To receive petitions and public questions in accordance with Standing Order 9.
Minutes:
In accordance with Standing Order 9, 2 public questions had been submitted.
The Mayor invited Jo Rust to come forward and ask the following question:
"At last full council I asked a question about the impact that Universal Credit (UC) would have on the levels of homelessness in King's Lynn. I referred specifically to supported housing. I was given assurances that as the changes to UC and supported housing wouldn't take place until 2018, there was no need for the council to take any action at all.
However, a cap to housing benefit for social housing tenants in supported and sheltered housing is going to be applied. The impact of the LHA cap on housing benefit paid to vulnerable people living in supported accommodation will be immense.
What steps are the council taking to mitigate against this and protect these people?"
Councillor Lawrence gave the following response:
"A cap on social rents is due to be introduced from April 2018 applying to tenancies signed from April 2016. The cap will limit the maximum amount of Housing Benefit that can be paid in the social rented sector to the relevant Local Housing Allowance rate applying in the private sector.
The majority of social sector tenants will be unaffected as the Local Housing Allowance rate is often higher than their rent. However social sector tenants in specialist housing services and schemes that provide extra care and support (known as Supported Exempt Accommodation) often incur much higher housing costs. Currently these costs are covered by Housing Benefit but from 2018 tenants may find that their rent and charges exceed the Local Housing Allowance rate.
The Government is currently undertaking a review of care and support including rents Supported Exempt Accommodation.
The Government has made available £870m of Discretionary Housing Payment funding over the next five years for local councils. This funding is partly to mitigate the impact of welfare reforms and assist vulnerable people and is used to top up Housing Benefit where there is a shortfall in rent. The Council already administers a Discretionary Housing Payment scheme and will continue to consider applications from any Housing Benefit customers in need of help with paying their rent.
Any Discretionary Housing Payment will be temporary and DHP doesn’t provide a sustainable funding model for supported housing. From discussions with supported housing provider partners operating at a national level it is clear that decisions relating to investment in new scheme developments are being postponed until the review has been concluded and there is clarity on the proposed changes to Housing Benefit.
The Council will follow the emerging national picture carefully whilst engaging housing support providers and the County Council now, with a sense of urgency, to understand what changes could be made to models of delivery, and what existing funding arrangements could be reviewed, to ensure that accommodation services can continue for the most vulnerable. Whilst some of the changes present a significant challenge there are opportunities to make more effective use of existing resources. Clearly in terms of planning for services - the sooner the national review is concluded the better."
By way of supplementary Ms Rust asked what action was being taken to mitigate the risks, rather than looking at the national picture.
Councillor Lawrence responded that he had made it clear in his earlier response that the issue was being taken very seriously.
The Mayor invited Sue Bruce to come forward to ask her question as follows:
"The Minutes of the pre-1974 King’s Lynn Borough Council suggest that all the council-owned land west of the former Hunstanton railway line was acquired during 1952-1955for the provision of additional allotments in North Lynn, even if not so used. Some was felt to be so necessary it was acquired for that purpose by compulsory purchase order. Should land that was originally acquired for allotment and agricultural land be developed for housing?"
Councillor Beales responded as follows:
"1) I have already answered questions on land titles in some considerable depth on an earlier occasion and in response to public questions. As before I have referred to the original conveyance.
2) Whilst it should be obvious to all that circumstances in our modern world are somewhat different to those considered and minuted over 60 years ago I can nevertheless confirm that the land in question is not in fact proposed for housing and is the site of open space, sports facilities and allotments. There are no formal covenants to that end but the land will remain in those uses.
3) A key point in answering this question is that it should always be remembered that the policy of a predecessor authority (indeed even a predecessor administration) do not bind succeeding administrations – this is an absolutely key tenet of democracy."
By way of supplementary Ms Bruce made reference to a document which had recently been added to the Council’s website relevant to the Major Housing Development and asked why this hadn’t been made available with the documents submitted as part of the planning application for comments.
Councillor Beales responded that all documents which needed to be produced for the planning application had been done so at the time. He re-iterated that throughout the process he had tried to ensure that the process had been as open as it should be and would continue to do so.
The Mayor thanked the questioners.