Agenda item

Impact of COVID-19

Anne Fairweather asked a question of the Chair of the Policy and Resources Committee concerning assessments of the impact of COVID-19 to the City of London Corporation’s budget, on smaller businesses which serviced office workers, and changes needed to support social distancing in the City.

 

In reply, the Chair confirmed that COVID-19 had had a significant impact on the Corporation’s finances and that the overall net cost was being tracked, reported and discussed by the Finance Committee. The informal meeting of Resource Allocation Sub Committee in early July would receive an update on both the in-year budget position and Medium-Term Financial Plan, leading on to a re-budgeting exercise in early autumn; efforts to control costs in the meantime would be vital.

 

With reference to the impact on small and medium sized businesses, the Chair City advised that the Corporation was doing what it could to help mitigate the impact; however, the scale of this problem was such that there were serious limits to the extent that it could provide relief. She noted that there was a separate question on the order sheet on this matter, where she would address the issue in more detail.

 

In relation to changes that would need to be made to the City’s environment, the Chair referenced forthcoming proposals to alter the City’s streets so as to provide more space for walking and cycling, in order to enable social distancing on the City’s streets and support the safe return of employees to the workplace. Measures to support businesses and manage travel demand were also included.

 

In closing, the Chair also highlighted the opportunity for cultural organisations in the City to focus on serving local communities and neighbours in different way. She made reference to work with  the London Festival of Architecture and London Open House to showcase our buildings and streetscape, as well as work underway to welcome people back to cultural spaces as soon as it was possible to do so.

 

She also advised that more detailed answers to this and the coming question had been published on the website and circulated electronically to this Court.

 

Support for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs)

Mark Wheatley asked a question of the Chair of the Policy and Resources Committee concerning the Corporation’s work to support SMEs, including liaison with Government and stakeholders on various support schemes, as well as direct support for local SMEs through rates and rental relief.

 

Noting that a fuller response had been published and circulated in view of the breadth of information available, the Chair outlined ongoing activity with both Government and business stakeholders in this area, such as asking Government to widen the number of businesses that qualified for rate relief and grants and calling for a review of rate relief thresholds, as they currently disadvantaged SMEs in central London. The City had also supported pan-London lobbying efforts with the Mayor of London, London Councils and the various representative business groups to make sure the needs and priorities of SMEs were heard. 

 

Other support for SMEs was also highlighted, such as through the work of the City Business Library, the City Property Advisory Team, the support for tenants at the wholesale markets, and the specific advice offered to cultural and tourism sectors by the Cultural and Visitor Development Team. The work of individual elected Members in lobbying on behalf of constituents was also highlighted as a significant factor and, with reference to the Government’s announcements on Small Business, Retail, Hospitality and Leisure Grant Funds, the Chair confirmed that the Corporation had now directly paid out £14.5m of the original £14.7m allocation.

 

Responding to a supplementary question from Mark Wheatley concerning additional activity and the possibility of a Working Party to look at SME support specifically, the Chair was happy to look at the general issue in more detail but was not in favour of a Working Party, in view of the risk of an additional layer of bureaucracy and slowing any response.

 

Reopening of primary schools

Deputy Robert Merrett asked a question of the Chairman of the Education Board concerning the reopening of primary schools in line with Government advice and resources being made available to ensure this was achieved safely.

 

Responding, the Chairman noted that all schools were planning for a potential phased re-opening, ahead of confirmation that the Government’s five key tests were met. The Government expected children in childcare and Early Years settings to return first and for Reception, Year 1 and Year 6 to be back in school in smaller sizes no earlier than 1 June. For the City, the relevant affected schools were, therefore, the Sir John Cass grant-maintained school, the three Academy primaries (City of London Primary Academy Islington, Redriff and Galleywall) and the three independent schools. However, related planning and the same principles would affect all schools within the City’s Family and the Chair undertook to provide more detailed information with regard to any City school, should any Member so wish.

 

The Chairman observed that, at all places of primary learning, the City had a duty to provide support to vulnerable children and so there was a particular focus on ensuring they could return to their schools and have continued access to their education, including via remote learning where appropriate. He also outlined responsibilities regarding Special Educational Needs and Disabilities, and children plus young people with Education Health and Care Plans. 

