Agenda item

Mr A Brady (Member for Canterbury City North), Mrs S Chandler (Cabinet Member for Integrated Children’s Services), Mrs S Hammond (Corporate Director of Children, Young People and Education), and Mr R Love, OBE (Cabinet Member for Education and Skills).

1.    The Chairman explained that the decision had been to Children, Young People and Education Cabinet Committee on 17 October, and a call-in had been submitted and subsequently rejected. Following Scrutiny Committee procedure, a request had been raised to add the decision onto the agenda for further consideration and discussion.

2.  Mr Brady explained that the reason he had requested the decision on the Scrutiny Committee agenda was for several reasons. These included the decision not meeting the requirements of the Children and Social Work Act 2017, as he felt the decision was not in line with the best interests of children and young people in Kent and had not taken into account their views and feelings. He questioned whether children and young people and had been consulted on the decision. Furthermore, the original paper had outlined that potential risks in the decision would be managed through the work of the District and Borough Councils within their capacity as the local housing associations. He questioned if local councils were involved in this decision and what consultation had been undertaken with them. He felt that the decision did not consider the knock-on costs for KCC, as the decision could increase homelessness in the borough, and therefore not provide a net saving.

3.  Mrs Chandler explained that care-leavers had been included within the decision, and some care-leavers had felt that the accommodation provided by KCC did not support them becoming independent and they would rather have more support in procuring their own accommodation. Discussions had also taken place between KCC and district/borough councils as well as with Kent Housing Group. Officers added that engagement with district councils had begun in 2021  when KCC officers had met individually with borough councils and the Housing Options Group, which contained all thirteen local councils. In September 2021 the Chair of the Housing Options Group attended the Corporate Parenting Panel, and officers had attended the Kent Finance Officers Group alongside district council officers to discuss the proposal. Mrs Hammond explained that legislation and statutory guidance mandated councils to take reasonable steps to keep in touch and re-establish contact with care-leavers up until the age of 21; and have a personal adviser up until the age of 25 if the young person wished to stay in touch. The legislation did not mandate the Council to provide accommodation to care-leavers past the age of 18, and this had been a discretionary service. She explained that KCC would continue to offer a personal adviser and provide assistance for housing where the care-leaver used to live or was seeking employment. Accommodation would continue to be provided for 18-19 year olds, which was not a statutory duty, and the decision would not be implemented until April 2024, which for those currently aged 16 provided three years of preparation for the young person until they turned 19. Officers added that the Children’s Council had been presented with the proposals early in the process.

4.  Members raised concerns as many care-leavers did not have any family support, so often needed the Council for accommodation support. Members also raised concerns with the availability of council housing, house prices, and rent prices, all of which could be barriers to care-leavers having stable and secure housing at 19 years old.

5.  Members questioned how many children and young people in care would be affected by this decision. It was confirmed that 90 young people would be affected. There were 332 children in care, but 242 of these were unaccompanied asylum-seeking children who, under new immigration policies, would not be entitled to any services or support after the age of 18.

6.  Members queried how the impact of the decision would be monitored and reported. Mrs Hammond explained that KCC reported to central government on how many care-leavers became homeless or were in appropriate accommodation. This was also reported within KCC as key performance indicators on a monthly basis.

7.  Members voted on the recommendation: 12 Members agreed; 0 voted against; and 1 abstained.

RESOLVED that the Committee:

a)    Considered the information provided in response to questions raised during this item and make any comments or recommendations it deems appropriate.