Commercial Rent (Coronavirus) Bill — House of Commons, 2022-03-23
Topic: Government Operations
Paul Stuart Scully (Conservative, Centre-right): Before I speak to the Lords amendments, I thank the shadow Ministers—the hon. Members for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra) and for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury)—for their constructive and positive engagement during the Bill’s passage through the House. I have been pleased with the support for the Bill across both Houses. The Government made several amendments in the other place to ensure that the Bill is as useful as it can be. To that end, I believe that Members across this House will support the amendments I will begin with the Lords amendments that were introduced following extensive engagement with the Welsh Government; I am grateful for their positive and thoughtful discussions about the Bill. Lords amendments 1, 3, 4, 6 to 8, 10, 15 and 17 were introduced to allow Welsh Ministers to have rightful control over devolved matters Lords amendment 1 defines Welsh and English business tenancies to allow the Bill to distinguish between business tenancies in later provisions Lords amendment 3 clarifies that the power to extend the time limit for making a reference to arbitration could be exercised separately for English or Welsh business tenancies, as well as for both Lords amendment 4 removes a definition that is redundant due to Lords amendment 6 to clause 23 Lords amendments 6 and 7 decouple the moratorium period from the period for making a reference to arbitration. They provide that the moratorium period will end six months from Royal Assent unless extended Lords amendment 8 inserts a new clause that means that the consent of Welsh Ministers would be needed to extend the moratorium period for Welsh businesses in respect of devolved matters On the power in clause 28—which was previously clause 27—to reapply the Act, Lords amendment 10 enables regulations under the clause to be made just for English or Welsh business tenancies, as well as for both. Lords amendment 15 requires the consent of Welsh Ministers to exercise the power to reapply devolved provisions in relation to Welsh business tenancies Lords amendment 17 inserts a new clause that provides that Welsh Ministers can use the power in clause 28 concurrently with the Secretary of State insofar as it relates to the reapplication, in respect of Welsh business tenancies, of devolved provisions—that is, certain moratorium provisions. Following those amendments, I am pleased to say that the Senedd has agreed a legislative consent motion, for which I thank them wholeheartedly Separately, I thank the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee for its consideration of the Bill. The Committee raised concerns about clause 28, which, as I said, was previously clause 27. The clause provides that the Act can be reapplied if there are further closure requirements due to coronavirus The Committee’s concerns were about the breadth of the power and the potential for significant alterations to be made for a reapplication. In response, Lords amendments 12 to 16 were introduced to limit the power’s breadth. As a result, the power would still allow for targeted modifications in order to accommodate new dates and make adjustments to moratorium provisions to take account of new timeframes. However, the amended power could not be used to change the operation of the arbitration process or policy I am sure that Members will agree that the Committee’s points are important and will be reassured by the appropriate limitations Lords amendment 11 ensures that the power can be used in respect of closure requirements imposed after the protected period set out in the Bill, whether that is before or after the Bill is enacted and whether or not the closure requirement has ended when regulations are made. It ensures that the power will be clear and robust for any new waves of coronavirus. Along with Lords amendment 9, it also ensures that the language of clause 27 is consistent with that of clause 4 We have continued to listen to stakeholder concerns. When the Bill was in the other place, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors gave useful feedback relating to the exercise of the arbitration bodies’ functions to remove arbitrators on the grounds provided for in the Bill. The Arbitration Act 1996 gives arbitration bodies immunity from liability in relation to the function of appointing arbitrators; arbitration bodies were concerned that under the Bill they did not have explicit immunity from liability in relation to the function of removing them. In response, Lords amendment 18 clarifies that approved arbitration bodies have immunity from incurring liability for anything done in exercise of the function of removing arbitrators under the Bill, unless the act is shown to be committed in bad faith.