Agenda item

To consider any questions submitted by Members of the Council, in accordance with Standing Order 4.8.11 (b).

In accordance with Standing Order 4.8.11 two questions had been submitted by the deadline date for questions set out in the Constitution.

(A)        NHDC providing Homelessness Prevention Grant Funding to Keystage     Housing

Councillor Claire Strong to Councillor Sean Prendergast (Executive Member for Housing and Environmental Health)

(B)        Local Plan Reviews

Councillor Ian Moody to Councillor Ruth Brown (Executive Member for Planning and Transport)

In the absence of Councillor Moody, Councillor David Levett asked the question.

Audio recording – 5 minutes 27 seconds

(A)  NHDC Providing Homeless Prevention Grant Funding to Keystage Housing

Councillor Claire Strong to Councillor Sean Prendergast (Executive Member for Housing and Environmental Health):

“I attended the last Cabinet meeting on Tuesday 13th December where Cabinet approved to award £150k of the Councils Homeless Prevention Grant to Keystone Housing (sic) to offset the department of work and pensions housing benefit subsidy loss as the council cannot recoup the full cost of the housing benefit. At the meeting Cllr Prendergast said that he would look at options to mitigate / reduce the loss. What ideas / options has Cllr Prendergast found and how much will this reduce the loss?”

Councillor Sean Prendergast gave a response as follows:

“One of the Council’s responsibilities is the management of Housing Benefit and subsidy loss. For costs that remain within the Local Authority this is a technical and financial challenge, for all Local Authorities and is widely recognised that the system is in need of government reform. Even though staff seek to maximise the amount of claim from the DWP, it is worth explaining that we as a Council already incur a subsidy loss where we have to place people in hotels. It appears this has cost the Council over £500k in the last two years, however after consultation with subsidy auditors we are able to use a higher rate, which will increase the amount reclaimable from the DWP and this is currently being reassessed. Thankfully, the overall cost has also been reduced slightly by the use of some government Homelessness Grants, but in terms of reducing this in general terms, and as you would expect from a Council that puts homeless prevention at the forefront of its housing objectives, the Housing Team will only ever turn to hotel use as a last resort and where possible, we aim to place people in supported and stable accommodation that provides a platform for eventual resettlement into independent accommodation.

With this in mind, the subsidy loss amount for Keystage to the end of December 2022 was around £40k. Hence the proposal to cover this DWP shortfall via the use of Homeless Prevention Grant. This will increase further to the end of March 2023, however the amount is influenced by the number of residents. You will note that subsidy loss from housing benefit claims for Keystage residents is less than those placed in hotels, and of course this has the additional benefit that residents are provided with the support service they need to help get their life back on track.

We are in regular dialogue with Keystage and I can confirm that they are looking at their corporate structure, with a view to examining the possibility of obtaining the status of a private registered social housing provider and they will be reviewing this with the regulator of social housing, which may eliminate subsidy loss going forward.”

N.B. At 19.40 Councillor Morgan Derbyshire entered the Council Chamber.

Councillor Strong asked a supplementary question:

“The question was particularly aimed at the investment that had gone to Keystage. A £200k grant was given to Keystage for providing homeless accommodation and in the report to Scrutiny it did state that there was a risk to Council investments that it might not deliver on expected benefits. I would like to know that, at the point Keystage was commissioned to provide the homeless accommodation, was it known that it was likely that there would be this subsidy loss? And if so, was this possible ongoing issue addressed in papers?”

Councillor Prendergast responded:

“Firstly, it is not unusual. As alluded to in the previous answer this is a problem a lot of Local Authorities face and it is something the government needs to tackle to ensure Local Authorities do not have to rely on grants to cover this loss. At the time Keystage took on the building we were in urgent need of this type of accommodation and to be perfectly frank we still are. It is worth explaining that Keystage are a Community Interest Company, who are experienced in providing intensive support for people with complex needs and currently deliver similar schemes in Luton and Northampton. Having spoken directly to residents myself, who are now living in the accommodation, I can tell you first hand how crucial these types of schemes are, and if we have any hope of ending homelessness crisis then we need to have these schemes.

I would invite Councillor Strong to come and visit the scheme and speak with the hardworking staff and also residents who live there, it will give a great insight to the support provided to some of the most vulnerable in our society.

We have adjusted all of our hotel claims for this financial year and therefore the subsidy loss will significantly decrease, but as I’ve said the real key is going to be with Keystage amending their corporate structure to look at becoming a registered social provider. That would all but eliminate the subsidy loss, but you can see the benefits this type of accommodation provides to our residents, who are North Herts residents.”

(B)  Local Plan Reviews

In the absence of Councillor Ian Moody, Councillor David Levett asked the following question to Councillor Ruth Brown (Executive Member for Planning and Transport).

“Now that the council has approved our local plan when does Cllr Brown expect to start the review of the plan and what is the timetable?”

Councillor Brown gave a response as follows:

“As was agreed when we adopted the Local Plan on 8 November, it commits the plan to a review by the end of this year, 2023. That does not mean the review would be completed by then, but has to start by then. There are three possible outcomes of the review; one that it remains up to date and no further action required, one that it requires a partial update and the third that it requires a comprehensive review. We’re expecting it to be the latter, but we shouldn’t prejudge the process. Detailed review and updating evidence would follow that. So there won’t be a new Plan by the end of the year, but the review will be commenced by the end of the year and we are committed to that. Officers will be scoping out the scope of that review in the second half of this year.

In the meantime our priority is to draft and adopt the Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD). You’ll notice that the Draft Developer one has gone through consultation ready for adoption and the next Cabinet on the 31 January, under Strategic Planning Matters, will be reporting on the timetable for all those SPDs.”

Councillor Levett asked a supplementary question:

“With relation to the Local Plan, there was a period where we were subject to a Judicial Review, are we now past that Review period and has there been a challenge within that period?”

Councillor Brown responded:

“Yes we have passed the Judicial Review, it was the 22 December I believe. It is not going to be Judicially Reviewed and we have had this confirmed by the Planning Inspectorate as well.”