| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Stunell: Does the hon. Gentleman accept that building societies already make loans conditional on a
variety of improvements that the purchaser has to undertake? Does he accept that the building society has a regulatory function when it releases the money and, on consideration, would he agree so enthusiastically with the hon. Member for Blaydon (Mr. McWilliam) that the majority of building inspectors have no professional skills and owe their appointment to patronage--political or otherwise? I was involved in the inspection side of the building industry for many years--not as a buildings inspector--and I feel that the hon. Gentleman does serious injustice to the regulatory system, although that is not to say that it could not be improved.
Mr. Bermingham: I thank the hon. Gentleman for that intervention. Had he been listening carefully, he would have noticed that I did not reply to my hon. Friend's intervention as I was not advancing down that line of argument. Of course, many people who work in the inspectorate are honest, hard-working and underpaid. However, there are not enough of them and the regulations are not tight enough. As we have learnt in all walks of life, if we pay people very poorly, we do not always get the best results.
I agree with the hon. Member for Hazel Grove that building societies regularly lay down conditions for granting a mortgage. In my time as a solicitor, I have seen many documents saying that a loan will not be advanced until certain works are carried out and that a certificate signed by the builder has to be produced to that effect. Of course, that does not guarantee the quality of the work.
I do not want to be too cynical, as one should not be too cynical about life, although I have lived it for a long time, but I have heard of work not being up to the required standard, as it was simply a quick way of getting the money. My hon. Friend the Member for Eltham (Mr. Efford) will agree with me about that. In the wonderful world of perfection, everything gets done; in reality, little of anything gets done.
Mr. Burnett:
Is the hon. Gentleman aware of any significant building societies or banks that instruct unqualified surveyors?
Mr. Bermingham:
Regrettably, the answer is yes, because a building society instructs a firm of surveyors and that firm decides who to send along. That is the problem. Although a firm of surveyors may have qualified staff--I speak with some knowledge, having once lectured surveyors on contract law--they may well send an articled clerk. The hon. Member for Portsmouth, South (Mr. Hancock) nods sagely and wisely in agreement. The problem arises when they send the office junior.
Mr. Clive Efford (Eltham):
I confirm to my hon. Friend that I had a survey undertaken by someone who was not qualified. I am sure that my hon. Friend is aware that the Bill relates to surveys undertaken when a house is purchased. What are his views on the role of building control officers in that process?
Mr. Bermingham:
They come in earlier when the house is built, when work is carried out or extensions added. In that case, there is certification of the quality of the work. Subsequently, a surveyor viewing the property will have from the vendor the relevant certificate stating that the property had been built or extended to the
I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister is listening--I mean that in the kindest possible way--and that when she comes to review building regulation she will take on board the fact that it is essential to address the issue of building certification so that there can be historical certification and so that a building coming on to the market 10 years from now, having been built in 2001, will be certified as having been built to the requisite high standards that I seek in the building industry and that no British Government this century have sought to achieve.
There has always been the laid-back approach of saying, "This is how we've always done it." It is not good enough compared with the system in Scandinavia and other parts of the world where it is appreciated that if one builds to high standards initially, one creates a dwelling or unit that will last a long time and will be energy efficient.
If properties are not energy efficient, there is not just heat loss, but all sorts of other problems. For example, properties have a very short life. The Minister will no doubt agree with me about that. In Merseyside, I am fed up with seeing houses boarded up when they were built only 20 or 30 years ago. They were not built to the old Parker-Morris standards, which were good, but to far lower standards and, as a result, their life expectancy is far shorter and there is great deterioration, although I do not know what that has to do with the Bill. I was probably stepping outside its remit and I apologise, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am on a hobby horse that I get a chance to ride only every three or four years.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
Order. I remind the hon. Gentleman that other hon. Members are seeking to ride hobby horses within the provisions of the Bill.
Mr. Bermingham:
This is probably the longest speech that I have made in 15 years, and I have nearly finished. I thank the hon. Member for Torridge and West Devon for allowing me to string together all my complaints about the building industry and, of course, my praise for the makers of building materials, many of whom are in my constituency.
Returning briefly to the Bill, I will support it, but I ask the hon. Member for Torridge and West Devon to look again at the meaning of the words "mortgage lender" because it also encompasses private trusts and others. Will he also think again about the three-year limitation period if a building is less than three years old? I do not anticipate that the Minister will produce the regulations requiring decent building industry standards within the next three years. Therefore, I should like every house to be subject to an energy audit whenever it changes hands. Will he consider adding to his Bill some definition of the standard and qualifications required of the surveyor who performs the survey that leads to the advice?