 

There was much for each School to consider and he acknowledged the support provided by the Education Unit to ensure that each could plan for re-opening by refreshing their risk assessments and other health and safety advice for children, young people, and staff, including regular review of government advice, identifying protective measures, and ensuring that all health and safety compliance checks had been or would be undertaken before any potential opening. He stressed that initial responsibility rested with each school and its local governing body who must look closely at four main areas of risk: health, learning, support for staff, and financial solvency. Planning needed to flexible and locally based, with a particular focus on communication, provision of data and monitoring.

 

The Chairman also advised that, at an early stage in lockdown, the Education Board had freed up restrictions governing City Premium Grants provided to Academies to allow them to use such monies in the most effective way to address COVID-19 challenges. In addition, various fora had been held in order to offer the latest advice, provide support and answer questions.

 

In closing, the Chairman observed that this was an extremely fluid situation and the position would undoubtedly evolve. He cautioned that that the challenge would be how best to address the growing long-term challenge faced by disadvantaged children whose learning gap became wider and long-term opportunities became narrower with each day of lockdown, set against potential dangers to health of children and staff from too early a return to face-to-face learning.

 

With reference to a supplementary question from James Tumbridge, the chairman confirmed that the position in respect of all year groups, not just those due to return to school first, was being kept under constant review.

 

Annual Appointment of Committees

Tijs Broeke asked a question of the Chair of the Policy and Resources Committee concerning the annual appointment of committees, noting the Chair’s earlier reference to the intention to bring forward proposals to hold this process in July.

 

The Chair confirmed that she had asked for a paper to be produced to assess the options in this respect and that it would be brought to the next cycle of meetings for consideration.

 

Electric Scooters

Alderman Alison Gowman asked a question of the Chair of the Planning and Transportation Committee concerning the use of electric scooters and the City Corporation’s views in respect of their legalisation, in order to provide a further option to commuters to travel to work during the COVID-19 recovery.

 

Responding, the Chair noted that  electric scooters were not currently legal for use on public highways in the UK but that the Government had committed to reviewing this position, with trials of rental e-scooter schemes planned as part of this review process. The City Corporation itself did not currently have a formal position on e-scooter use but was keen to do whatever it could to help businesses and workers return as safely as possible to the City and their places of work. Consequently, a report on this  issue would be considered by the Planning & Transportation Committee at its meeting on 23 June. The views of the Committee would help inform potential participation in any future trials and guide responses to any consultations as part of the legislative review. The Chair stressed that he would not want to presume to make a judgement on what these views might be ahead of that meeting.

 

The Chair also took the opportunity to reference developing proposals to change the City’s streets to enable more people to move around the City either on foot or by cycle, which would go a considerable way to ensuring that people living in, visiting or returning to their workplace in the Square Mile were safe whilst also supporting the City’s Post COVID-19 recovery. 

 

Affordable Housing

Helen Fentimen asked a question of the Chair of the Planning and Transportation Committee concerning affordable housing and provision for key workers within City boundaries. She also sought a commitment to provide the number of housing units identified in the City Plan 2036, as well as an undertaking to revise the position on the future requirements for office space, given that many businesses were likely to propose new ways of working with less reliance on City accommodation.  

 

Responding, the Chair confirmed that the City Plan 2036 provided a clear commitment to make provision for a minimum of 1,460 net additional dwellings in the City between the years 2019/20 and 2028/29. He outlined the mechanisms through which this would be achieved, including by encouraging new housing development on appropriate sites in or near identified existing residential areas, and by protecting existing housing where it was of suitable quality in a suitable location.  The new Plan also included a policy commitment to the delivery of a minimum of 50% affordable housing on public sector land and required residential development in the City with the potential for more than 10 units to provide a minimum of 35% affordable housing on-site.   

 

The Chair noted that the existing policy of refusing new housing in locations where it would prejudice the primary business function of the City would continue, in recognition that the City was considered in both national and Mayoral policy to be a leading financial and professional services centre having a key role in the UK economy. Therefore, housing was not appropriate for every site in the City, although commercial developments were required to contribute financially to affordable housing provision through extensive planning obligations. Funding delivered through these obligations was used by the Department of Community and Children’s Services to deliver the new affordable housing.   

