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 Community Partnerships presentation will follow as an addendum.

Several advance questions on this item had been submitted prior to the meeting. The advance questions and their responses can be viewed here:

Document Advance Questions and Answers OS 19 January 2023 | Reigate and Banstead Borough Council (moderngov.co.uk)

The Executive Member for Housing & Support invited Members to ask questions on the portfolio briefing provided in the agenda pack. In response, the following clarifications were provided:

Housing & Support

·         Temporary accommodation: the authority had between 120 and 126 self-contained, temporary accommodation properties. Some are owned by the authority whilst others are owned by Raven and Accent. Members were advised that the two properties under offer to provide emergency and temporary accommodation were different from that previously purchased and would take less time to make available for use. Whereas the previous property had been a House of Multiple Occupation which had required work to make it suitable for living, these were family homes which only needed minor works. The number of houses on which offers had been accepted had increased from two to four since the agenda had been published.

·         Housing Register: there were a lot of reasons why those who apply may not be accepted onto the Housing Register. Where there was no eligibility but there was a threat of homelessness, tailored information was provided on the housing options available.

·         Homelessness Funding: one of the problems faced was that funding was year-on-year, meaning a lack of certainty for the Council. However, it was reported that the Homeless Prevention Grant had been confirmed for the next two financial years giving some security for workstreams. Additionally, it was noted that homelessness remained an area that still attracted funding, which had increased during Covid and was expected to continue. The Financial Sustainability Programme picked-up the risks associated with the funding and had monitoring in place. The homelessness funding available through the revenue budget and grants was sufficient to cover the extra Bed & Breakfast provision and staff costs resulting from the Homelessness Reduction Act. However, this was predicated on levels of homelessness not increasing. The risk of any potential increase was monitored and reported quarterly.

·         Asylum seekers: it was reported that there was a significant concentration of asylum seekers, both temporary and long term, with some awaiting their asylum decisions within the borough. This was putting pressure on the local infrastructure. This included GP space and capacity, public health prevention, mental health support and school places. Housing was working very closely with partners including those in health, public health, and children’s services. Concerns are continually raised with accommodation providers and the Home Office. Some success had been achieved with a recent meeting having been held with the Home Office where the pressures on the ground were explained and that some accommodation was not fit for purpose. Transport for asylum seekers was acknowledged as a significant challenge. The location of accommodation was far from ideal and caused challenges in terms of accessing services. It was explained that the authority had no formal role in monitoring the accommodation provided. The four hotels that were accommodating asylum seekers in the borough were directly contracted by the Home Office. However, this did not prevent the Environmental Health team being involved in ensuring accommodation standards in the usual way. It was not known if any asylum seekers housed within the borough were couples. The only information on numbers was supplied by the Home Office. Whilst it was possible that some spoke English, it was not possible to use them as interpreters due to confidentiality, safeguarding and data protection considerations.

Intervention

·         Refugee resettlement: the authority was delivering the scheme on behalf of the East Surrey cluster which additionally comprised Mole Valley and Tandridge. A Syrian cookbook, which provided support for those resettling during Covid as well as raising funds, had proved popular and was on a second print run after an initial edition of 150 copies. It was acknowledged that there were a number of Syrian refugees, who since 2016, had been successfully supported through the resettlement scheme such that they were now living without support from the authority. It would be possible to provide precise numbers after the meeting. Whilst there were approximately 30 out of 297 Ukrainian guests in private rented accommodation, the majority were still accommodated with their original sponsors. Some guests had needed to move into alternative accommodation. Arrangements were subject to continual change including through the rematch system. 

·         Family Support Programme: wait times had increased from four to six weeks for support through the programme. This was due to the complexity of the issues facing families. This work was being delivered on behalf of three authorities with the service provided detailed in Memoranda of Understanding and Service Level Agreements. These were regularly reviewed by colleagues in Commissioning with it being agreed that the service provided was to the expected standard. The increased complexity for families was being reported with work ongoing with partners to overcome the issues faced.

·         Money Support: it was explained how the authority worked closely with local and national charities to provide frontline prevention help, to help maximise income and to make the most of money through budgeting. It was acknowledged that the authority was not a debt management specialist and always referred on.

Leisure & Culture

The Executive Member for Leisure & Culture provided an update on her portfolio in addition to the information provided in the agenda pack.

It was explained that leisure and culture had positive benefits for physical and mental health. Making culture and wellbeing services accessible to and able to meet the needs of communities and visitors was part of the Council’s five-year plan. This had become even more important with the energy crisis and rising costs-of-living.

Whilst the pandemic had created a lot of disruption to the delivery of leisure and culture services, GLL, the operator of the authority’s three leisure centres, had recently reported membership growth. The authority had supported GLL during the pandemic by freezing the monthly management free, but this would now be reviewed. GLL had fulfilled the motion passed by Surrey County Council to offer a full membership to care leavers and had made its own offer to Ukrainian refugees. In the face of increasing costs, in order to maintain the offer of a good service across all three sites, the number of pool operating hours had been reduced.

There had also been an increase in leisure development activities through R&B Active. It was the Council’s aim to help young residents by maintaining a healthy weight, learn new skills, improve self-confidence, enjoy the outdoors, develop social skills and improve physical and mental health. They had benefitted in 2022 though school holiday activities, the Surrey Youth Games etc.

