Agenda item

(Finance Portfolio Holder) To consider the attached report (C-009-2014/15).

(1)        That the Local Council Tax Support scheme for 2015/16 should aim to be cost neutral for the Council be agreed as a general principle;

(2)        That the following elements of the scheme be approved for consultation purposes:

            (a)        The maximum Local Council Tax Support for people of working age           be reduced from 80%;

            (b)        Child Benefit be included as income for people of working age;

            (c)        A requirement that people of working age to have been resident in   the Epping Forest District for a period of time before they were eligible to      receive Local Council Tax Support; and

            (d)        a similar waiver of the residency qualification be applied to members          of the Armed Forces as contained        in section 14.3 (a) to (d) of the Housing         Allocations Scheme; and

(3)        That a public consultation exercise on the 2015/16 scheme be undertaken between August and October 2014.

The Finance Portfolio Holder presented a report on the Local Council Tax Support Scheme for 2015/16.

The Portfolio Holder reminded the Cabinet that the Council had adopted the current Local Council Tax Support scheme for 2014/15 on 17 December 2013. Consideration now had to be given to the scheme for the financial year 2015/16, which would require approval by the Council in December 2014. If the current scheme was to be amended, then it would be necessary to undertake public consultation on any proposed amendments before the scheme for 2015/16 could be adopted. In view of the timescales, it was necessary for the consultation to be undertaken between August and October 2014 to ensure that the correct procedure had been followed if changes to the scheme needed to be made.

The Portfolio Holder stated that the suggested general principle was for the scheme to be cost neutral to the Council. To this end, some changes to the current scheme had been suggested for consultation, these being:

·         the maximum Local Council Tax Support for people of working age be reduced from the current level of 80%;

·         Child Benefit be included as income for people of working age; and

·         a requirement for people of working age to have resided in the District for a period of time before they could claim Local Council Tax Support.

The Housing Portfolio Holder welcomed the residency clause as a possible change to the scheme; the Housing Allocations Scheme already had a similar residency requirement. Further information concerning any ongoing legal challenges was requested, and whether an exception for Armed Forces personnel could also be consulted upon.

The Portfolio Holder responded that a judicial review against Sandwell Metropolitan District Council in respect of their two-year residency requirement, had been upheld by the High Court but the main issue was badly written policy. A further legal challenge against the residency requirement in the policy by Sandwell Metropolitan District Council from the Child Poverty Action Group was due to be heard by the High Court in the near future. No legal challenges had been brought against either Tendring or Basildon District Councils, both of whom had included residency requirements in their schemes this year. Exceptions for Armed Forces personnel could be included provided that it had been properly consulted upon. However, there were currently no Armed Forces personnel receiving Council Tax Benefit residing within the District.

The Housing Portfolio Holder proposed that a similar waiver of the proposed residency qualification be applied to members of the Armed Forces, as currently contained in section 14.3 (a) to (d) of the Housing Allocations Scheme; this was seconded by the Environment Portfolio Holder.

In response to further questions from Members, The Director of Resources stated that a further reduction in the money provided by the Government for the Local Council Tax Benefit Scheme was planned. It was acknowledged that it was difficult to consult when the exact reduction was not known, but the Council was under a legal requirement to consult with the public now on possible changes to the scheme and then examine the exact figures when they were publicised later in the year. The scheme was kept within budget during 2013/14 and a further report scheduled for the Cabinet meeting in December would have all the necessary figures for Members to make the final decision.

A local member for Epping Hemnall commented that the more complex the scheme became then the more difficult it would be to administer the scheme, and more expensive. Any further reduction in support would affect the working poor the most and the residency qualification could discourage people from moving to find work. It was also felt that the inclusion of child benefit would be highlighted as a significant issue.

Decision:

(1)        That the Local Council Tax Support scheme for 2015/16 should aim to be cost neutral for the Council be agreed as a general principle;

(2)        That the following elements of the scheme be approved for consultation purposes:

            (a)        The maximum Local Council Tax Support for people of working age           be reduced from 80%;

            (b)        Child Benefit be included as income for people of working age;

            (c)        A requirement that people of working age to have been resident in   the Epping Forest District for a period of time before they were eligible to      receive Local Council Tax Support; and

            (d)        a similar waiver of the residency qualification be applied to members          of the Armed Forces as contained in section 14.3 (a) to (d) of the Housing     Allocations Scheme; and

(3)        That a public consultation exercise on the 2015/16 scheme be undertaken between August and October 2014.

Reasons for Decision:

The Council was required to undertake consultation prior to agreeing any major amendments to the Local Council Tax Support scheme. If amendments were to be made for 2015/16 then the revised scheme had to be agreed by the Council and be in place by 31 January 2015.

Other Options Considered and Rejected:

To make no changes to the current scheme. However, if the Local Government Settlement reduced funding for the scheme significantly then it would be too late to consult upon the necessary changes to keep the scheme cost neutral to the Council.