Agenda item

Debby Weller (Head of Housing Strategy and Policy) and Adam Stephenson (Assistant Director – Housing Needs & Homelessness) were in attendance to respond to Members’ queries in relation to the Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy Consultation Draft as set out in the agenda pack.

Members enquired how the Government’s reported decision to stop sharing temporary accommodation data across London boroughs might impact the Council’s four?year homelessness strategy. Officers were unaware of such a decision but stated that losing access to this data would be unfortunate, as London?wide data was used for benchmarking. They noted that pan?London work on data analysis continued and that online resources remained available, and asked Councillors to share any information they had in respect of this.

Councillors sought further clarification as to whether the central homelessness dashboard, once live, would be accessible to Members of the Committee. It was confirmed that a suite of performance indicators was being developed, capturing both national targets and local MTFS priorities. The dashboard would be available to CMT, the Cabinet, and other stakeholders.

Members asked whether demand modelling was possible regarding asylum seekers, new arrivals and Chagossians, noting ongoing pressures. In response it was stated that numbers were tracked through Government?required submissions and that trends were not constant, with waves of different groups over time. It was noted that numbers in recent years had been higher than before. It was confirmed that MTFS planning included modelling based on 18 months of Chagossian trend data and that planning incorporated both local homelessness and additional demand from rough sleepers and Chagossian households over the next three years.

In response to further questioning from the Committee, it was noted that forecasted and modelled costs were included in the published budget, although figures were not broken down by cohort.

Councillors enquired how many households evicted from private rented accommodation had received discretionary housing payments (DHPs) in the previous financial year. Officers confirmed that DHP data existed but was not available at the meeting. It was uncertain whether payments could be broken down by eviction type, but overall numbers could be provided. The Committee queried whether DHP awards had increased over time and whether the allowance was fully used. It was confirmed that the entire DHP budget was always spent each year, and that award volumes depended on available budget rather than application levels.

In response to Members’ requests for clarification, it was explained that work was carried out within the Statutory Homelessness Framework and support for households lacking a local connection was limited. It was stated that this was not thought to be a significant issue.

Councillors sought further information regarding the rate of return homelessness among rough sleepers who had been placed in accommodation. It was confirmed that figures were not available. It was recognised that entrenched rough sleepers with complex needs sometimes struggled to maintain accommodation, although numbers were small. Officers noted that Hillingdon had around 14 entrenched cases and reported some successful sustained placements.

Members asked about cost pressures arising from temporary accommodation and how they were mitigated. Officers stated that the published budget included relevant growth items and savings plans. Gross expenditure for the next year was forecast at approximately £35 million, with net costs around £19.5 million.

Councillors enquired how many of the 500 homes referred to in the Strategy had been purchased. It was confirmed that this matter fell more within the housing remit and that a response would be sought from the appropriate officer.

With regards to temporary accommodation, Members heard that self?contained units were used almost exclusively, with hotels used only in rare circumstances, such as where specialist facilities were required. It was explained that all households in temporary accommodation were charged rent, with contributions assessed through the Housing Benefit system.

Members asked how many of the 793 verified rough sleepers in 2024–25 were asylum seekers. Officers responded that such data would be provided after the meeting. It was added that CHAIN data broke down previous accommodation pathways. Councillors queried why the report described the increase in asylum?seeker rough sleepers as “anecdotal” if data existed. It was explained that the wording reflected comments made informally but it was accepted that data could support the statement.

The Chair sought further information as to how the Council worked with Heathrow Airport, given the high proportion of rough sleepers located there. Officers stated that the relationship had improved greatly, particularly during COVID, when all airport rough sleepers had been moved into hotels. It was reported that Heathrow had increased security patrols working with outreach partners, enabling faster intervention. It was stated that rough sleeper numbers at Heathrow had been kept well below pre?COVID levels and that more rough sleepers were now located elsewhere in the Borough.

The Chair asked how the Council balanced confidentiality and support for rough sleepers with the concerns of affected residents. It was confirmed that work was undertaken closely with voluntary sector partners and agreed that the Strategy could include more about communication with residents.

With regard to support for veterans, particularly those experiencing homelessness, the Committee was informed that CHAIN identified veterans, who also received priority on the housing register. Officers noted previous engagement with veterans’ organisations and said that work was underway to broaden and regularise partnership engagement, including through annual or more frequent homelessness forums.

Councillors asked whether rough sleepers on borough borders knew which council to approach, and whether Hillingdon Council met with GLA partners regarding homelessness. It was explained that outreach teams identified rough sleepers within Hillingdon and took the lead in supporting them, though not always by placing them in local accommodation. Officers confirmed regular meetings with the GLA, particularly around funded accommodation schemes for homeless families and rough sleepers.

In respect of gaps between service provision and the needs of rough sleepers with complex needs, Members heard that the number of rough sleepers with complex needs, particularly mental health needs, was increasing. Officers noted reductions in mental health outreach owing to external financial pressures and described challenges where individuals had dual diagnosis but did not meet thresholds for formal care. It was stated that the Council continued to engage partners and seek funding.

It was agreed that the drafting of Select Committee comments to Cabinet regarding the Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy would be delegated to Democratic Services in consultation with the Chair and Labour Lead.

Councillor Kaur suggested adding “empathy” to the Council’s stated values as set out on page 21 of the draft Strategy, which the Chair agreed could be considered offline. The Committee agreed to the recommendations.

RESOLVED That the Residents’ Services Select Committee:

1.    Noted the contents of the Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Review; and

2.    Agreed that the drafting of Select Committee comments to Cabinet regarding the Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy be delegated to Democratic Services in conjunction with the Chair and in consultation with the Opposition Lead.