This is an opportunity for Members of Council to ask the Mayor, Members of the Executive or the Chairman of any Committee or Sub-Committee a question on notice under Procedure Rule 10.2.

The Mayor reported that 3 questions had been received under Procedure Rule 10.2.

(a)        Councillor Wright asked the following question for which he had given notice:

Could the Executive Member for Finance please confirm this Council’s strategy to help and assist the 140 residents in this borough that have been affected by the government’s reduction in the benefit cap? If the member could focus on their Discretionary Housing Payment policy for benefit cap claimants and the routes to employment that would be much appreciated. Could the member also confirm how many residents have actually met and been seen by the Council’s chosen partner Shelter since the introduction of the benefit cap and can you also confirm if any financial contribution (and how much) has been made by this council to Shelter for this service.

(Note: Councillor Myers declared a personal interest being one of the Council’s appointed representatives on the Trafford Housing Trust Board and remained in the meeting.)

Councillor Myers, Executive Member for Finance reported that Shelter had been engaged by the Council from November 2016 to provide support to those affected by the Benefit Cap. Shelter worked closely with the Stronger Families Team to ensure that customers received consistent advice and Shelter also worked with Trafford Housing Trust who had the most tenants affected. Key parts of the service delivery model included support to move closer to the labour market and gain employment and assistance to access in work benefits.

The ten largest Registered Social Landlords in Trafford, Adactus; Arcon; Contour; Equity; Great Places; Irwell Valley; Mosscare; Guinness-Northern Counties; Your Housing Group and Trafford Housing Trust, were notified of the tenants affected by the Cap so that they could provide support. 

All affected applicants were to be seen by Shelter to ensure that the additional Discretionary Housing Payment funding was used efficiently and to ensure that the necessary support and guidance could be provided to help claimants work towards a longer term solution for the shortfall in housing costs.

By 24 January 2017 Shelter had arranged 52 appointments but only 31 customers attended. Overall, 44 awards of Discretionary Housing Payment had been made. There were 28 Discretionary Housing Payment applications pending of which 17 appointments had been arranged with Shelter.

Shelter also provided a drop in session at the Partington Sure Start Centre to which all 27 customers affected in the Partington area were invited to attend but unfortunately nobody turned up.

Shelter had organised weekly sessions at Sale until the end of February 2017 with additional sessions at Stretford Children’s Centre and Urmston Library.

Shelter had written, telephoned and sent text messages to everybody affected by the Benefit Cap and some had been contacted on more than one occasion. The good news was that the numbers of claimants attending at Shelter to take up the service was increasing. Claimants that had made Discretionary Housing Payments applications independently of Shelter were being informed that they needed to seek advice from Shelter before the claims were processed. The general feedback from Shelter was that Customers were finding the appointments very useful.

The Council had been awarded funding of £33,456 by the Department of Work and Pensions to support customers affected by the Benefit Cap and

Shelter received a fee of approximately £150 per case for the support it provided.

As a supplementary question, Councillor Wright asked whether or not Discretionary Housing Payments were prioritised for those affected by the Benefit Cap, as on average in Trafford, residents were losing £64 per week out of Housing Benefit which could see rent arrears rise rapidly to high levels increasing the risk of homelessness, evictions and other associated problems.

Councillor Myers confirmed that payments were made at the discretion of the Council and to the most appropriate, acknowledging that people in severe rent arrears needed to be seen and prioritised and he believed that this was done. In context, the Benefit Cap in Trafford came in at £20,000 per couple and at £13,400 for a single person without children and the Executive Member considered this to be at a significantly high level.

(b)        Councillor Mrs. Brophy asked the following question for which she had given notice:

Has the Council considered withdrawing from the Greater Manchester Special Framework in order to develop and promote local community developed plans instead of the top down plan which does not safeguard our green spaces, nor provide adequate affordable homes for Trafford?

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Sean Anstee indicated that he did not agree with the premise of the second part of the question and, therefore the short answer was no, the Council had not considered withdrawing from the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF).

As a supplementary question, Councillor Brophy, asked under what circumstances the Leader would think the Council should withdraw from the GMSF.

Councillor Sean Anstee referred to the debate on the Spatial Framework at the previous meeting on 21 December when there was a clear view that in order for Greater Manchester and Trafford to plan for growth and ensure that the consequences of not having a plan in place were avoided, the Council needed the ability to contribute through the GMSF consultation process. Citing the serious consequences of withdrawal, specifically, homes of multiple occupation; an extra strain on public services; an all-day ‘rush hour’; an inability to control where development took place; a housing free for all; the inability to offer greater protection to green spaces than currently provided; an inability to respond to homelessness or the borough’s young people and to provide the homes they deserved; the Leader commented that the position being put forward by Councillor Mrs. Brophy was not one his Group supported.

(c)        Councillor Cordingley asked the following question for which he had given notice:

We have heard a lot about using greenbelt, but what are measures are the council taking to identify and utilise brownfield sites for meeting the borough’s housing development needs?

Councillor Sean Anstee, the Leader of the Council considered that the Council had a good track record of preparing for the delivery of sites from within the existing urban area with examples including Trafford Waters, Carrington, Alt-Air and Pomona. The Council was supportive of initiatives to bring forward brownfield sites for development to assist with urban renewal and regeneration of those areas.

The new Mayor of Greater Manchester would receive new enhanced compulsory purchase order powers to be exercised only with the consent of the host local authority which would assist with land assembly and scheme viability. In addition, the Greater Manchester Land Commission and Mayoral Development Corporations would help to bring forward brownfield sites across the borough and the city region. In addition, the Government had announced in the Autumn Statement a new £2.3 billion Infrastructure Fund to help unlock unviable brownfield sites and bring them forward for development. The fund would complement the Greater Manchester Housing Investment Fund which had already helped to release over 1500 previously stalled developments to get building started again.

The Leader of the Council believed there was a range of tools available to help bring forward brownfield sites through both the new powers the Combined Authority receives and the continued work on the Spatial Framework. The Spatial Framework would help to ensure that the Council met its obligations to have a supply of land to meet housing need over a 5 year period, would help to control where developers built and would offer greater protection over green belt and open spaces from speculative planning applications by landowners than was afforded at present.

In view of the controversy surrounding Flixton fields and equally other areas throughout Greater Manchester, Councillor Cordingley asked as a supplementary question, how the Council could reassure the public that it was doing everything it could, and acknowledging that the Leader of the Council had just provided details of what the Council was doing, how could the public find the information to feel confident that it was always going to be brownfield first.

Councillor Sean Anstee recognised that over the coming months, as the Greater Manchester Spatial Strategy moved into its next reiteration, the Council needed to have an open conversation with its residents and the public across Greater Manchester and that the debate needed to be framed around the factual positions of what the Council was seeking to achieve. Referring to the answer given to Cllr Mrs. Brophy on the consequences of not having a Plan (Minute 52 (b) above) it was important to make it public and Members of the Council had a responsibility to inform.

The Leader considered the Spatial Framework critical for the future prosperity of Greater Manchester and for the ability to grow sustainably and avoid the consequences of not having a plan. It had generated significant interest and it was right to continue the discussions over the next few months. Naturally, people would want to identify sites in need of regeneration within the existing area first, however, Councillor Sean Anstee also appealed for Members to consider whether new powers might be called for in the Housing and Planning White Paper, when published, to enable the Council to be able to control the release of land and other activity.