Agenda item

To receive a written report from the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Homes & Safer Communities, and to question the Cabinet Member thereon, provided any such questions are registered in accordance with the timescales and procedures set out in Standing Order 8.2.1.

Council received a written report from Councillor Simpson-Laing, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Homes and Safer Communities.

 

Councillor Simpson-Laing presented her report and requested male Councillors and Officers to sign up to the White Ribbon campaign against domestic abuse.

 

Notice had been received of six questions on the written report, submitted by Members in accordance with Standing Orders. The first four questions were put and answered as follows and Cllr Simpson-Laing undertook to provide Members with a written answer to the remaining questions.

 

(i)   From Cllr Barton

“Whilst congratulating Ian Floyd and his team for achieving a ‘5 year high’ in terms of a 98.04% rent collection rate, can the Cabinet Member outline what robust measures are to be introduced to collect the £¾ million plus which are nevertheless still outstanding, monies which rightly belong to the taxpayers of York, or is this huge amount likely to be written off?”

 

I am sure that the Director of Customer and Business Support Services, Ian Floyd,  will take the praise for the rent collection rate of the Housing revenue account but this actually falls in the remit of the director of Director of Communities and Neighbourhoods  Sally Burns.

 

I believe from the question that there is confusion between Council Tax and the Housing Revenue Account as the latter cannot be redirected into other areas of council spending. The HRA is the account where Council tenants’ rent is collected.

 

As I am sure Cllr Barton is aware rent money is not general taxation and cannot be spent on Council services, only on housing related services such as the continued Tenants Choice rolling programme, repairs, the building of new Council Homes, estate improvements, adaptations to council properties, and improving management and customer engagement

 

As my report notes Council Rent Arrears are at their lowest for 12 years. The Council has a number of sanctions for those in debt including not being able to move to another property – however this has been relaxed where tenants have been affected by the Bedroom Tax (Spare Room Subsidy) as otherwise their arrears would potential continue to increase.

 

The council’s approach to rent recovery is very much based on a preventative approach. This begins at the start of someone’s tenancy where the importance of timely rent payment is stressed. New tenants are expected to pay rent in advance and or come with their Housing Benefit application ready with evidence to support a claim.

 

The Housing Department ensures that it’s accessible at local advice sessions, along with money and employment advisers to help with maximising benefits and opportunities for employment, when residents are signing their tenancies or have a change in circumstances. I have created a pot for assisting people to downsize to reduce cost and I have ensured the use of the new build program to encourage this too. The Council also funds the Citizen Advice Bureau (CAB) debt project which helps tenants manage their debt.

 

Ultimately action will be taken against tenants who are not paying their rent but this is only done once all other avenues have been explored with tenants. Court action and eviction is very much seen as the last resort.

 

Similar to all councils the City of York Council does ‘write’ off arrears each year. Arrear ‘write offs’ take place for the following reasons:

 

·        Death of the tenant and no estate

·        Tenants being untraceable (the Council does rewrite debt back if past tenants re-appear)

·        Tenants moving in to care

 

The council initially uses internal systems and services to trace those with

rent arrears if they have vacated a property. If the debtor cannot be located

by internal means the council uses Tracing Agents and Debt collection

agencies.

 

National recovery rates for rent arrears are around 5% of the total outstanding debt due to the reasons outlined

 

For information the written version of this answer includes rent arrears ‘write offs’ for the last ten years, peaking at nearly £0.5m the year before Labour took office and falling ever since.

 

Finally, and with regard to the LGA update given at Audit and Governance recently I have asked Democracy Services to ensure that as part of the new member training programme, for May 2015, that a session is provided on the different council financial funds and their uses, those being the Capital and Revenue Fund and the Housing Revenue Account

 

Arrears ‘write offs’:

2005/06	£403,192.50
2006/07	£278,246.74
2007/08	£146,016.00
2008/09	£213,437.90
2009/10	£164,928.12
2010/11	£490,986.67
2011/12	£298,016.37
2012/13	£221,722.58
2013/14	£215,714.00
2014/15 to end Sept	£99,351.10

 

 (ii)     From Cllr Doughty

 

“The Cabinet Member reports having taken on responsibility for the Mansion House in 2012 and points to a success story in visitor numbers (6,000 in 2013/2014 from under 1,000 in 2006). Can the Cabinet Member please supply the figures for each of the years between please?”

 

In my report to Corporate and Scrutiny Management Committee
Monday, 23rd June 2014 I reported, in detail, the work going on at the Mansion House.

 

I included in that report a graph to show the increase in visitor numbers related to increased opening hours and the types of events being held. The published written version of this answer will include that graph.

