Issue - meetings

The council’s housing stock within the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) is situated within the Bournemouth and Poole neighbourhoods and comprises 9,592 owned properties (5,080 in Bournemouth and 4,512 in Poole) and 1,139 leasehold properties (as at 1 April 2021).

Council housing within the Bournemouth neighbourhood is managed in-house within the officer structure of the housing service unit.  Poole Housing Partnership (PHP) is an Arm’s Length Management Organisation (ALMO), a wholly owned company, and manages the council housing in the Poole neighbourhood whilst BCP Council retains ownership and ultimate responsibility.

This report sets out the national policy context for council housing and proposes some core objectives to guide future delivery.

This report presents the council’s strategic key drivers for service delivery in this area and, measuring these against the various governance options, proposes a preferred model for housing management in the future. 

It is recommended that the council should align and create a new combined hybrid service, the ‘best of both worlds’, within the council.

It is recommended that the new combined in-house hybrid service has a robust ‘advisory board’, providing oversight, expertise and informed advice.  A number of other councils, including some which have recently changed from an ALMO model, have similarly set up or are considering setting up an advisory board to ensure robust visibility and monitoring for continued good service delivery.

The report requests approval to commence extensive consultation with residents and other stakeholders over summer and autumn 2021 to help determine implementation. 

RESOLVED that: -

(a)         The proposed objectives of a new combined service within the council:

(b)         The preferred governance model for a new combined hybrid service within the council overseen by an advisory board:

(c)         The outline principles of governance arrangements for the advisory board: and

(d)         The commencement of extensive consultation with all council housing tenants/leaseholders and other stakeholders on the preferred model and the future nature of services to be delivered.

Voting: Unanimous

Portfolio Holder: Homes

Reason

The alignment of the housing management services is necessary to meet the council’s overarching alignment agenda and emerging transformation strategy, with the outcome of delivering excellent services for our council housing tenants and leaseholders.

The Portfolio Holder for Homes presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'E' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

Cabinet was advised that the council’s housing stock within the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) is situated within the Bournemouth and Poole neighbourhoods and comprises 9,592 owned properties (5,080 in Bournemouth and 4,512 in Poole) and 1,139 leasehold properties (as at 1 April 2021). In relation to this Cabinet was informed that council housing within the Bournemouth neighbourhood is managed in-house within the officer structure of the housing service unit, and that  Poole Housing Partnership (PHP) is an Arm’s Length Management Organisation (ALMO), a wholly owned company, and manages the council housing in the Poole neighbourhood whilst BCP Council retains ownership and ultimate responsibility.

Cabinet was advised that the report sets out the national policy context for council housing and proposes some core objectives to guide future delivery and presents the council’s strategic key drivers for service delivery in this area and, measuring these against the various governance options, proposes a preferred model for housing management in the future. 

Further to this Cabinet was informed that it is recommended that the council should align and create a new combined hybrid service, the ‘best of both worlds’, within the council, and that it is recommended that the new combined in-house hybrid service has a robust ‘advisory board’, providing oversight, expertise and informed advice.  A number of other councils, including some which have recently changed from an ALMO model, have similarly set up or are considering setting up an advisory board to ensure robust visibility and monitoring for continued good service delivery.

The report sought approval to commence extensive consultation with residents and other stakeholders over summer and autumn 2021 to help determine implementation.

The Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Board addressed the Cabinet and advised that at their recent meeting the Board had been largely supportive of the report.

RESOLVED that: -

(a)         The proposed objectives of a new combined service within the council:

(b)         The preferred governance model for a new combined hybrid service within the council overseen by an advisory board:

(c)         The outline principles of governance arrangements for the advisory board: and

(d)         The commencement of extensive consultation with all council housing tenants/leaseholders and other stakeholders on the preferred model and the future nature of services to be delivered.

Voting: Unanimous

Portfolio Holder: Homes

To consider the following Homes related reports scheduled for Cabinet consideration on 28 July 2021:

•   Housing Management Model Review

The O&S Board is asked to scrutinise the reports and make recommendations to Cabinet as appropriate.

Cabinet member invited to attend for this item: Councillor Robert Lawton, Portfolio Holder for Homes

The Cabinet report for this item is included with the agenda for consideration by the Overview and Scrutiny Board.

Housing Management Model Review– The Portfolio Holder for Homes introduced the report, a copy of which had been circulated to members of the Board and a copy of which appears as Appendix B to these minutes in the minute book. The Portfolio Holder outlined the key issues within the report and responded to a number of issues raised by Board members in the subsequent discussion including:

·     Whether the report applied in anyway to Christchurch as the housing stock within the Christchurch area had been outsourced to a housing association. It was noted that at present the models proposed within the report would not apply to any of the housing stock in Christchurch but it was possible that it would, should new Council housing be built within Christchurch. However, there were not plans for this at present.

·     It was confirmed that there was no criticism for the way housing services were run in any of the preceding authorities, but the review was required to pull together the housing function for BCP.

·     There would be a comprehensive consultation to find out how residents would want to see the housing function delivered. A Councillor commented that they supported putting residents at the heart of decisions on services moving forward.

·     It was highlighted that the table within the report did not list specific disadvantages to either of the models. It was confirmed that the intention of the table was that the reverse of the advantages was he disadvantages but a Councillor commented that this did not fully explain the situation, for example there could be a disadvantage in the in-house model of officers’ time being divided with other issues as opposed to dedicated staff in a housing management organisation. Officers felt that this would not be a significant consideration. The table outlined what the Council working group considered to be the main advantages and disadvantages. However, there would be further work on this in the future.

·     It was acknowledged that sometime the focus of the whole Council could be distracted and not focused enough on housing management. It was envisioned that there would be some kind of advisory board or panel with a particular focus on issues that matter to residents.

·     It was noted that there were currently two Housing Revenue Accounts covering the area with a single housing model it would be possible to combine these.

·     The focus on the consultation would be on recommended model to test and challenge and would be focused on current tenants in Poole and Bournemouth. There would also be a wider stakeholder engagement which would include residents on the waiting list.

·     How would the proposals effect the different salaries between those employed by Poole Housing Partnership and the Council. The Portfolio Holder advised that there would be some synergies, but this would not always mean to go for the lowest denominator. It was questioned that this would mean increased overhead costs. It was confirmed that this particular situation referred to company overhead costs related to audit,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55