Baroness Harris of Richmond
Main Page: Baroness Harris of Richmond (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)(9 years, 3 months ago)
Grand CommitteeMy Lords, there are two points here. First, it is imperative to protect tenants from unscrupulous landlords who will not meet their obligations. Secondly, in the theoretical situation set out by my noble friend, if on day two—2 October—a landlord was in breach, that landlord would have 28 days to comply, so the date we are talking about is more like six weeks from now.
The Question is that this Motion be agreed to. As many as are of that opinion will say “Content”; to the contrary, “Not content”.
My Lords, surely if one noble Lord says “Not content”, the statutory instrument just reverts to the main Chamber, where it is open to a substantive debate if the noble Lord puts down a Motion. That is my understanding.
That is exactly what will happen and I hope that the noble Lord is satisfied with that. As he knows, we do not vote in Grand Committee.
For clarification, does that mean that this will go back to the Chamber?
As far as I understand it, that is the case—I have seen this happen before—although I do not wish to pre-empt the view of the Chairman. The Grand Committee cannot approve a Motion if a noble Lord decides that he is not prepared to say “Content”. It simply reverts to the Chamber and will probably appear on the Order Paper within a short time. My understanding is that it is open for debate on the Floor of the House.
That is exactly what happens. I am grateful to the noble Lord. It will go back to the Government and they will decide when and if they take the regulations to the Floor of the House.
That presumably means that unless they come back this week or next week, because Parliament does not come back until 12 October, it would be impossible for this statutory instrument to be brought into effect on 1 October.