Alison Seabeck MP raises concerns about the impact of proposed changes to the Land Registry in Plymouth

On Tuesday Alison Seabeck, MP for Plymouth Moor View, spoke in a Westminster Hall debate following Government Ministers announcing plans to launch a consultation on ending the Land Registry’s status as a trading fund. The consultation made two key recommendations: that HM Land Registry be separated into an office of the chief land registrar and a service delivery arm; and that the service delivery arm be transferred out of the civil service and either become a Government-owned company—a GovCo—or a private or quasi-private company.

The debate allowed Ms Seabeck to express concerns from constituents and lobbying organisations about some of the potential negative knock-on impacts that these proposed changes could have. One key concern is that contracting out the service delivery arm could lead to full privatisation further down the line. Another issue is that whilst the Government is consulting on these proposals, the full details of the changes are not clear and have not been fully disclosed. It therefore makes it very difficult for organisations and groups to effectively contribute.

Speaking in the debate Ms Seabeck said: “At the moment, we do not have clarity—indeed, there is quite a lot of confusion out there. It is partly due to the compressed nature of the consultation, but there are also issues involving Ministers’ approval for the Land Registry board to go ahead with a target operating model, which could lead to a significant rationalisation or downsizing of the organisation. However, we do not know what is in the TOM (Target Operating Model), as it is not public. It is difficult for people to make a submission to a consultation when the ground rules are not properly known and available. We could be saying that we want to do X, when in fact, according to suggestions and proposals in the TOM, Y would be a far more sensible route. The information is not available for people to respond intelligently to the consultation.”

Ms Seabeck also raised concerns about the impact that privatisation of the Land Registry, and indeed other Government run services, could have on the local economy in Plymouth, as it is a City so reliant on the public sector for employment.

She went on to say: “Let us look at the implications of drastic change. Is the Minister aware that a decision to remove posts from cities such as Plymouth will pose problems? Plymouth is still heavily dependent on the public sector. The Government have the view that if they remove public sector jobs, they will be backfilled by the private sector, but a recent Centre for Cities report flagged up the fact that Plymouth is probably in a slightly different situation. Our peripherality makes it difficult for us to attract new business"

“Some 650 jobs sit in our Land Registry; there is a slight difference—about 50 full-time equivalents—between the figures provided on the ground to me and the figures in a parliamentary answer. Those jobs are well paid. They contribute to our economy significantly. More importantly, we have about 100 highly skilled IT people there. That would be a loss to the city, so I hope that the full socio-economic impact of any change, downsizing or moving of offices around the country would be seriously considered.”