Deregulation Bill

Debate between Lord Avebury and Baroness Gardner of Parkes

Wednesday 11th February 2015 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Gardner of Parkes]

I will do so unless anyone wishes to speak.

[Lord Avebury (LD)]

My Lords, I hope that we are not going to have another speech from the noble Baroness, Lady Gardner, on Amendment 48 when she has already spoken to it.

[Baroness Gardner of Parkes]

No, I have not spoken to Amendment 48.

Poverty: Developing Countries

Debate between Lord Avebury and Baroness Gardner of Parkes

Wednesday 27th June 2012 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Gardner of Parkes]

My Lords, I think it is a very good thing that the Government are supporting—

[Lord Avebury]

My Lords—

[Baroness Gardner of Parkes]

We have not had a question from the Conservative Benches.

Localism Bill

Debate between Lord Avebury and Baroness Gardner of Parkes

Monday 5th September 2011 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Gardner of Parkes]

This is a question of whether people have a 100 per cent right to decide what is suitable. I think we have all read about the case of a family who were very unhappy in Kilburn as they considered that the shops were not smart enough and who were moved to Kensington and Chelsea, which involved a huge amount of housing benefit being paid. I consider that those people did not have the right to say that they did not like Kilburn as it was not smart enough. That was unreasonable. However, as regards Amendment 20, is it not a fact that if a local council wished to do so it could use these criteria as part of its own flexible criteria and would not need to have that enshrined in the law? I very much support the flexibility in the Bill. It is unreasonable to tie councils in this regard. However, if you do not like what your council is doing, you can vote it out in the hope of getting a new council with a different attitude.

[Lord Avebury]

My Lords, I know that the Minister does not want to discuss the Dale Farm evictions, which are to take place in the week beginning 19 September. However, as the noble Baroness, Lady Whitaker, said, we are talking about a general instance of homelessness. She pointed out that every single Gypsy or Traveller who is encamped on an unauthorised site is ipso facto statutorily homeless and therefore the local authority has a duty to provide that person with alternative accommodation. However, in no case of which I am aware has any offer of alternative accommodation been made to a person living on an unauthorised site that would enable that person to bring themselves within the law concerning their accommodation.

As regards the definition of suitability which my noble friend has suggested in Amendment 20, people in this position are often deprived of the rights which he proposes to confer on the homeless. For example, there is a reference to,

“disruption to the education of children or young persons in the household”,

and more than 100 young children on the Dale Farm site attend the local primary school and will be dispersed across the countryside with no provision made for their education to continue. Bearing in mind that Gypsies and Travellers are the most deprived of all ethnic minorities, in terms of achievement and attendance in education, it is something of a triumph that so many of the children on this site have been persuaded to attend primary school. That is all going to be scrapped because, when they are on the roadside, it will be physically impossible and impractical for them to attend local schools—assuming that there would be a place for them to be admitted.