Agenda item

The Portfolio Holder for Housing & Benefits, Cllr Fredericks, presented the report to the committee.

The Assistant Director for People Services explained this was an early pre- scrutiny review. This stage set out the process for the review, then the review would be undertaken over the coming months, culminating in a draft and then final strategy. The team would be coming back to O&S Committee to consider the review and strategy as pre scrutiny.

Cllr Cushing asked if the new strategy would vary greatly from the existing strategy and questioned the impact of LGR. The Assistant Director People Services explained the new strategy would be mindful of LGR, but it will not change for the people who needed support. There may be risks with LGR that meant that those people would have a larger area for which to be considered for housing, and constraints may be introduced, but Officers would continue to be as compassionate as possible, remain concerned about the quality of Temp. Accommodation and the need to keep people local. Cllr Fredericks said she was a member of the East of England Housing and Homelessness Delivery Group working with other councils in Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex in this respect, for ‘life after’ LGR.

Cllr Boyle asked if the Council was fully utilising different upstream services like the Early Help Hub and other initiatives. Cllr Fredericks confirmed Community Connectors actively encouraged people to come to the Council for help before they became homeless, the Early Help Hub team was identifying those who were at risk of homelessness. The Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) was also now present in the council offices for further support and cases involving bankruptcy etc.

Cllr Fletcher asked about the work to get empty homes back into use. Cllr Fredericks confirmed that officers were working very hard to contact and investigate any empty homes and to get them back into market sale or market rent but explained that it was unlikely that they could be renovated to a standard where they could be used for Temp. Accommodation as they have been unused for so long and would incur costs to renovate. 

The Chair asked if the review was tailored to the North Norfolk housing market. The Assistant Director People Services advised that the process itself was prescribed but when the data was assessed it would be localised. As far as empty homes are concerned, these would not help homelessness, and the strategy should be focussed on understanding what was needed to help that cohort as per the Council’s allocation programme. She added homelessness was higher profile for the Council than previously.

Cllr Bailey commented that it was helpful for O&S to understand geographically (at parish level) where the need was locally to help find sites. Additionally, he felt it would be helpful to hear of success stories as currently the perception was that Temp. Accommodation costs, were a short-term funding requirement and often linked to domestic abuse, and this could help educate residents and their local communities about the challenges people faced. He also asked whether previous local accommodation schemes such as Homes for Ukraine could be rolled out in wider circumstances.

The Housing Strategy and Delivery Manager advised that, as far as information on needs was concerned, this was something that Task and Finish work group had identified. She added that annual data is sent to every local parish to show local needs figures for their area, that it was needed across the district, as there was a misconception that homelessness was not something that affected their parish, when in truth it affected all areas. A ’good news story’ was a good idea and this approach was already used for promoting rural exception schemes. The Housing Strategy and Delivery Manager explained the different types of Temp Accommodation and the circumstances for when, and why, they were used and reiterated that the Council did not lose money on its Temp Accommodation. She also, confirmed that when it came to local accommodation, the model set out by Homes for Ukraine, had been considered previously and would be again in the future.

In response to Cllr Bayes question regarding communication with parishes, using heat maps as an example, Cllr Fredericks said that the Council communicated twice a year with each parish regarding the number of homeless people in their area and the contact details should they become aware of a homeless person. The Housing Options Manger added that there was data for rough sleepers but there was a reluctance to putting anything into the public domain that could identify people as the numbers were so small. The Council did provide a ‘snapshot’ once year for to the Government, but she felt that a heat map would not be a true reflection at any one time. There was a mechanism where people could report a rough sleeper which went to the team and additional communication was done through social media, the general public and the Council’s teams to highlight the help and support for rough sleepers.

The Chair asked whether it could be identified through the data which group was most in need of support, dependency or health issues for example. The Assistant Director People Services said it was about ‘sense checking’ on the data and using it wisely, bringing everything together in a review document, asking for any additional information as required, before we move into the strategy process. The Council could liaise with the parishes, through the clerks, by sharing a copy of the review encouraging them to share any changes or recommendations they had, whilst crucially keeping them informed of any issues, and providing as much information as possible, for their area.

Cllr Boyle commented that it was too early to make any specific recommendations to localise the review process to North Norfolk.

RESOLVED The Committee noted the report and agreed they had provided sufficient feedback.