Agenda item - Housing Allocation Policy Review

Extract from the proceedings of the Cabinet meeting held on the 19^th April 2012 (to be circulated separately) and Report of the Strategic Director; Place together with an extract from the proceedings of the Housing Management Consultative Committee meeting held on the 19^th March 2012 (copies attached).

7.1             Councillor Wakefield introduced the report and stated that the report had resulted from concerns raised by this group of vulnerable people took account of the results of a public consultation exercise that took place between November and December last year.  It was recommended that care leavers should be awarded Band A priority for social housing following a case conference which would identify the support package required for each individual.  She noted that the council had a corporate parenting responsibility towards these people and hoped that this would enable the council to meet this responsibility.

7.2             The Leader of the Council stated that the allocation of housing in the city to care leavers who were a vulnerable group that required support was an important issue which needed to be addressed and he wished to thank the Labour & Co-operative Group for their support in this matter.

7.3             Councillor Peltzer Dunn moved an amendment on behalf of the Conservative Group which sought to amend paragraph 3.26 of the report to read, “Where a care leaver seeks to appeal an assessment decision and/or agreement cannot be reached by professional assessors, the matter is to be referred to the Strategic Director People and the Strategic Director Place for determination.”

7.4             Councillor G. Theobald formally seconded the amendment.

7.5             Councillor Robins noted that he had previously recounted his personal experience as a care leaver at the recent Housing Management Consultative Committee meeting and that he would not have managed without the support of friends, siblings and others.  Although society was somewhat different today from then, as a corporate parent the council should support care leavers and he did not see how they would be placed at an advantage to others and therefore urged all Members to support the proposed policy.

7.6             Councillor Mears stated that she wished to put the record straight and make it clear that the policy under her previous Administration had been a legal one and had not been under the threat of judicial review.  She was concerned about some of the recommendations and felt that the proposed policy raised a serious question about confidence.  She believed that there was only one Member of the Administration with housing knowledge and her administration had worked to engage and bring tenants on board with the decision-making process.  She was not against care leavers and was aware of the duty of care that the authority had, however the whole situation needed to be reviewed and the report delayed.

7.7             Councillor Barnett stated that the previous Conservative Administration had undertaken a comprehensive review of the situation only a year ago and therefore she could not understand the need for the latest policy change.  She appreciated the difficulties faced by care leavers but they were not unique to them and many people were in a similar situations and needed help.  She welcomed the proposed amendment and hoped it would be supported and noted that under the new Localism Act it was very likely that there would be a need for yet another review, so the latest one did appear to have been a waste of resources.

7.8             Councillor Marsh stated that as a corporate parent all Members needed to be responsible and to support care leavers.  The proposed changes only affected a small number of people but the impact would be significant and she felt it had been a shame that the Conservative Members on the HMCC had not been able to vote on the matter.  The Children’s Act was clear in that the child had to be placed first and accommodation was an important factor in this regard.

7.9             Councillor Randall stated that there was no hidden agenda in terms of tenants’ rights and noted that the Innovations Group was due to report to the HMCC next week on several points, including improving tenant involvement in decision-making.  He noted that the last meeting of the Corporate Parenting Board had been attended by three young people, one who had been at university, one who was currently at university and one at an academy which just showed what could be achieved with the right level of support in place.

7.10         Councillor Cox stated that he has listened carefully to the points made during the debate and remained confused as to how the process would work.  He was unsure whether all care leavers would be automatically placed under Band A or if the decision was discretionary and queried how it would be implemented if someone was a drug-user.  He noted that he had a resident with an autistic child who was placed on Band C and yet if the child’s needs were accounted for he believed they would be in Band A.

7.11         Councillor G. Theobald stated that previously there had been an element of discretion which enabled people to be placed in Band A and the proposed amendment  was aimed to enable that to happen with the two officers taking the decision together, rather than placing the responsibility on one person only.  He also felt that it was likely that the mater would have to be reviewed again as part of the requirements of the Localism Act, which meant that the recent review had been somewhat superfluous and an unnecessary use of resources.

7.12         Councillor Wakefield noted the comments and stated that a care leaver was not automatically granted Band A status, but it was an option that was available should officers feel that it was appropriate, afterall it might not be the best option available.  She was happy to accept the proposed amendment and noted that the young people faced a number of difficulties in their lives and the intention was to provide a positive experience of a tenancy.

7.13         The Mayor noted that an amendment had been moved and put it to the vote which was carried.

7.14         The Mayor noted the report as amended had been moved and put the recommendations to the vote.

7.15         RESOLVED:

(1)         That the proposals set out in paragraphs 3.22 to 3.28 in the report, as amended and also Appendix 3 to the report be approved;

(2)         That the Strategic Director, Place, be authorised to amend the Council's Housing Allocations policy to reflect the above changes; and

(3)         That the Strategic Director Place and the Strategic Director People, be authorised to take all steps necessary or incidental to the implementation of the proposals in paragraphs 3.22 to 3.28, including making appropriate arrangements for assessments, referrals and reporting to Members as suggested in paragraphs 3.14 and 3.24 of the report.