Agenda item

Report of the Executive Director of Community and Children’s Services.

The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director for Community and Children’s Services concerning the Housing Investment Programme.

Introducing the report, the Chairman repeated his comments made at the Court of Common Council meeting on 26 June 2025 that the Housing Investment Programme was a priority for the City Corporation.

The Chairman acknowledged that, at £205million over a 10-year window, the Housing Investment Programme came at a considerable financial cost. However, he said that it was only this large because the City Corporation had historically underinvested in these estates; he felt it was long-past time to make these commitments for residents. He assured Members that the financial outlay would not be immediate or required in one tranche, but phased along with the programme. The commitment for the first five-years of the programme had been made, and the Chairman and other senior Members had recently met with officers to discuss how to procure the remaining funds.

Looking forward, the Chairman informed the Committee that he had asked the Town Clerk to commission a viability assessment of the City Corporation’s current estates, identifying the scope for intensification and delivery of new units. He would continue to chair regular update meetings with officers, which would also include the Chairman of the Finance Committee, the Chair of the Investment Committee, the Deputy Chair of the Police & Resources Committee and the Lead Member for Resident Engagement.

During discussion, Members noted that it was important to also consider the needs of residents who lived in non-City Corporation housing, such as the Mansell Street Estate which was administered by the Guinness Trust. The Chairman agreed with these comments and said he felt there was scope to develop these sites, in partnership with the Guiness Trust and third-party stakeholders.

A Member, also the Chair of the Community and Children’s Services Committee, emphasised the importance of improved communications with residents to strengthen the relationship with the City Corporation. She had not been present for the motion on housing at the June Court of Common Council meeting, but, having reviewed the meeting, thought that there was some confusion amongst Members on the scope and legal framework of the Housing Revenue Account. She had accordingly arranged an all-Member briefing on this topic to help Members understand the possibilities. She also said that the Community and Children’s Services department was focusing on the compliance issue and had a clear action plan. She also drew the Committee’s attention to paragraph 22 of the report, which demonstrated that the size and scale of the improvement programme required substantial additional resources in management capacity.

A Member asked if it would be possible to establish a Working Party to develop communications with residents. The Chairman said he would discuss the topic with the Housing Group.

Several Members discussed methods to expedite the Programme, with one Member noting the complexities caused by the Golden Lane Estate’s listed status and asking if it was worth considering de-listing the Estate so that the improvements could be progressed more quickly and efficiently. While supportive of this proposal, others said that even working within the listed status a more pragmatic approach was required. The Executive Director of Community and Children’s Services said she could explore delisting but warned that it might cause challenges leading to further delays.

A Member noted that paragraph 14 of the report set out the funding sources. While the information presented was factually correct, there were several funding options being explored. This was confirmed by the Executive Director of Community and Children’s Services. The Deputy Chairman also requested that officers return with a timeline on initial views of funding following the summer recess. In terms of financial modelling, the Chamberlain said that she would get the first indication on the outcomes of the Fair Funding Review and transitional relief around September. The final local government settlement would be available in November.

Members asked that the terminology in reports clarify that the focus was on social housing, as the City Corporation was involved in housing in several other areas. They asked that officers return with a paper providing a holistic look at the role the City Corporation played in social housing beyond the HRA. and that the required fund was expenditure rather than investment. The Chamberlain confirmed that the programme did not count as an investment as would be handled by the Investment Committee.

The Chairman concluded the discussion by saying that the Programme required a commitment going well into the future.

RESOLVED: That Members:

·           Note the identified shortfall in capital and revenue funding

·           Note the progress on the Golden Lane investment Programme and the establishment of a Golden Lane Advisory Board to support that work.