were at the time.

[Baroness O'Loan]

My Lords, if a member of a family has allegedly committed some rioting offence and the remaining members of that family are completely uninvolved in their activities, and if they are evicted from their home and thereby lose what may be the only security they have, is it not possible that other members of the family may be driven into worse conditions and ultimately into crime?

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Hanham]

My Lords, there are always outcomes when people behave badly. There is also a responsibility within families. We have seen awful riots. People were made homeless as a result of them. There is a responsibility within families to know what their members are doing on the basis that what they do may have an impact on their family.