The Rating (Property in Common Occupation) and Council Tax (Empty Dwellings) Bill

The Second Reading in the House of Lords took place on Monday afternoon. I briefed the Earl of Lytton (crossbencher) beforehand. He spoke for about fifteen minutes, and both he and the Minister (Lord Bourne) commended IRRV for its help.

Most of the valuation issues were resolved by others in discussion prior to the debate and so we were left, largely with the revenues implications and the problems of implementation, which, themselves, are valuation orientated. 

Lord Lytton raised, in particular, the backtracking of the government on its original promise to reimburse billing authorities their losses on repayment: he pointed out that councils have not been accumulating "shedloads" of money "against the possibility of an enforced repayment, and called on the government to recognise the difficulties of local authorities. At the moment, though, it seems (to me, at least) that the only way to a refund from the government is likely to be through s31 Local Government Act 2003. 

In making this point, he was echoed by several other peers, especially Lord Shipley, Lady Pinnock and the Earl of Listowel. They decried the diminution in local services, mentioning among other things children's services (statutory and non-statutory) the impact on rate retention inputs and the mention by the Governor of the Bank of England to the Treasury Select Committee, of complaints about the rating system.

In relation to the proposed extended Council Tax premium there was widespread support, subject to the inclusion of appropriate safeguarding exceptions. Lord Lytton pointed out that the Institute had advised him that no evidence has been produced as yet to demonstrate why the premium should become chargeable and at what stage it should arise. On this I hope we can get some further information before the Bill gets to committee.

It was also suggested that to allow local authorities once more to build houses and to retain 100% of capital receipts from right to buy sales will help to ease the housing shortage. The question was also asked as to why housing management orders are said to not work.

On the procedural side, we have the draft regulations for discussion until 13th July. Ratepayers will be allowed to reopen the 2010 rating lists on the ground only that the splits created by the VOA following the Mazars decision in effect contravened the provision of the new Act, which has retrospective provisions. 

Check Challenge Appeal ("CCA") was mentioned, though only in passing as that day was not the right one to raise such matters. Nevertheless, the Minister agreed with Lord Lytton that the discussions with IRRV and others on resolving what the Minister has previously recognised as "issues" will continue. We therefore have something of an open door on this. Lord Lytton also told the Minister that the “bulk” operators, whose activities gave rise to the introduction of CCA in the first place, have developed a new “wheeze" to gain fees from ratepayers, without concluding an appeal, thereby bypassing the labyrinth of CCA. He has undertaken to pass this information to the Minister, who was visibly appreciative. 

The Bill, which was given a Second Reading, unopposed, will now to go to a Committee of the Whole House and it is clear that there will be more work for us all to do. I am ready to continue with this.

The whole debate took just over an hour and it is available to be seen on Parliament TV for 4th June.