 

I would also refer Cllr Doughty to the previous years report to Corporate and Scrutiny Management Committee, 13th May, 2013 in which I reported on ideas discussed with Mansion House staff about increasing visitor numbers and the use of the house.

 

Both of these reports are available on the Council website and are part of the agenda document packs for those meetings.

 

As Cllr Doughty has not had the opportunity to read the reports along with the actual number of visitors and the categories, I will explain.

 

Attendance is recorded by categories or entrance charge. The bands are Adults, Concessions, Residents, Children, York Pass and York Archaeological Trust Pass.

 

The actual total numbers for each year are:

 

2006          812

2007          700

2008          868

2009          1097

2010          2588

2011          3828

2012          4148

2013          6301

2014                    7998

 

Note the 2014 figure is for the period Jan  to Nov end

 

The General House tour is offered on Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays at the following times: 11:00am, 12:30pm and 2pm. Specialist tours for pre-booked parties or around events during the year, such as Halloween also take place.

 

Obviously there will be a reduction in visitor numbers during the latter half of 2015 and the first 6 months of 2016 if the Heritage Lottery Fund bid is

 

successful due to the need to completely close the house and remove its contents so the much needed restoration and improvement works can take place.

 

If Cllr Doughty feels that there are issues with regards to entry charges,

and attendance, I have included these in the written version of this answer.

However I will put on record that these will be reviewed when the House has been refurbished to the extensive increased offer that will be available

 

Visitor Numbers
	2014	2013		2012	2011	2010	2009		2008		2007	2006
Adults	4475	1802		1257	1666	800	186		213		185	255
Concession	1303	1252		1091	822	890	343		456		316	355
Residents	1493	2407		934	851	484	140		62		161	127
Children	560	593		640	284	249	6		29		37	58
York pass	147	161		126	197	140	91		103		0	0
YAT pass and hidden secrets	18	86		100	8	25	0		0		0	0
Hudson	2
total	7998	6301		4148	3828	2588	1097		868		700	812

 

The current charges for the Open House tours are;

 

Adults £5

Concessions £4

Children under 16 and York residents are free

 

Private booked tours vary in price depending on requirements of the groups from

House tours £6.00 per person

Silver Tour-£12.00 per person – Refreshments are included

Connoisseur Tour -£15:00 per person – Refreshments are included

 

(iii)   From Cllr Ayre

 

“How many different viewers accessed the video webcasts during the last month for which figures are available?”

 

I was very pleased that this Labour Council took the lead in webcasting and audio recording after the Labour group first suggested webcasting in 2007  - at that time it was rejected by the then Liberal Democrat  controlled Council as not a sensible use of council expenditure.

 

I am pleased then that major decision meetings, from next week, will be either webcasted or audio recorded so that a true and accurate record of what has been said can be viewed and listened to and not distorted by inaccurate or malicious reporting. I would also add that for once I will go on record praising the Minister, Eric Pickles MP, for the suggestion that web and audio recording take place so that accurate records of meetings exist.

 

Whilst the figures in my report are correct they were only ‘in time’ when the report was written as the figures were based on public meetings which took place between 1^st June 2014 and 12^th November 2014.

 

Up to date statistics for on-demand viewing figures for all our webcasts viewed from the 1^st June to the 9^th December are:

 

·                    Total views: 1,325

·                    Estimated minutes watched: 9,515 (159 hrs)

 

Viewing figures since webcasting was introduced in June 2013 are:

 

·                    Total views: 15,553

·                    Estimated minutes watched: 96,716 (1,612 hrs)

In addition, we have had 1,564 listens to audio recordings of City of York Council committee meetings in a similar period.

 

As I mentioned in my report the Council is unable to identify unique views, only the overall number of views and as mentioned, these figures do not include live viewing figures. This is because the current system would not be able to give accurate figures of combined viewings as viewers can view webcasts via our website or directly on YouTube.

 

Speaking to the Officer responsible for the technology, that the Council uses, we do not have the ability to record actual individuals as this would require the Council tracking IP addresses and our current set up does not allow us to do this.

 

Undertaking some research I believe one possible way to obtain such numbers would be to set up a subscriber service and I have asked officers to investigate the technology and cost around this.

 

If Cllr Ayre is worried about how many actual people are watching and how we can increase viewers it is also possible that the Council could look to increased viewership by either using Title or Thumbnail Optimisation so that our ‘recordings’ appear higher up prioritisation lists when being searched. Again this would involve time and cost.

 

Now you would hope that each video was watched on average by 86 different viewers – It would be unusual for someone to watch more than once - but no doubt be some will just as many people watch YouTube postings numerous times.

