Members received and considered the report of the Head of Service Housing and Community which detailed the recommendations of the Anti-Poverty Task and Finish Group (APT&FG).

The APT&FG was established in January 2020  to investigate the effects of income, health and housing poverty on local people and the local services that support them.  The original timetable for the activity of the APT&FG had to be revised due to the impact of COVID-19.

The APT&FG held two events to gather evidence from external partners and internal Council colleagues to meet its objectives.  At the first event, partner agencies were asked to summarise the services they offered and provide details of the types of service user that accessed their services. The APT&FG also invited partner agencies to describe the main challenges service users experienced in relation to poverty and where the main gaps in service provision existed.

At the second event, the APT&FG received presentations from the Council’s housing needs, revenue and benefits and environmental health services and explored how these might be delivered differently to relieve poverty.  There was also a presentation to Members on the Council Tax Reduction (CTR) Scheme delivered by the Council’s technical consultant on the 27 April 2021. This summarised the range of CTR schemes nationally and how the Rother scheme compared.

The evidence gathering sessions provided reassuring evidence of the levels of commitment from the professionals present to alleviating the symptoms of poverty.  However, the sessions did identify areas for improvement in how the Council and partner services were delivered and it was suggested that a multi-agency Anti-Poverty Strategy may well offer partners a means of achieving improvements in these areas.

The two events underlined to Members that the causes of poverty were complex and driven by a range of interrelated forces across income, health, housing, employment and education. Good working relationships existed between many of these services, notwithstanding the scope for improvement that had been identified.

Challenges relating to the coordination of services and the confusion experienced by service users forced to navigate between an array of statutory, voluntary and community services were also identified and there was some evidence of a duplication of services.  In addition, challenges related to the accessibility of services and their promotion were identified.  Many solutions were proposed by attendees to the evidence gathering sessions which were outlined in the report before Members.  The CTR presentation in April 2021 illustrated that Rother was ahead of many local authority areas in having an income banded system in operation and that the level of financial support offered was typical. Further work would be undertaken in time for any final decisions in June, to illustrate the impact of increasing the amount of help given.

It was clear from the evidence gathering sessions that the causes of poverty were multiple and complex and its symptoms wide ranging. The effects of poverty were felt by a range of different sectors of the community across different demographic groups and geographic locations. Therefore, it was recommended that strategic objectives should be developed between partner services alongside a Strategy Action Plan, the delivery of which should be led by the Council and Rother Voluntary Action, in partnership though the Local Strategic Partnership.

Councillor Coleman, Chairman of the APT&FG, thanked Members of the Group for their hard work and paid tribute to the officers involved for their support.

Members were given the opportunity to ask questions and the following points were noted during the discussion:

•           developing an Anti-Poverty Strategy was crucial to the leadership role of the Council;

•           funding to improve transport services from areas such as Sidley would enable younger residents to travel to youth centres, part-time work and the college during the evenings;

•           access to Universal Credit was key to supporting residents;

•           the existence of a Hardship Fund gave access to forward payments whilst Universal Credit applications were being processed;

•           although the work of the Group was completed for the moment Members were keen for the APT&FG to be revived to review the Strategy once in place;

•           the Council’s Customer Service Team were very knowledgeable and able to signpost residents to available services;

•           the use of Artificial Intelligence was suggested which would enable residents to enter a problem onto the website and an algorithm would provide details of services available to assist;

•           concerns were raised about increasing the maximum support currently provided under the CTR scheme, as all preceptors would be impacted, not just the Council.  All would need to be consulted with and their views and comments considered by full Council when making any decisions; and

•           public donations towards the Hardship Fund would be in addition to current arrangements, but would need to be explored by officers, as no mechanism to collect payments was currently in place.

RESOLVED: That Cabinet be requested to agree that:

1)         an Anti-Poverty Strategy and Action Plan be developed for the district between partner services, led by the Council in partnership with Rother Voluntary Action and the Local Strategic Partnership;

2)         the Council Tax Reduction Scheme Hardship Fund be reviewed by officers and report back to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on options for improving the promotion of the scheme and the potential of establishing a mechanism for public donations to supplement the Hardship Fund;

3)         the maximum support under the Council Tax Reduction Scheme be increased above the current 80% when the Council achieves its financial stability ambition, as set out in the draft Corporate Plan; and 

4)         consultation takes place with the public and key stakeholders on improving access to Council Tax Reduction Scheme for self-employed people who are also carers and those self-employed residents who are registered disabled, as outlined in this report.

(Councillor Maynard declared a Personal Interest in this matter as an Executive Member of East Sussex County Council and in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct remained in the meeting during the consideration thereof).