The Harlequin saw a slow return to the theatre and cinema at the beginning of 2022. However, this had picked-up as with live shows and outdoor theatre. The pantomime Cinderella had staged 43 shows and welcomed around 17,000 theatre goers, generating nearly £250K with strong secondary food and beverage sales. In addition to the regular calendar of events, The Harlequin hosted the Jubilee celebrations and other civic events including the proclamation. It was planned to publish the authority’s new Leisure and Culture Strategy within the next few months. This aimed to achieve the ambition of reducing funding for The Harlequin from £380K per annum down to £280K in 2022/23 (with further savings next year) by improving visitor numbers and reach to neighbouring areas as well as increasing participation in leisure services.

The Executive Member for Leisure & Culture invited Members to ask questions on her portfolio. In response, the following clarifications were provided:

·         GLL: it was confirmed that the provider offered parity in its pricing across all three of its sites. In response to concerns that the online booking system retained since the pandemic was excluding groups of users including those who were older and those with special needs, it was emphasised how hard the authority worked with GLL to ensure the offer met needs. Where it fell short, the authority would press hard. Members were asked to bring their specific concerns directly to officers. Whilst GLL had moved to a much more technical solution for activity bookings there were always non-digital solutions for those who found them difficult.

The offer for care leavers was a full membership. A different approach was needed to offer membership to those in care. This was more complicated but was being addressed. Demographic data was expected from GLL. This would allow a better understanding of which groups had seen a decline in usage.

The contract with GLL was up for renewal in 2024. The current contract with GLL gave it the ability to determine prices whist the authority benefitted from a fixed management fee. Rising energy costs had been addressed by reducing operating hours by 23% across all three sites. This had allowed a reduction in costs whilst minimising the reduction in service to residents. 

·         The Harlequin: in response to concerns expressed about the operation of The Harlequin, it was noted that the Leisure & Culture Strategy was forthcoming which would provide a framework for Leisure & Culture in the borough including the operation of The Harlequin.

It was specifically noted that The Harlequin was available for conference hire and had recently seen it host an event for 600 people over two days. The need for additional equipment to be installed into the Studio after the work done in 2019 was to make the venue suitable for live screenings and therefore to give increase scope to raise revenue. It was intended to reduce the Council’s subsidy by increasing the revenue realised. Many avenues were being explored. A costed business plan for The Harlequin would be forthcoming subsequent to the Leisure & Culture Strategy.

It was reported that income was on a trajectory to reduce the subsidy which had been endorsed by the Finance Team. The income achieved by the pantomime was yet to be finalised with the ticket revenue to be split with the provider. It was the third best take by a pantomime in the history of The Harlequin. Information on the highest grossing activities were not usually provided as this was commercially sensitive information. It could be explored how it might be possible for this to be shared with the Committee. Whilst there was a big focus on the operation of The Harlequin, the Leisure & Culture Strategy was about more than the operation of this one venue. It was noted that it had achieved some sell out events with the popularity of live music and comedy, along with the focus on attracting teenagers. Its success was demonstrated by the decline in the subsidy required. It was requested that advertising at street level be improved.

·         Reigate Priory Museum: it was explained that this was not included in the presentation as it was not within the Portfolio Holder’s brief. It would be feasible to look at how it would be best to share information about the Reigate Priory Museum with the Committee.

·         School holiday activities: these were focused on hard-to-reach areas and those who could not afford to travel elsewhere rather than seeking to spread out across all parks.

Community Partnerships

The Executive Member for Community Partnerships provided an update on the portfolio, referencing the presentation provided in the agenda pack.

The authority had three community centres at Banstead, Woodhatch and Horley which had all originally been part of the 1970’s day centre concept. This was now outdated. Originally run by a management committee, between 2016 and 2020 the Council outsourced their management to a charity. However, in 2020 the decision was taken to bring their management back in house. This happened just before the start of the first Covid lockdown. With the average age of users at that point being 82 years, the priority therefore became to keep them safe.

Transforming the three sites into modern Community Centres was approved by The Executive in July 2021 with the key aspiration to have an offer for all ages. This had to be handled sensitively so not to alienate existing users, and with the work being slowed by Covid restrictions. The intention was to step away from a one-size fits all approach because each centre needed to reflect the broader needs of its local community. A survey of 1,500 residents took place which generated huge interest and established that the top outcome desired was a place to connect. The potential to widen the offer by closer working between the centres and Community Development Teams was acknowledged. The transformational project involved renaming and rebranding the centres allowing them all to be identified as Reigate and Banstead community centres but with their own unique identities within this. Whilst the former management committees were initially sceptical each has now funded improvements.

Since autumn 2022 a series of Open Days have been offered and with heavy promotion, they have been very successful in bringing in first-time visitors of all ages. It was explained that the time was right to move to a Business-as-Usual model. Centre Managers were working on new business plans using feedback from the Open Days and experience gained from running them since the relaunch. An example of use was provided where Barclays was hiring a room to enable face-to-face banking services to still be offered in Banstead.

The Executive Member for Community Partnership invited Members to ask questions on his portfolio. In response, the following clarifications were provided. In order to keep the centres current and relevant, it was important for the service to keep challenging and questioning itself. There was a need to keep offering a variety and vibrancy of services through refreshed business plans. It was important for the centres to keep learning from each other and to avoid complacency. It was acknowledged that the team was very proactive in gaining feedback and using this to generate lots of ideas. Establishing a model that would allow work with other centres to develop satellites was supported and it was reported that some conversations were already happening.

RESOLVED to note the People Portfolio Holder updates and observations for consideration by Executive Members as set-out in the minutes.