Social Housing Waiting Lists (S.R. 11/2011) Scrutiny Report: Response of the Minister for Housing

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 30 September 2011 regarding:

Decision Reference: MD-H-2011-0087
Decision Summary Title :	DS – Response to SR11/2011		Date of Decision Summary:	20 September 2011
Decision Summary Author:	Director of Strategic Development		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Oral		Person Giving Oral Report:	Director of Strategic Development
Written Report Title :	n/a		Date of Written Report:	n/a
Written Report Author:	n/a		Written Report : Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)	n/a
Subject: Housing Minister’s response to the HSSH Scrutiny Panel report S.R.11/2011 Social Housing Waiting Lists.
Decision(s): The Minister approved his response to Scrutiny Report S.R.11/2011 for presentation to the States Assembly.
Reason(s) for Decision: To ensure that a formal response is made to S.R.11/2011
Resource Implications: NIL
Action required: Director of Strategic Development to refer the response to the Assistant Greffier and Publications Editor for presentation to the States as an R.
Signature:		Position: MINISTER
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Social Housing Waiting Lists (S.R. 11/2011) Scrutiny Report: Response of the Minister for Housing

Ministerial Response: SR11/2011 Ministerial Response required by 6th October 2011

Review title: Social Housing Waiting Lists

Scrutiny Panel: Health, Social Security and Housing

Introduction

Findings

	Key Findings	Comments

1	There is a risk that the Affordable Housing Gateway will not meet one of its stated aims of establishing a single waiting list for all providers of social housing.	If the Parishes do not wish to participate in the new Gateway then this need not weaken the gateway’s aims significantly. The Parishes together have only 155 units of accommodation (including sheltered) which represents just 2.5% of the overall social Housing stock. What is clear is that the Gateway will be available for the Parishes to use should they wish to do so, given that it will provide a ready pool of means tested potential tenants and would bring efficiency benefits it is likely that some will want to do so.
2	The current eligibility criteria for social housing mask the true level of housing need in the Island.	The Minister agrees, indeed it was the Housing Minister who drew attention to this fact through the 2009 Green Paper and it is the Minister who has proposed the gateway as a means of widening access and providing more detailed information on housing needs.
3	The plans for the Affordable Housing Gateway mirror developments in the allocation of social housing that have occurred in the UK.	The gateway is indeed similar to many areas of good practice in the UK. The proposed Gateway has been identified as a means of pooling applications in a manner which is accessible by applicants but which is flexible enough to deal with the scale of Jersey’s social housing provision and its range of providers as well as permitting a future move away from traditional allocation based lettings to choice based lettings or some other variant.
4	There is currently no statutory basis for the provision and regulation of social housing in Jersey.	This is not disputed and is the reason why a new regulatory structure was proposed in the 2009 Green Paper. Developing an appropriate regulatory framework is a key work stream in the transformation programme.
5	It will not be possible to verify whether the Affordable Housing Gateway has achieved its aims for some time after its implementation.	Monitoring will be key. Very quickly the Gateway will:- Remove any duplication in existing social housing waiting lists, particularly between the 4 main housing trusts and the Housing Department Ensure that all allocations to the 4 main housing trusts are made on a priority needs basis, this is not presently the case Begin to provide information to inform new policy development particularly in respect of initiatives to extend home ownership to those presently registered on the existing waiting lists.

Recommendations

	Recommendations	To	Accept/ Reject	Comments	Target date of action/ completion

1	The Minister for Housing must continue consultation with the Parishes to ensure that the Parishes understand and accept the Affordable Housing Gateway.		Accept	The Minister is happy to confirm that he will continue to consult with the Parishes.
2	In his White Paper, the Minister for Housing must explain how the Affordable Housing Gateway compares to schemes in the UK. This must include some evaluation of alternatives already established in the UK.		Reject	The White Paper is a set of policy proposals and will contain details of how mechanisms such as the Gateway will function and what benefits it will deliver. The White Paper will not set out in any detail alternative mechanisms which the advisors appointed by the Minister have not recommended or which have been ruled out.
3	The Minister for Housing must ensure that the Affordable Housing Gateway is established within a statutory framework.		Accept	It is proposed that legislation will be introduced requiring Social Housing providers to be licensed. A condition of that licensing will be compliance with a number of regulations. One of these regulations will set out how the Gateway must be used by licensed social housing providers. However, with the support of key stakeholders it is proposed that the gateway will be introduced prior to the regulatory framework initially as a means of bringing together all existing waiting lists. Early development allows some of the key benefits to be derived and allows processes to be ‘road tested’ prior to being enshrined in statute.
4	If the Housing Transformation Programme is pursued, consideration will need to be given to the terms and conditions of staff to be transferred from the Department of Housing.		Accept	This is already a key work stream within the Transformation Programme. The States Employment Board, Staff and their representatives have been consulted throughout.
5	Prior to implementation, the Minister for Housing must develop a mechanism by which the Affordable Housing Gateway can be monitored during its initial stages.		Accept	Monitoring is key.

Conclusion

The Minister accepts the conclusions reached by the panel in its report, however, the Minister has the following observations:-

6.4 The Parishes make up only 2.5% of all Social Housing provision. Further attempts will be made to engage with the Parishes, however, the Minister has no plans to attempt to compel the Parishes to comply, though their involvement is undoubtedly important.

6.4 It is the banding system within the Gateway process and not the Gateway itself which will provide better understanding of waiting times.

6.5 & 6.6 It is not proposed that the Gateway should have any eligibility criteria, other than residential status and that the applicant is not in a position to be able to buy their own on the market unassisted. Everyone else would then have a right to be registered, have their means tested and be assigned a priority band. By introducing additional eligibility criteria you inevitably exclude some sector of society and the information base which the Gateway can provide is weakened.