text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Housing and Planning Bill - Clause 72 - Vacant High Value Local Authority Housing - Local Retention of Funds for Social Housing
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  @ MP voted aye not to require the Secretary of State to consider applications from councils to fund new social housing from the proceeds of selling off vacant high value housing and not to require the amounts retained by local councils to be sufficient to fund at least one replacement affordable home.
  @ MP voted no to require the Secretary of State to consider applications from councils to fund new social housing from the proceeds of selling off vacant high value housing and to require the amounts retained by local councils to be sufficient to fund at least one replacement affordable home.
  
  
  The majority of MPs voted not to require the Secretary of State to consider applications from councils to fund new social housing from the proceeds of selling off vacant high value housing. The majority of MPs voted against requiring any sum a local council is permitted to retain in relation to charges on high value vacant council houses be sufficient to fund at least one new affordable home outside Greater London and two within it. 
  
  MPs were considering the Housing and Planning Bill[1].
  
  The motion supported by the majority of MPs in this vote was:
  
  :That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 47E
  
  Amendment 47E[2] stated:
  
  :Page 31, line 42, at end insertâ
  â() The  amount  of  any  reduction  agreed  under  subsection  (1)  must  be sufficient to fund the provision of at least one new affordable home outside Greater London, and at least two new affordable homes in Greater London, for each old dwelling.
  :( )Where the local housing authority can demonstrate, whether by reference to its local housing plan or otherwise, that there is a particular need in its area  for  social  rented  housing,  the Secretary  of  State,  as  part  of  any agreement  under  subsection  (1),  must  consider any  application  from  the authority  to  fund  the  provision  of a new  dwelling  to  be let  as  social housing, in respect of each old dwelling.â
  
  
  
  
  Had the amendments not been rejected they would have added subclauses to clause 72 of the Bill[3] titled ''Reduction of payment by agreement''. The clause related to a requirement for local councils to pay central Government the value of any high value council homes which are likely to become vacant during the year. Provisions in the Bill require councils to consider selling such high value council homes.  The rejected amendment sought to require some of the funds to be retained for the provision of social housing locally where need is demonstrated.
  
  Without the rejected amendment the option to allow such funds to be retained locally was available, but there is nothing in the Bill requiring the Secretary of State use it.
  
  
  ===
  
  
  * [1] [http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2015-16/housingandplanning.html Parliament's webpage on the Housing and Planning Bill]
  * [2] [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2015-2016/0123/amend/ml123-I.pdf  Lords amendments to the Housing and Planning Bill containing amendments 47E]
  * [3] [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2015-2016/0087/lbill_2015-20160087_en_5.htm#pt4-ch2-pb1-l1g72 Clause 72 of the Housing and Planning Bill as at the time of the vote]
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  