 

With regard to the suggestion that the position on future requirements for office space be revised, the Chair cautioned that it would be precipitate to say how the effects of COVID-19 would impact on the City in the medium to longer term, noting that a number of previous trends may or may not resume whilst other, new trends, would emerge. The new Plan sought to look beyond the current situation to a period when a probable vaccine would renew the attractiveness of accessible and vibrant city centres and the current experience of pre-application discussions suggested there remained a strong appetite for further office development in the City.  He considered that the new City Plan provided a flexible framework for the delivery of appropriate office floorspace in the City as part of sustainable growth, adding that regular monitoring of trends and close liaison with developers and occupiers would identify any long-term changes in business practices and space requirements which could be reflected in future alterations to the Local Plan.   

 

Investment Strategy

Deputy Edward Lord asked a question of the Chair of the Investment Committee regarding the City Corporation’s future investment strategy and the importance of demonstrating the organisation’s values through its investment portfolio, particularly in the context of the current COVID-19 crisis and its impacts.

 

In reply, the Chair agreed that businesses should be acting in the interests of their staff, communities, and in the national interest, as well as in the interests of shareholders, at this time of crisis.? He also agreed that the City Corporation should be investing for the long-term in a sustainable way, balancing the maximisation of income streams whilst holding itself to the highest standards and investing consistently with the UN Principles for Responsible Investment that it had signed up to.?He added that the City Corporation was working with its investment managers to promote responsible business in line with its Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) commitments, through active engagement with businesses within the portfolio, and was also promoting these principles strongly through the Green Finance Institute and Impact Investing Institute. 

 

Support and financial assistance for service departments affected by COVID

Tracey Graham asked the Chair of the Policy & Resources Committee a question concerning the financial impact of COVID on service departments, seeking clarification as to what assurances had been given in relation to making up for lost external income.

 

Responding, the Chair observed that she was not able to provide assurances that the losses of individual departments or institutions could be made good, noting that the pandemic had had a significant impact on the City’s overall finances potentially in the order of an annualised deficit of £60m-70m, with around two-thirds of that impact falling on City Fund.

 

Lost income had been the primary driver and significant thought would need to be given to a range of options for managing the position. The informal meeting of Resource Allocation Sub Committee in early July would receive an update on both the in-year budget position and the Medium-Term Financial Plan, leading on to a re-budgeting exercise in early autumn when decisions could be taken. In the meantime, it was vital that every effort be made to contain costs and minimise loss of income.

 

Replying to a supplementary question from Tracey Graham concerning the Fundamental Review, the Chair confirmed that consideration would need to be given to the impact of COVID in taking this forward.

 

In response to a supplementary question from Deputy Philip Woodhouse concerning the potential for furloughing staff, the Chair advised of the limitations of that scheme in the context of the City Corporation’s myriad functions and the difficulties of applying any a blanket policy due to the contracts of employment used. The approach had been not to furlough staff at this time but to seek to redeploy them wherever possible; however, if re-deployment was not an option, then furloughing was not ruled out. The situation was under constant review and a report on furloughing options and employee redeployment was to be considered by the Establishment Committee at its next meeting.

 

Homelessness Provision

Natasha Lloyd-Owen asked a question of the Chair of the Community & Children’s Services Committee, referencing recent news articles concerning financial support from central government in respect of homelessness provision. She sought confirmation that there was continued funding for the provision of hotel or other temporary accommodation for those willing to accept it and whether steps were being taken to ensure that all those who had accepted temporary accommodation could remain until they could be supported into longer-term accommodation.

 

Responding, the Chair advised that he was encouraged to note that the Government had been swift to respond to  media articles, refuting suggestions that funding was being withdrawn or that people would be asked to leave hotels. He added that he was also looking forward to further clarification from central government regarding individuals with no recourse to public funds.  

 

The Chair confirmed that 48 people referred by the City’s outreach team were being accommodated in government-funded provision, with a further 44 housed from the streets by the City Corporation in bed spaces procured in hotels, specialist hostels and the Youth Hostel at St Pauls. There was continued funding for these. And officers were already exploring options to secure pathways and to provide the supported accommodation that could assist in achieving a lasting end to rough sleeping.