 

 

 

 

        (v)     From Cllr Doughty

 

“In her report, the Cabinet Member speaks of her request for a full review of the Council Constitution in 2012 and work still being underway. I agree it is good that reviews are undertaken as this holds the key to citizens as well as Councillors being able to hold the Council to account. Can the Cabinet Member demonstrate how she has included citizens in this process(or intends to)?”

 

I would like to thank Cllr Doughty for asking a similar question to that of Cllr Ayre’s at July’s Council meeting, but I am happy to answer again if he missed the answer then.

 

The Audit and Governance Committee is the Committee that has the responsibility of bringing forward proposals for amendments to the Constitution. I am sure that the previous questioner on this matter, who is now the Chair of Audit and Governance will ensure that, and if legally appropriate, the public will be able to make any contributions on the recommendations brought to Council through the public participation system.

 

As I answered in July the Audit and Governance Committee held a public engagement event in May at which members of the public were invited to express views as to how the Council operates and a Scrutiny review has taken place which has amongst its objectives:

 

·        Examine national best practice by other Local Authorities currently achieving excellence level in their democratic traditions.

·        Identify optimum methods for raising awareness of the democratic process amongst York’s Communities of Identity.

 

I am sure that the Chair of the Task Group would have received contributions from interested members of the public.

 

Of course it should be remembered that the Constitution has to reflect complex statutory provisions including those in the Local Government Acts of 1972 and 2000, the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 and the Localism Act 2011 as well as a myriad of other Acts, Statutory Instruments statutory guidance and case law.

 

The Council has an expert legal team that undertake this work and they also work in partnership with colleagues in the region to ensure that our Constitution is legally compliant. Members of the public can send in suggestions to the legal team and these will be considered, but due to legal ‘process’ changes that can be made are limited.”

(iv)   From Cllr Doughty

 

“The Cabinet Member informs us £115,000of borrowed money has been committed from the Delivery and Innovation Fund towards an Anti-Social Behaviour ‘hub’. Can she confirm the cumulative cost of borrowing for this over the next 20 years please?”

 

As I am sure Cllr Doughty and Council are aware the ASB Hub was launched in May 2014 and is a partnership between North Yorkshire Police and the Council.

 

The ‘Hub’ has the backing of the Conservative Police and Crime Commissioner Julia Mulligan who has said:

 

“Anti-social behaviour is one of the greatest concerns of residents across North Yorkshire and can have a massive impact on people’s quality of life. That’s why, on coming to office, I championed the establishment of an Anti-Social Behaviour hub, so that the police, local authority officers and other partner agencies could work collaboratively and make a real and tangible difference to communities.”

 

The establishment of an anti-social behaviour hub in York is an innovative approach to transforming the way both organisations work together to tackle anti-social behaviour (ASB) and nuisance, including environmental issues such as flytipping and graffiti and involves the pooling of resources – especially important when both the Council and police force budget are being cut year on year.  This brings together the powers and expertise to make communities across the city feel and be safer

 

The aim of the hub is to ensure a more efficient, timely and appropriate response to anti-social behaviour within York’s communities by deploying members of a single team of frontline enforcement officers from both organisations. 

 

The £115k that Cllr Doughty mentions has been supported by two awards from the Home Office funded Police Innovation Fund, now totalling £382k, over both 14/15 & 15/16. The local allocation has been made by the Conservative Police and Crime Commissioner. The fund’s aim is to incentivise collaboration, support improved digital working and innovative approaches to improve policing and to drive efficiency.

 

In respect of the Delivery and Innovation Fund, the Delivery and Innovation Fund is a revenue budget, so the cost of borrowing is nil! The funding was approved as part of the annual budget, as a growth item, and was established to assist in taking forward innovative projects and to support the delivery of major priority areas of work.

 

(v)    From Cllr Doughty

 

“The Cabinet Member (in page 78 of the Agenda) points to work being carried out by Council staff to stop residents becoming homeless, noble aims ofcourse. Of the numbers she quotes, can she please advise how many solely relate to the three areas she claims in her opening statement of the section by breakdown with more detail?”

 

Whilst the statement and the section on homelessness are not actually linked my statement is a matter of fact. This is based on fact and evidence from leading homeless experts.

 

Shelter report that:

 

Sadly, many people view homelessness as the result of personal failings, and consider that if the economy is going well, there is no excuse for not getting on.

 

But this belief is belied by the facts, which show that homelessness is caused by a complex interplay between a person's individual circumstances and adverse 'structural' factors outside their direct control.

