Agenda item

To receive a briefing from Executive Members of the People Portfolio areas of work: Housing & Support, Leisure & Culture and Community Partnerships and to consider any issues that arise.

The Committee received presentations and briefings from the three Portfolio Holders responsible for the following areas of the Council’s services: Housing & Support, Leisure & Culture and Community Partnerships.

 

Portfolio Holder for Housing & Support, Councillor Neame, gave the first presentation and overview of work over the past year and challenges to come. There had been an increase in homeless approaches but there was a high percentage of positive outcomes for homeless people. A number of government grants had been secured including a £190k grant from Homes England to support the capital build ringfenced for single homeless applicants in Lee Street. Six homes in Pitwood Park, Tadworth development were sold using Help to Buy Scheme and 11 houses to Raven Housing Trust for shared ownership. Many of the 32 flats on Cromwell Road were to be let at sub-market rents and the remainder at market rent via a RBBC wholly owned company. All this had been achieved during a difficult and unprecedented year.

 

Committee Members asked questions in the following areas:

 

Use of private sector – Members asked how many homeless households were assisted into private sector accommodation and what the proportion was in the Borough compared to using social housing. It was noted that due to the lack of social housing, the Council had to use the private rented sector and assist tenants applying for help with housing benefits and to secure deposits and rents in advance. The Head of Housing would follow-up the numbers in the private sector with a written answer. The Council placed more people in the private rental sector than the social rental sector.

 

Asylum Seekers and Refugees – Members asked for further information on the legal definitions and differences between Asylum Seekers and Refugees. The Head of Housing would provide more details in a follow-up written response.

 

Afghan refugees resettlement – Members questioned if Afghan refugees were in temporary accommodation locally while they waited for appropriate housing or if they would need to move into other areas once accommodation was found which could disrupt children’s education. Councillor Neame confirmed that until the properties were available, the Home Office was responsible for the refugees who were housed away in bridging hotels. This was an ongoing challenge. The locations were arranged by the Home Office. In response to Member questions, it was confirmed that there were no bridging hotels for Afghan refugees in Reigate and Banstead although there were three hotels providing initial accommodation in Horley and Reigate for 341 asylum seekers. There was one bridging hotel in Mole Valley and one in Tandridge (within East Surrey). It was confirmed that private rented properties were being sought so this would not necessarily affect local residents or homeless applicants.

 

Maternity health for pregnant refugees was discussed. There was a lot of pressure on health colleagues, but they were supporting all the pregnant women and looking after the general health of refugees such as providing vaccinations.

 

The work with Syrian refugees was highlighted and successes achieved such as the well-attended Syrian feasts at the Harlequin and the Syrian cookbook. Officers would look at ways to promote these events further.

 

Homelessness statistics – the numbers of homeless people were discussed. It was confirmed that these reflected initial approaches to the Council – some of which were just one phone call with little casework and others which required more work.

 

Marketfield Court, Redhill – there were 7 submarket private rented homes delivered in this development with vacancies taken by households on the housing list. This is fully private rental accommodation, and these were offered at the same rent as affordable housing. This was not subsidised by the Council as the landlord covers the costs in lieu of section 106 obligations. This was not shared ownership or market sale as it was a rental scheme.

 

Horley car park site – Members asked for a status update. It was confirmed that work was ongoing to assess the viability of the site. A business case had been written and further information would be provided once there was a viable proposal.

 

Allocations for housing – it was noted that the number of properties allocated for housing was dropping and residents were spending longer on the housing waiting list. The waiting list for social rented housing had been increasing by around 100 households each year for three consecutive years. How could the Council start to get back on track? Councillor Neame said they were working on projects with partner organisations to increase social housing in the Borough and were looking at affordable housing and Help to Buy schemes. This would provide more than one option – either social housing or rental schemes.

 

An update on the Revenue, Benefits & Fraud and Intervention work was given in the presentation slides. Members raised questions on the following service areas:

 

Discretionary housing payments – as of 31 December 2020, the Council had paid out 78% of the government funding. It was managed well so very unlikely to exceed the government funding. If there were any unused funds these will be returned to the Department for Work and Pensions.

 

Complexity of cases – the complexity of family cases continued to increase. Members asked how the offer was changing as the type of work changed. The pandemic had made cases more challenging with changing social circumstances and family need. Working intensively with families often uncovered more problems. The service was reviewing the team’s work and working closely with family centre partners to support families and working with Surrey County Council colleagues.
Refugee Resettlement – it was confirmed that the Council had made a new commitment to resettle 3 households as part of the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy. It was running the scheme for South East Surrey councils including administration for Mole Valley and Tandridge for the Afghan households to be settled in their districts.

 

Portfolio Holder for Leisure & Culture, Councillor Sachdeva, gave a presentation and overview on her service area which supports residents in improving their physical and mental health as well as providing a preventative approach to obesity and diabetes. The Borough owns three leisure centres operated by GLL under the Better brand and the contract is coming up for renewal in 2024. The closure of the leisure centres during the pandemic created an immediate loss of income and RBBC supported GLL by waiving the management fee to support with income losses. Since then membership numbers have been rising and the Council had reinstated management centre fees. Other activities in the Borough included community games and holiday activities for children and young people.

