5
a) Question from Councillor David Beavan to the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Resources
How many “holiday let businesses” in Southwold Ward were refused a Covid grant application in 2020 and 2021, and are there any outstanding investigations? Further are they still allowed to escape council tax and rates by pretending to be a genuine business? I only need headline figures and do not require any personal information that may identify them.
Response from Councillor Maurice Cook:
To date, no applications from businesses for Covid grants in Southwold have been refused, because all applicants were initially assessed as meeting the eligibility criteria. At this time, I cannot confirm or deny whether there are any outstanding Council investigations into potential fraud in relation to Covid grants. It would not be appropriate for me to release this information. However, I can reassure you, Councillor Beavan, that East Suffolk Council has zero tolerance of fraud and the appropriate enforcement action was always taken to recover public funds and bring perpetrators to justice when fraud was identified.
The total number of self-catering holiday units in East Suffolk as at 1st September 2020 was 1422 and was currently 1523, an increase of 101 throughout the whole of the district.
Cllr Beavan did suggest to me, in separate correspondence, that holiday lets in his ward had doubled to 573 in the last year. However, in replicating his search it was found that this figure included all types of holiday opportunities and any property, in surrounding parishes, which included Southwold in an address line.
The correct figure for Southwold, Walberswick and Reydon parishes last year was 361 self-catering holiday units. (281 + 45 + 35). This year there are currently 378 (294 + 45 + 39) which represented an increase of 17 over the year.
It would be fair to say, therefore, that holiday lets have been on the rise for some time, due to low RV’s on the properties and the ability to claim Small Business Rate Relief as a result, and that this had increased, as more people become aware of the opportunity to reduce their liabilities.
Members will be aware that in March 2021, I announced that, in response to our lobbying, HM Treasury were to introduce plans to legislate to change the law to strengthen the self-catering accommodation criteria for business rates, to account for actual days the property was rented. This would ensure that owners of properties cannot reduce their tax liability by declaring that a property was available for let, while making little or no actual effort to do so.
Upon recent enquiry of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, we have now been advised that the regulations that will be necessary to deliver the requisite changes, will be taken forward over the autumn period. I’m sure Members across the Chamber will welcome the imminent closing of this apparent loophole, which was something that East Suffolk Council has actively sought for some time.
Supplementary Question from Councillor David Beavan
To be clear, there were no investigations and no grants were refused? I find it strange that you are not able to say if there are any investigations underway or outstanding.
Response from Councillor Cook
I cannot confirm or deny if there are any ongoing investigations, it would not be appropriate for me to release any information on this matter.
b) Question from Councillor Janet Craig to the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Community Health
The LGA is currently calling for a change to the Licensing Act to require operators to take public health into account in running their premises, alongside wider safety and crime issues. Councils can only currently consider four issues when deciding whether to grant licences – the prevention of crime and disorder; public safety; prevention of public nuisance; and protection of children from harm.
The LGA maintains that giving councils the powers to consider the public health impact of licensing decisions is vital to protect communities from harm, reduce NHS costs and save lives.
It wants to see the Licensing Act updated to include a public health objective and allow for action where premises fail to protect the health of their communities, Councils also need greater access to NHS data, including hospital admissions and ambulance call-out details to assist decision making.
Excessive alcohol consumption is estimated to cost the NHS £3.2 billion a year, with additional costs falling to Social Services, Police and businesses.
The proposed change to the Licensing Act would place a legal requirement on businesses to think about public health issues and give councils long-term tools to act on public health risk risks.We are aware that this Council has twin duties, both to support local businesses with a vibrant economy and to protect our communities from harm, so what strategy is this Council implementing to monitor the impact on public health of the night-time economy in particular, as it re-opens post Covid?
Response from Councillor Rudd:
East Suffolk Council, as the local licensing authority, regulates the sale of alcohol, the supply of alcohol, the provision of various forms of entertainment and the provision of late night refreshment in the district pursuant to the Licensing Act 2003.
Whilst public health was not currently a licensing objective, it was important to note that since 2013, Directors of Public Health in England have been included in the list of responsible authorities to be consulted by licensing authorities on licensing applications. Therefore, Directors of Public Health, like all Responsible Authorities, are entitled to object to and make representations on individual licensing applications and to trigger reviews of existing Premises Licences. Objections to applications for new premises licences and applications for reviews of existing premises licences from responsible authorities are determined by East Suffolk Council’s Licensing Sub-Committees.
East Suffolk Council’s Licensing Services and Suffolk Constabulary regulate and enforce the responsible sale and supply of alcohol by licensed premises. The sale of alcohol to a person who is drunk, or to a child, or proxy sales are criminal offences which would also be considered serious breaches of a Premises Licence and in such cases appropriate enforcement action would be taken by the licensing authority and/or the police against the Premises Licence, the Designated Premises Supervisor and/or the Premises Licence Holder.
Licensing Services has a welfare page on its website where it signposts persons seeking support with alcohol addiction to NHS and specialist support organisations.