 

Shelter states that causes of homelessness include one or more of the following:

•  debts - especially mortgage or rent arrears, poor physical and mental health and  relationship breakdown

• unemployment
• poverty
• a lack of affordable housing
• housing policies
• the structure and administration of housing benefit

 

This list is backed up by the Salvation Army who report that Homelessness can be caused by:

• poverty
• unemployment
• lack of affordable housing
• poor physical or mental health
• drug and alcohol abuse
• gambling
• family and relationship breakdown
• domestic violence
• physical and/or sexual abuse.

 

All these factors can cause a person to become homeless. They can also be one of the reasons why a person remains homeless.

 

In the written version of this answer I have attached two tables. One shows actual reasons for homelessness and the other measures that were taken to prevent possible homelessness – that is the causes that may have caused it to happen.

 

With regard to York actual homelessness includes relationship breakdown -, which can often be a result of debt, unemployment and health issues - actual debt and end of tenancies in the Private Rented Sector. Of those who were prevented from becoming homeless the top two categories were ‘debt’ and Housing Benefit problems.

 

The reason for such low homeless figures in York is the excellent intervention service we provide and the work we undertake with our partners across the city.

 

I include in the written version of this answer tables which show overall interventions. This shows how homelessness has been avoided by 683 people in 13/14 and 332 this year, up to September.

 

Main reason - Households accepted as being homeless and in priority need (P1E data)
Area		Date	Relatives/friends no longer able/willing to provide accommodation		Relationship breakdown		Mortgage Arrears	Rent Arrears	End of Assured Shorthold Tenancy	Loss of Other Rented or Tied Accommodation	Other Reason	Total
			Exclusions Parents	Exclusions Friends/ Relatives	Relationship Breakdown Violent	Relationship Breakdown Other
York		30-Jun-13	5	0	5	1	0	0	4	0	8	23
York		30-Sep-13	5	0	5	3	0	6	4	3	5	31
York		31-Dec-13	7	3	6	4	0	0	5	0	4	29
York		31-Mar-14	11	4	0	1	0	0	8	2	0	26
York		2013/14	28	7	16	9	0	6	21	5	17	109
England		2013/14	8530	6670	6130	2560	990	1740	13640	3020	8980	52260
York		30-Jun-14	3	3	1	3	0	4	3	0	3	20
York		30-Sep-14	0	3	7	4	0	0	4	0	5	23
York		31-Dec-14										0
York		31-Mar-15										0
York		2014/15	3	6	8	7	0	4	7	0	8	43
England		2014/15

 

 

Successful Prevention Measures - to remain in existing home
Period	Total No of Cases	Mediation	Conciliation (incl home visits)	Homeless Prevention Fund	Debt Advice	Resolving Housing Benefit problems	Resolving rent/service charge arrears	Sanctuary Scheme	Crisis intervention	Negotiation/ legal advocacy	Other assistance	Mortgage arrears	Other	MRS
30-Jun-13	53	7	1	0	14	9	10	0	5	0	5	2	0
30-Sep-13	51	15	1	0	12	3	5	5	5	3	2	0	0
31-Dec-13	45	12	2	1	12	7	1	1	4	2	1	2	0
31-Mar-14	56	7	3	1	14	9	9	0	2	5	4	2	0
2013/14	205	41	7	2	52	28	25	6	16	10	12	6	0	0
30-Jun-14	58	4	4	0	16	9	7	0	9	1	7	1	0
30-Sep-14	50	4	1	0	9	9	3	0	3	9	3	1	8
31-Dec-14	0
31-Mar-15	0
2014/15	108	8	5	0	25	18	10	0	12	10	10	2	8	0

 

Homelessness prevented or relieved-household assisted to obtain alternative accommodation
Period	Total No of Cases	Hostel or HMO	Private Rented		Friends/ Relatives	Supported Accommodation	Social Housing			Low cost home ownership	Other
			With Landlord Incentive Scheme	Without Landlord Incentive Scheme			Management Move Existing LA Tenant	Part 6 Offer LA accomm / RSL nom	Negotiation with RSL outside Part 6
30-Jun-13	116	0	9	13	3	37	1	53	0	0	0
30-Sep-13	125	0	11	16	3	20	3	72	0	0	0
31-Dec-13	113	5	4	11	9	30	1	53	0	0	0
31-Mar-14	124	1	10	18	7	33	3	51	0	1	0
2013/14	478	6	34	58	22	120	8	229	0	1	0
30-Jun-14	121	2	2	17	8	37	3	51	0	1	0
30-Sep-14	103	1	2	14	6	35	1	42	0	0	2
31-Dec-14	0
31-Mar-15	0
2014/15	224	3	4	31	14	72	4	93	0	1	2

Council received a written report from Councillor Simpson-Laing, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Homes and Safer Communities.