 

The Harlequin had had a challenging year, but it had secured a £107k government grant which had gone to mitigate the losses in revenue over the last 24 months due to the pandemic. The Waller studio had screened over 80 films this year and the pantomime ran 43 shows without interruption.

 

Members asked questions on the following areas:

 

Horley Leisure Centre – Members asked if the pre-Covid trial of opening up slightly earlier at 6am or 6.30am as people got back to normal work patterns could be revisited. Councillor Sachdeva confirmed that this could be discussed with GLL in future meetings and plans going forward.

 

Marketfield Way development and the Harlequin – as this new development in Redhill included a cinema, Members questioned how this would impact on the Harlequin which was seen as underused. How would this help it to break even and, in future, become profitable. Councillor Sachdeva said that the Harlequin would work with the Marketfield Way cinema operator and help Redhill to become a cultural hub. The Harlequin would not compete on showing the latest films but show classic films and children’s films, for example. The recovery plan was for the Harlequin to be self-sustainable and create revenue in other ways with new sources of income. For example, the first ever wedding reception was held earlier this year.

 

Members suggested pop music events and daytime conferences. Responses to an Advance Question on holding conferences at the venue had been emailed to Members. Councillor Sachdeva urged Members to become involved and attend events at the Harlequin to support it as a business. She was asked by O&S Chair to email the Committee to invite ideas. Information could also be publicised to Members through the weekly newsletter ReMember. The Harlequin had a marketing and promotions budget and a new staircase wrapping promoted events to improve High Street visibility; internal signs had had a refresh.

 

Publicising children’s events to schools – Councillors asked how the sports and activities for children and young people were publicised to schools. Officers said that work was ongoing with the marketing team and digital communications. They were also building up a network of key teachers to promote these activities.

 

Working with local sports clubs – Members highlighted further work that could be done with local football and sports clubs in the community such as Merstham Football Club. Executive Members encouraged Councillors to contact the Head of Wellbeing & Intervention to discuss further.

 

Leisure & Culture Strategy – Members asked about the Leisure & Culture Strategy which was being worked on to look ahead three to five years and to provide high quality services to residents. Members expressed an interest in taking part in formulating this strategy.

 

Subsidies and losses – Members asked what the level of subsidies and losses were over the last two years. This would be provided by a follow-up written answer. Plans were in place on post recovery work with the theatre to stabilise income streams and reduce the subsidy in future years.

 

The Portfolio Holder for Community Partnerships, Councillor Ashford, gave the final People Portfolio Holders presentation and update to the Committee. The presentation slides published in the agenda pack included updates on: Covid welfare calls and support, strategic partnership work (including forging links with the health services), community development, Community Centres, partnerships with the voluntary and community sector (VCS) and a community safety overview.

 

Councillor Ashford highlighted the successes of the five food clubs which had been set up by volunteers throughout the Borough with support from the Council’s Community Development Team. The food clubs are aimed at residents on low incomes as an alternative to using food banks regularly as well as reducing food waste. He also highlighted the ongoing work and new activities in the three Community Centres in the Borough which were now bright and welcoming with a steady increase in centre usage by people of all ages. Each centre was focusing on their own communities. He thanked staff across the whole of the service, many of whom had been engaged in Covid welfare work as well as their main jobs.

 

Member engagement – O&S Chair, Councillor Harrison, suggested that local Community Centre staff reach out to local councillors in their area so they can visit their local centres and find out about the changes. There was also an all-party working group that advises on the centres and these Members had had a guided tour. These Members could report back to the Committee as well.

 

Food clubs – Members praised the work of the food clubs which were very popular and appreciated by residents as well as the work to reduce food poverty.

 

Community Centres – the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Turner, said she had attended the Woodhatch and Banstead Community Centres at Christmas sessions and praised the work of the volunteers as well as the fresh food that was prepared now for meals in the centres.

 

Fuel poverty – Members asked about support for people in fuel poverty. Councillor Ashford said a pilot scheme was up and running to support those with key meters who pay the highest energy tariffs. Emergency top ups were offered last winter to those referred through partner organisations. Conversations were continuing with Surrey County Council and the utility companies to try and influence policy on the cost of prepayment meters. Partnership working with Horley Lions is helping to reduce fuel poverty for residents in Horley and the centre of the Borough.

 

Engaging with local schools – Members highlighted that local schools could identify families who need additional help. For example, one school in the north of the Borough had directed people in need to the Banstead Community Centre for support. At the Woodhatch and Horley Community Centres, groups for parents/grandparents and under fives had been set up.

 

Local plans – Members said that the older generation were delighted the community centres were back up and running but cautioned against changing them completely and advised building on already positive services. Councillor Ashford stressed that all centres worked with existing users and there was clear evidence that the community centres benefited from younger people attending events if this was managed well. Councillor Ashford explained that each centre has its own delivery plan from which new services are being developed and piloted.

 

RESOLVED – that the Committee:

 

1.    Noted the People Portfolio Holder Updates and made observations for consideration set out in the Minutes by Executive Members.