East Suffolk Council also works closely with our public sector and Clinical Commissioning Group colleagues to address the wider determinants of health and their impact on individual health and wellbeing. For example, we are working on a project with Norfolk and Waveney CCG and partners around health inequalities in the north of the District, which includes a focus on preventable health conditions. Alcohol was one factor that contributes to the prevalence of preventable health conditions (along with smoking, poor diet and lack of activity) and we work (and will continue to work) with colleagues in public health to support those with substance abuse issues and support various tools, including social marketing, to encourage people to drink in moderation and understand the impact of alcohol on their body/health.
Supplementary Question from Councillor Janet Craig
If the local statistics from the NHS and ambulance service were to indicate that consideration of the impact on public health would be beneficial in our consideration of licencing decisions, would this Council support this change to the Licensing Act?
Response from Councillor Mary Rudd
Yes, I think the Council would. You may wish to suggest this as a matter to be referred to the Licensing Committee, in order that they can fully consider the matter and make recommendations in due course. It must also be noted that any changes to the Licensing Objectives would require the Licensing Act 2003 to be amended by Parliament.
c) Question from Councillor Tess Gandy to the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Resources
Given the significant number of recipients of Universal Credit across East Suffolk, what impact assessments have been undertaken, as a result of the planned cut to Universal Credit across our communities, to take into account the reduced ability of individuals and families to pay housing costs, including rent, Council Tax and increasing utility bills?
Response from Councillor Cook:
There will be no cut, as such, to Universal Credit as this extra support was announced by the Chancellor as a temporary measure in March 2020 to support those likely to be facing the most financial disruption as a result of the public health emergency. Alongside the temporary increase to Universal Credit and Tax Credits, the Government has invested over £352bn in measures to create, support and protect jobs and businesses – as well as introduced measures such as mortgage holidays and additional support for renters, and has worked with energy suppliers to protect those struggling with energy bills.
On top of the planned uprating, it was very welcome that the Government extended the temporary £20 per week increase to the Universal Credit standard allowance until the end of September 2021, meaning that the additional support has remained in place well beyond the end of economic restrictions.
At a local level, the Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme (LCTRS) will continue to receive the same level of support towards their Council Tax when the UC uplift ceases, and there was consequently no need to complete an impact assessment in respect of this. More generally, the Council carried out Equality Impact Assessments each year when considering rent, council tax, and fee and charge levels. In carrying out these assessments, the Council takes into account the range of measures that exist to mitigate the impact of any increases.
In this respect, a number of measures have been introduced by the Council and Anglia Revenues Partnership (ARP) in the last two years, to both directly support customers in respect of the impact of the pandemic, and to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of dealing with all benefits.
In 2020/21 the Council administered a Council Tax Hardship Fund allocation of £1.917m, which was used to reduce the council tax liability of working age LCTRS customers. The Hardship Fund covered the amount of the council tax that LCTRS claimants were required to pay, typically 8.5% under the Council’s scheme, up to a maximum of £150.
The Council obtained approval from MHCLG to utilise the remaining funding from this allocation the COVID Hardship Support Grant for working age LCTRS customers throughout the 2021/22 year, enabling a flat rate relief of £30 to be applied to their bills.
In addition to freezing its own element of the Council Tax for 2021/22, the Council also passed on £110,000 of Local Council Tax Support Grant to town and parish councils to enable them to also keep increases down this year.
Initiatives have been introduced to streamline customer experience and claiming requirements by utilising data share with DWP & HMRC. This means that customers are not required to make a separate claims to the Council to ask for help with their Council Tax and the burden of reporting changes in their circumstances has been reduced. In September, the Cabinet approved proposals to consult the public on further improvements to streamline the customer experience, from April 2022.
To help residents during the early part of last year the Council issued informal, soft reminders to residents who had not paid their Council Tax. The Council seeks every opportunity to engage with and help customers to pay their Council Tax, often spreading arrangements over an agreed and affordable period of time. ARP is about to launch smart use of technology to contact customers to remind them to pay before a formal reminder is issued.
Finally, LCTRS customers can also apply to the Council on the following link to request Exceptional Hardship help with their Council Tax. DHP and EHP Application - (www.financialassessments.co.uk)
Supplementary Question from Councillor Tess Gandy
Since my question was submitted, the situation has deteriorated rapidly and there has been a wholesale increase in the cost of gas and electricity, which will disproportionately affect those on lower incomes. Last week in Parliament, our MP, Peter Aldous, was one of only 4 Conservative MPs to speak against the removal of the Universal Credit uplift. He stated that UC had been frozen for 4 years and that there was a responsibility to protect those on the lowest incomes and the most vulnerable, from falling into poverty and despair. I ask that letters be written to the 3 MPs whose constituencies fall within our district. The first, to Peter Aldous to thank him for supporting this cause so passionately, and two further letters to be sent to Dan Poulter and Therese Coffey asking why they were not able to demonstrate the same humanity as Peter Aldous.
Response from Councillor Maurice Cook
The Labour Group are most welcome to contact the 3 MPs regarding this matter should they wish. This Council will not be writing to them on this occasion.