 

Councillor Simpson-Laing presented her report and requested Councillors and Officers to sign up to the White Ribbon campaign against domestic abuse.

 

Notice had been received of six questions on the written report, submitted by Members in accordance with Standing Orders. The first four questions were put and answered as follows and Cllr Simpson-Laing undertook to provide Members with written answers to the remaining questions.

 

(i)   From Cllr Barton

“Whilst congratulating Ian Floyd and his team for achieving a ‘5 year high’ in terms of a 98.04% rent collection rate, can the Cabinet Member outline what robust measures are to be introduced to collect the £¾ million plus which are nevertheless still outstanding, monies which rightly belong to the taxpayers of York, or is this huge amount likely to be written off?”

 

The Cabinet Member replied:

I am sure that the Director of Customer and Business Support Services, Ian Floyd,  will take the praise for the rent collection rate of the Housing revenue account but this actually falls in the remit of the director of Director of Communities and Neighbourhoods  Sally Burns.

 

I believe from the question that there is confusion between Council Tax and the Housing Revenue Account as the latter cannot be redirected into other areas of council spending. The HRA is the account where Council tenants’ rent is collected.

 

As I am sure Cllr Barton is aware rent money is not general taxation and cannot be spent on Council services, only on housing related services such as the continued Tenants Choice rolling programme, repairs, the building of new Council Homes, estate improvements, adaptations to council properties, and improving management and customer engagement

 

As my report notes Council Rent Arrears are at their lowest for 12 years. The Council has a number of sanctions for those in debt including not being able to move to another property – however this has been relaxed where tenants have been affected by the Bedroom Tax (Spare Room Subsidy) as otherwise their arrears would potential continue to increase.

 

The council’s approach to rent recovery is very much based on a preventative approach. This begins at the start of someone’s tenancy where the importance of timely rent payment is stressed. New tenants are expected to pay rent in advance and or come with their Housing Benefit application ready with evidence to support a claim.

 

The Housing Department ensures that it’s accessible at local advice sessions, along with money and employment advisers to help with maximising benefits and opportunities for employment, when residents are signing their tenancies or have a change in circumstances. I have created a pot for assisting people to downsize to reduce cost and I have ensured the use of the new build program to encourage this too. The Council also funds the Citizen Advice Bureau (CAB) debt project which helps tenants manage their debt.

 

Ultimately action will be taken against tenants who are not paying their rent but this is only done once all other avenues have been explored with tenants. Court action and eviction is very much seen as the last resort.

 

Similar to all councils the City of York Council does ‘write’ off arrears each year. Arrear ‘write offs’ take place for the following reasons:

 

·        Death of the tenant and no estate

·        Tenants being untraceable (the Council does rewrite debt back if past tenants re-appear)

·        Tenants moving in to care

 

The council initially uses internal systems and services to trace those with rent arrears if they have vacated a property. If the debtor cannot be located by internal means the council uses Tracing Agents and Debt collection agencies.

 

National recovery rates for rent arrears are around 5% of the total outstanding debt due to the reasons outlined

 

For information the written version of this answer includes rent arrears ‘write offs’ for the last ten years, peaking at nearly £0.5m the year before Labour took office and falling ever since.

 

Finally, and with regard to the LGA update given at Audit and Governance recently I have asked Democracy Services to ensure that as part of the new member training programme, for May 2015, that a session is provided on the different council financial funds and their uses, those being the Capital and Revenue Fund and the Housing Revenue Account

 

Arrears ‘write offs’:

2005/06	£403,192.50
2006/07	£278,246.74
2007/08	£146,016.00
2008/09	£213,437.90
2009/10	£164,928.12
2010/11	£490,986.67
2011/12	£298,016.37
2012/13	£221,722.58
2013/14	£215,714.00
2014/15 to end Sept	£99,351.10

 

 (ii)     From Cllr Doughty

 

“The Cabinet Member reports having taken on responsibility for the Mansion House in 2012 and points to a success story in visitor numbers (6,000 in 2013/2014 from under 1,000 in 2006). Can the Cabinet Member please supply the figures for each of the years between please?”

The Cabinet Member replied:

In my report to Corporate and Scrutiny Management Committee
Monday, 23rd June 2014 I reported, in detail, the work going on at the Mansion House.

 

I included in that report a graph to show the increase in visitor numbers related to increased opening hours and the types of events being held. The published written version of this answer will include that graph.

 

I would also refer Cllr Doughty to the previous years report to Corporate and Scrutiny Management Committee, 13th May, 2013 in which I reported on ideas discussed with Mansion House staff about increasing visitor numbers and the use of the house.

 

Both of these reports are available on the Council website and are part of the agenda document packs for those meetings.

 

As Cllr Doughty has not had the opportunity to read the reports along with the actual number of visitors and the categories, I will explain.

 

Attendance is recorded by categories or entrance charge. The bands are Adults, Concessions, Residents, Children, York Pass and York Archaeological Trust Pass.

 

The actual total numbers for each year are:

 

2006          812

2007          700

2008          868

2009          1097

2010          2588

2011          3828

2012          4148

2013          6301

2014                    7998

 

Note the 2014 figure is for the period Jan  to Nov end

 

The General House tour is offered on Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays at the following times: 11:00am, 12:30pm and 2pm. Specialist tours for pre-booked parties or around events during the year, such as Halloween also take place.

 

Obviously there will be a reduction in visitor numbers during the latter half of 2015 and the first 6 months of 2016 if the Heritage Lottery Fund bid is

 

successful due to the need to completely close the house and remove its contents so the much needed restoration and improvement works can take place.

 

If Cllr Doughty feels that there are issues with regards to entry charges, and attendance, I have included these in the written version of this answer. However I will put on record that these will be reviewed when the House has been refurbished to the extensive increased offer that will be available

 

Visitor Numbers
	2014	2013		2012	2011	2010	2009		2008		2007	2006
Adults	4475	1802		1257	1666	800	186		213		185	255
Concession	1303	1252		1091	822	890	343		456		316	355
Residents	1493	2407		934	851	484	140		62		161	127
Children	560	593		640	284	249	6		29		37	58
York pass	147	161		126	197	140	91		103		0	0
YAT pass and hidden secrets	18	86		100	8	25	0		0		0	0
Hudson	2
total	7998	6301		4148	3828	2588	1097		868		700	812

 

The current charges for the Open House tours are;

 

Adults £5

Concessions £4

Children under 16 and York residents are free

 

Private booked tours vary in price depending on requirements of the groups from

House tours £6.00 per person

Silver Tour-£12.00 per person – Refreshments are included

Connoisseur Tour -£15:00 per person – Refreshments are included

 

(iii)   From Cllr Ayre

 

“How many different viewers accessed the video webcasts during the last month for which figures are available?”

 

The Cabinet Member replied:

I was very pleased that this Labour Council took the lead in webcasting and audio recording after the Labour group first suggested webcasting in 2007  - at that time it was rejected by the then Liberal Democrat  controlled Council as not a sensible use of council expenditure.

 

I am pleased then that major decision meetings, from next week, will be either webcasted or audio recorded so that a true and accurate record of what has been said can be viewed and listened to and not distorted by inaccurate or malicious reporting. I would also add that for once I will go on record praising the Minister, Eric Pickles MP, for the suggestion that web and audio recording take place so that accurate records of meetings exist.

 

Whilst the figures in my report are correct they were only ‘in time’ when the report was written as the figures were based on public meetings which took place between 1^st June 2014 and 12^th November 2014.

 

Up to date statistics for on-demand viewing figures for all our webcasts viewed from the 1^st June to the 9^th December are:

 

·                    Total views: 1,325

·                    Estimated minutes watched: 9,515 (159 hrs)

 

Viewing figures since webcasting was introduced in June 2013 are:

 

·                    Total views: 15,553

·                    Estimated minutes watched: 96,716 (1,612 hrs)

 

In addition, we have had 1,564 listens to audio recordings of City of York Council committee meetings in a similar period.

 

As I mentioned in my report the Council is unable to identify unique views, only the overall number of views and as mentioned, these figures do not include live viewing figures. This is because the current system would not be able to give accurate figures of combined viewings as viewers can view webcasts via our website or directly on YouTube.

 

Speaking to the Officer responsible for the technology, that the Council uses, we do not have the ability to record actual individuals as this would require the Council tracking IP addresses and our current set up does not allow us to do this.

 

Undertaking some research I believe one possible way to obtain such numbers would be to set up a subscriber service and I have asked officers to investigate the technology and cost around this.

 

If Cllr Ayre is worried about how many actual people are watching and how we can increase viewers it is also possible that the Council could look to increased viewership by either using Title or Thumbnail Optimisation so that our ‘recordings’ appear higher up prioritisation lists when being searched. Again this would involve time and cost.

 

Now you would hope that each video was watched on average by 86 different viewers – It would be unusual for someone to watch more than once - but no doubt be some will just as many people watch YouTube postings numerous times.

 

        (iv)    From Cllr Doughty

 

“In her report, the Cabinet Member speaks of her request for a full review of the Council Constitution in 2012 and work still being underway. I agree it is good that reviews are undertaken as this holds the key to citizens as well as Councillors being able to hold the Council to account. Can the Cabinet Member demonstrate how she has included citizens in this process(or intends to)?”

 

The Cabinet Member replied:

I would like to thank Cllr Doughty for asking a similar question to that of Cllr Ayre’s at July’s Council meeting, but I am happy to answer again if he missed the answer then.

 

The Audit and Governance Committee is the Committee that has the responsibility of bringing forward proposals for amendments to the Constitution. I am sure that the previous questioner on this matter, who is now the Chair of Audit and Governance will ensure that, and if legally appropriate, the public will be able to make any contributions on the recommendations brought to Council through the public participation system.

 

As I answered in July the Audit and Governance Committee held a public engagement event in May at which members of the public were invited to express views as to how the Council operates and a Scrutiny review has taken place which has amongst its objectives:

 

·        Examine national best practice by other Local Authorities currently achieving excellence level in their democratic traditions.

·        Identify optimum methods for raising awareness of the democratic process amongst York’s Communities of Identity.

 

I am sure that the Chair of the Task Group would have received contributions from interested members of the public.

 

Of course it should be remembered that the Constitution has to reflect complex statutory provisions including those in the Local Government Acts of 1972 and 2000, the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 and the Localism Act 2011 as well as a myriad of other Acts, Statutory Instruments statutory guidance and case law.

 

The Council has an expert legal team that undertake this work and they also work in partnership with colleagues in the region to ensure that our Constitution is legally compliant. Members of the public can send in suggestions to the legal team and these will be considered, but due to legal ‘process’ changes that can be made are limited.”

 

(v)    From Cllr Doughty

 

“The Cabinet Member informs us £115,000of borrowed money has been committed from the Delivery and Innovation Fund towards an Anti-Social Behaviour ‘hub’. Can she confirm the cumulative cost of borrowing for this over the next 20 years please?”

 

Reply:

As I am sure Cllr Doughty and Council are aware the ASB Hub was launched in May 2014 and is a partnership between North Yorkshire Police and the Council.

 

The ‘Hub’ has the backing of the Conservative Police and Crime Commissioner Julia Mulligan who has said:

 

“Anti-social behaviour is one of the greatest concerns of residents across North Yorkshire and can have a massive impact on people’s quality of life. That’s why, on coming to office, I championed the establishment of an Anti-Social Behaviour hub, so that the police, local authority officers and other partner agencies could work collaboratively and make a real and tangible difference to communities.”

 

The establishment of an anti-social behaviour hub in York is an innovative approach to transforming the way both organisations work together to tackle anti-social behaviour (ASB) and nuisance, including environmental issues such as flytipping and graffiti and involves the pooling of resources – especially important when both the Council and police force budget are being cut year on year.  This brings together the powers and expertise to make communities across the city feel and be safer

 

The aim of the hub is to ensure a more efficient, timely and appropriate response to anti-social behaviour within York’s communities by deploying members of a single team of frontline enforcement officers from both organisations. 

 

The £115k that Cllr Doughty mentions has been supported by two awards from the Home Office funded Police Innovation Fund, now totalling £382k, over both 14/15 & 15/16. The local allocation has been made by the Conservative Police and Crime Commissioner. The fund’s aim is to incentivise collaboration, support improved digital working and innovative approaches to improve policing and to drive efficiency.

 

In respect of the Delivery and Innovation Fund, the Delivery and Innovation Fund is a revenue budget, so the cost of borrowing is nil! The funding was approved as part of the annual budget, as a growth item, and was established to assist in taking forward innovative projects and to support the delivery of major priority areas of work.

 

(vi)   From Cllr Doughty

 

“The Cabinet Member (in page 78 of the Agenda) points to work being carried out by Council staff to stop residents becoming homeless, noble aims ofcourse. Of the numbers she quotes, can she please advise how many solely relate to the three areas she claims in her opening statement of the section by breakdown with more detail?”

 

Reply:

Whilst the statement and the section on homelessness are not actually linked my statement is a matter of fact. This is based on fact and evidence from leading homeless experts.

 

Shelter report that:

 

Sadly, many people view homelessness as the result of personal failings, and consider that if the economy is going well, there is no excuse for not getting on.

 

But this belief is belied by the facts, which show that homelessness is caused by a complex interplay between a person's individual circumstances and adverse 'structural' factors outside their direct control.

 

Shelter states that causes of homelessness include one or more of the following:

•  debts - especially mortgage or rent arrears, poor physical and mental health and  relationship breakdown

• unemployment
• poverty
• a lack of affordable housing
• housing policies
• the structure and administration of housing benefit

 

This list is backed up by the Salvation Army who report that Homelessness can be caused by:

• poverty
• unemployment
• lack of affordable housing
• poor physical or mental health
• drug and alcohol abuse
• gambling
• family and relationship breakdown
• domestic violence
• physical and/or sexual abuse.

 

All these factors can cause a person to become homeless. They can also be one of the reasons why a person remains homeless.

 

In the written version of this answer I have attached two tables. One shows actual reasons for homelessness and the other measures that were taken to prevent possible homelessness – that is the causes that may have caused it to happen.

 

With regard to York actual homelessness includes relationship breakdown -, which can often be a result of debt, unemployment and health issues - actual debt and end of tenancies in the Private Rented Sector. Of those who were prevented from becoming homeless the top two categories were ‘debt’ and Housing Benefit problems.

 

The reason for such low homeless figures in York is the excellent intervention service we provide and the work we undertake with our partners across the city.

 

I include in the written version of this answer tables which show overall interventions. This shows how homelessness has been avoided by 683 people in 13/14 and 332 this year, up to September.

Main reason - Households accepted as being homeless and in priority need (P1E data)
Area	Date	Relatives/friends no longer able/willing to provide accommodation			Relationship breakdown			Mortgage Arrears		Rent Arrears	End of Assured Shorthold Tenancy		Loss of Other Rented or Tied Accommodation	Other Reason	Total
		Exclusions Parents	Exclusions Friends/ Relatives		Relationship Breakdown Violent		Relationship Breakdown Other
York	30-Jun-13	5	0		5		1	0		0	4		0	8	23
York	30-Sep-13	5	0		5		3	0		6	4		3	5	31
York	31-Dec-13	7	3		6		4	0		0	5		0	4	29
York	31-Mar-14	11	4		0		1	0		0	8		2	0	26
York	2013/14	28	7		16		9	0		6	21		5	17	109
England	2013/14	8530	6670		6130		2560	990		1740	13640		3020	8980	52260
York	30-Jun-14	3	3		1		3	0		4	3		0	3	20
York	30-Sep-14	0	3		7		4	0		0	4		0	5	23
York	31-Dec-14														0
York	31-Mar-15														0
York	2014/15	3	6		8		7	0		4	7		0	8	43
England	2014/15

 

 

Successful Prevention Measures - to remain in existing home
Period	Total No of Cases	Mediation	Conciliation (incl home visits)	Homeless Prevention Fund	Debt Advice	Resolving Housing Benefit problems	Resolving rent/service charge arrears	Sanctuary Scheme	Crisis intervention	Negotiation/ legal advocacy	Other assistance	Mortgage arrears	Other	MRS
30-Jun-13	53	7	1	0	14	9	10	0	5	0	5	2	0
30-Sep-13	51	15	1	0	12	3	5	5	5	3	2	0	0
31-Dec-13	45	12	2	1	12	7	1	1	4	2	1	2	0
31-Mar-14	56	7	3	1	14	9	9	0	2	5	4	2	0
2013/14	205	41	7	2	52	28	25	6	16	10	12	6	0	0
30-Jun-14	58	4	4	0	16	9	7	0	9	1	7	1	0
30-Sep-14	50	4	1	0	9	9	3	0	3	9	3	1	8
31-Dec-14	0
31-Mar-15	0
2014/15	108	8	5	0	25	18	10	0	12	10	10	2	8	0

 

 

 

Homelessness prevented or relieved-household assisted to obtain alternative accommodation
Period	Total No of Cases	Hostel or HMO	Private Rented	Friends/ Relatives		Supported Accommodation	Social Housing			Low cost home ownership	Other
			With Landlord Incentive Scheme	Without Landlord Incentive Scheme	Friends/ Relatives		Management Move Existing LA Tenant	Part 6 Offer LA accomm / RSL nom	Negotiation with RSL outside Part 6
30-Jun-13	116	0	9	13	3	37	1	53	0	0	0
30-Sep-13	125	0	11	16	3	20	3	72	0	0	0
31-Dec-13	113	5	4	11	9	30	1	53	0	0	0
31-Mar-14	124	1	10	18	7	33	3	51	0	1	0
2013/14	478	6	34	58	22	120	8	229	0	1	0
30-Jun-14	121	2	2	17	8	37	3	51	0	1	0