Two questions had been received prior to publication of the agenda.

Two Questions had been received from Mrs Gearon-Simm as follows:

1. ‘The shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls, has promised to cut ministerial pay by 5% if the Labour party are elected to government in 2015.

On 11 June 2014 at the Ordinary Council meeting under Item 15, the majority of Councillors voted themselves a 1% pay rise.

Many people have not had a pay rise for a long time.

Are there any councillors in the chamber who would be prepared to state in public that they have not taken this pay rise?’

The Monitoring Officer read our Cllr  Aspinell’s  response as follows:

‘There are I know many Councillors who have not accepted the 1% increase in allowances from within the Accord Group. I cannot speak for the Conservatives but it would be inappropriate tonight for Councillors to leap to their feet declaring their status in that regard. This is simply not the forum for it. I do have to say however, that I am totally opposed to the derisory amount that Councillors are currently paid, being used as a political football. I have always been of that opinion

Since the introduction of the allowances in the early 2000's successive Conservative administrations have cut the allowances paid as a means of declaring to the public 'Look how good we are' to coincide with the elections. 

The amount that we receive cannot be described in truth as a recompense for time spent at the Offices as many of our Councillors have their own businesses, or work full time and the Council simply cannot afford to pay those Councillors their true worth. The role of Councillor has changed completely since the allowances were introduced. The Government now insists that the Revenue Support Grant will be removed and that we have to stand on our own two feet and raise revenue from other means. 

Leadership and the Chairs have to put in the hours to oversee these new initiatives. Every Chair has additional responsibilities and a time demand that eats into their social down time and family commitments. It is true that no-one forces us to take on this responsibility, but with the commitment in hours at the Council Offices, in addition to our role in our Wards, and outside bodies that many of us represent, versus the amount we individually receive, it would be wrong for the Public to be led to believe that we are on some sort of 'Gravy Train'. Three of our busiest Councillors, Councillor Baker Chair of Planning, Councillor Quirk, Chair of Assets, Councillor Kendall, Chair of Business and Town Centre; not to mention our Mayor, all have their own businesses and are able to arrange their diaries to fit in this additional demand and spend hours with me going through their commitments and their various roles. 

I am mindful that there are Chairs that because they work full time cannot get into the office and feel disenfranchised and spend hours on the phone or email catching up. 

Going forward I would like to be given the opportunity to put forward a case that will show fair recompense for time committed, and with no burden on our tax payer.  This I believe is achievable and if I am in this position in a future budget setting meeting there may well be a proposal along those lines coming forward and will remove forever this politicising of Councillors’ Allowances being eradicated for good and allow us to get on and do the job we have been elected to do, without constantly having to feel the obliged to defend our position.

2. ‘ For the majority of people who hear of the Bedroom Tax and who are not affected by it, the idea that people in council housing should only be able to have a ‘spare room’, if they pay extra rent for it, can at first sound seductively sensible.

If Brentwood Borough Council believes that this is sensible, will the Bedroom Tax be continued by the present administration’.

Cllr Carter responded as follows:

The spare room subsidy is legislature under the Welfare Reform Act 2012 and not a choice for the current administration; with a general election in May 2015 for local and national administrations it could change according to the political parties of the  government.

The Welfare Reform Act 2012 placed a cap on the amount of housing benefit someone receives due to having spare rooms.  This mirrors the private sector where benefit is paid based on need. They are required to make up the difference between the rent and the amount of housing benefit received. The Council operates an under occupation allowance of £1000 (one thousand pounds) per bedroom for Council tenants wishing to downsize their properties.

No evictions have taken place during my tenure because of bedroom tax if there is outstanding benefit; pre-court action prevents any action being taken.  The Council makes agreement with tenants to clear any money owed to it.  He is not aware of any authorities who have chosen not to follow bedroom tax personally but knows from research and general interest that Brighton and Hove Unitary Authority have opted to follow a non-eviction policy in relation to bedroom tax.

Like the bedroom tax/spare room subsidy this could appear an attractive option.  However humane and genuine the intention, a no-evictions policy is not a practical long-term solution to assist lower income residents in need.

How would we know if the arrears are the result of bedroom tax or another factor?  It is practical to provide tangible help for low income households and that is what needs to take centre stage. Eviction is always a final course of action if a tenant has fallen seriously behind in their rent.  Members will know from information they receive that this is likely  to be more than a couple of thousand pounds.  The housing Department under my watch and certainly that of Ms Gregory is certainly helping residents put in the most vulnerable circumstances as a result of the bedroom tax or otherwise or should their financial situation change suddenly as we know it can.

Unfortunately  poor record keeping from the previous administration has meant rather frustratingly that we have a lack of recorded information on the number of people who have been affected or assisted with help with the bedroom tax although I know we currently have two people wishing to downsize to a smaller property who we will help when a suitable property of their choice becomes available.  My view is our arrears policy and procedure is currently outdated and this is why one of the areas we are working on as part of our Key Performance Indicators (KPI) workshop improvement programme is to improve this, modernise it and offer additional help where we can.  For example this is currently very letter orientated with minimal personal contact.  We also provide advice on income maximisation for tenants however it is not currently structured as the Head of Housing or I would like to see it.  This is an area I hope you will see improvements within.  We are working on a new arrears policy and procedure and this will be reviewed in the first week of November.  It will include lots of personal contact  and structured interviews in person to assess it fully and referrals to Citizens Advice Bureau where appropriate.  Also there will be the opportunity for housing to use the new local Support Services Framework that our Council Tax team are leading on – a partnership arranged between the Council and CAB and organisations like Synergy and Job Centre Plus.  When this goes live it will help people to find jobs and is an example of proactive steps this department will be taking to assist those who come to us in need, particularly if they are affected by the bedroom tax.  I would like to give Mrs Gearon-Simm and all the residents of the borough an assurance that we will do our utmost to assist any resident in need including if they are affected by the bedroom tax or spare room subsidy.