2nd opinion: I have a dream …

"Your idea is just a pipedream!" That was the response the Empty Homes Agency got at a conference early last year where we were promoting the idea of compulsory leasing of long-term empty private homes. Yet over the year the momentum behind this idea grew and grew until, at our joint conference with the Social Market Foundation in May, then housing minister Tony McNulty announced a consultation on this proposal, which is now in the public domain.

The notion originated in the London borough of Hammersmith & Fulham and it was beautifully simple. Where a good reason can't be given for keeping a property empty, the owner has turned down offers of help and the property is slipping into decline, the council should have the power to take over the management of the property to meet housing need. The council would do the necessary capital works to make the house good, and the subsequent rental income could pay for this work. Once the debts are paid, management of the house would revert to the owner.

The consultation proposes four options:

• run voluntary leasing schemes as before (in other words, change nothing)
  
• take action based on the state of the property
  
• take action based on local housing need
  
• take action where the property is in poor condition and there is local housing need.

Clearly, the first is not an option: we need additional powers for owners for whom existing voluntary methods have had no impact. Ideally, we would like to see management orders on empty homes being used with the third option, with option four as a fallback position – although option two would serve the purposes of low-demand areas seeking to use this power as part of their market renewal toolkit.

The paper also seeks views on what justifies action being taken on empty homes. We support the contention that the state of the property and the local housing need are both factors to justify action.

The consultation paper also proposes new powers of entry for local authority staff to inspect empty homes before any action being taken, which is a very positive step forward.

Another vital section concerns the financing of these new "empty homes management orders" (the term "compulsory leasing" has been rejected, but it doesn't matter what the name is, it is the powers that are important). We certainly support the rental income being used to cover the cost of the tenancies and the costs of any loans, but we would like to see the income from the abolition of the empty homes discount on council tax funding this scheme.

The final section of the paper deals with the implications of the Human Rights Act on this legislation. We believe that management orders can be justified in the public interest: empty homes devalue communities and attract crime and vandalism; in areas of high demand where there is not a clear future purpose for the property, the empty home should be brought back into use for the benefit of the community and tenants; the owner will also gain from having the property managed on their behalf and having the home returned in a greatly improved state.

This proposal is a win-win solution for all parties but it is not a certainty that it will become law. I urge you to read the consultation paper and ensure your response arrives before 22 August.