Clause 1 (3) states:
Mrs. Linda Gilroy (Plymouth, Sutton):
I am not quite sure whether I am about to indulge in riding a hobby-horse or eating apple pie and clotted cream--both of which activities I suspect the constituents of the hon. Member for Torridge and West Devon (Mr. Burnett), my constituents and those in neighbouring Cornwall would probably approve of greatly.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Torridge and West Devon on introducing his Bill. As a founder member of the Plymouth energy advice centre and of the west country energy action trust, it would be nice to think that the good and effective work that those organisations have done in the past four to five years to inform, encourage and support the citizens of Plymouth and Devon and Cornwall may have been instrumental in adding to the hon. Gentleman's already significant awareness of these issues. Perhaps it has even played a small part in his decision to introduce his Bill.
Hon. Members on both sides of the House may be interested to calculate how many of their constituents might benefit from the Bill's proposals. I understand--from calculations made for me by the Plymouth energy advice centre, which must be similar to calculations made in other constituencies--that about 900 new mortgages are taken out annually in the Plymouth, Sutton constituency. Approximately 270 of the homes bought will be newly or recently built and meet the higher energy-efficiency levels required by more recent building regulations, so perhaps 650--involving about 750 people--could benefit from the Bill's provisions each year. In the life of this Parliament, about 9,000 people could live in households that benefit from the type of information required by the Bill.
If we apply the 60 per cent. rule that has been suggested by the Association for the Conservation of Energy and Which?, approximately 6,000 people in my constituency live in households in which action might be taken as a result of advice and benefit from the savings.
The experience of the Plymouth energy advice centre is that people are most likely to follow through advice when they are moving into a new home--partly because it is possible to negotiate on and spread the cost of implementing measures, possibly by using the mortgage. Such a possibility is one of the great values of the Bill. It is true also that all my constituents--all 70,666 of them--would benefit from the emissions reductions that would follow from energy conservation.
I also congratulate the hon. Member for Torridge and West Devon on his work--with the able support of that worthwhile organisation, the Association for the Conservation of Energy--since the publication of his Bill. Together, they seem to have persuaded the Council of Mortgage Lenders to make a more positive appraisal of the Bill's pros and cons--as demonstrated in its most recent briefing this week.
The council must, of course, have regard to the cost of the service to its institutions, customers and members, but just as all my constituents stand to gain from the contribution that the Bill can make to reducing emissions, so, too, will the council and its members and their families, shareholders and customers. Moreover, if we add in the value in extra jobs--which the Association for the Conservation of Energy has calculated as about 500 jobs a year and 5,000 over a 10-year period--we have a win-win-win situation in reduced fuel bills, reduced harmful emissions and reduced unemployment. This is a veritable have-your-cake-and-eat-it measure.
Many of today's younger generation have a far better regard for, and intellectual appreciation of, the value of and threats to our environment. As someone who first became aware of the need to consider our environment in the 1960s on reading Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring", I applaud that. It bodes well for our future and for the interest in, and support for, the Bill. I think that we can confidently expect new generations of householders to take advantage of the information that the Bill will bring to their attention.
It is encouraging that so many hon. Members on both sides of the House have attempted to draw attention to many of the other measures that the Government are promoting--and to other measures--that can help us to reduce home energy use. The Energy Conservation (Housing) Bill, promoted by my hon. Friend the Member for Eltham (Mr. Efford), has been mentioned. Other Bills on today's Order Paper--including my Bill, the Warm Homes and Energy Conservation (Fifteen Year Programme) Bill--also deal with the importance of energy in our lives.
By introducing targets for 500,000 homes to be provided with a comprehensive package of home insulation and other energy efficiency improvements, my Bill would address many of the other issues for which hon. Members have expressed their support. It would effectively ensure that something was done about the 8 million homes that are lacking and unable to afford warmth, and it focuses particularly on people in poverty. The Bill introduced by the hon. Member for Torridge and West Devon would also undoubtedly be the vehicle for giving people access to good quality information on which they can take sensible action.
"For the purposes of this section measures which are applicable to the dwelling concerned and where the cost of installation will be repaid through energy savings or other benefits within a reasonable period of time shall constitute practicable means".
Perhaps the Bill should not only refer to the nature of the proposed improvements, but include a set of specifications for the improvements required and a practical way in which the costs could be computed.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |