Issue - meetings

B Report of the Director of Housing Services

1.      The Council is to adopt, at this stage, the ‘selection’ methodology for choosing Tenant Board members as indicated as the preferred option by 50% of the tenants responding to the consultation and it will promote further resident engagement in the process of establishing its new resident involvement structure.

2.      The Council is to agree an initial Area Housing Partnership Board composition of two Members, three local senior staff and five tenants with an option for the Boards to further co-opt independent Board members. 

3.      During October to December 2009, the Council is to implement a programme to support the development of the Area Housing Partnership Boards by the promotion and provision of joint training and Board development sessions aimed at the relevant Members, Officers and tenants for each of the four Housing Areas.

4.      The Council is to note the initial suggestions made by tenants during the consultation about what should constitute the elements of a Board member person specification.

5.      The process of appointing tenants to the Area Partnership Boards will begin in accordance with the timetables outlined in the report

6.      A further progress report is to be forwarded to Cabinet in March 2010.

7.      Elected Member engagement as part of this process will commence.

Councillor Clarke addressed cabinet and referred to a previous call-in on the issue, on the grounds that inadequate consultation had taken place but the Committee had not supported this view and the call-in had failed.  He then referred to the small number of people who attended the meetings and suggested that a large proportion of tenants may not have understood the letter or its implications. He now considered that two very poor consultations had taken place resulting in an outcome that was not representative of the 12,800 tenants.  He warned that if the recommendations were adopted, he would call the issue in and if that failed, he would apply for a judicial review.

As the relevant Portfolio Holder, Councillor Beardsworth presented the report to Cabinet.  She explained that PEP, who had carried out the consultation, had been appointed by a selection board of tenants and that every tenant in the Borough had been given the opportunity to have their say on the proposed tenant engagement structure.  The low response was in line with similar exercises in other local authorities and reflected tenants’ lack of interest in engagement with the Council.  However tenants were being encouraged to become involved through Area Boards and assistance would be given to local resident bodies. Once in place, the structure would be reviewed in two years.  Councillor Beardsworth then commented on the internal disputes that had led to the failure of NTACT and expressed the need to engage with tenants who were willing to listen and be listened to.  The intention was to encourage as many people as possible to become involved and not be put off coming to meetings.

Councillor Church suggested that, as NTACT had failed to represent tenants, an alternative body was needed.  He felt that those who were in favour of election to the board, rather than selection, could have lobbied to persuade more tenants to return their tear-off slips.

Councillor PD Varnsverry gave an account of a meeting with a member of the tenants’ sounding board who had been 100% in favour of the new structure as the way forward for tenants.  The previous scheme had failed and there was a need of people representing tenants to make positive contributions.

Councillor B Hoare observed that the very behaviour displayed at tonight’s meeting was indicative of the reasons that NTACT had been banned from holding meetings at the Guildhall and why an alternative tenant engagement structure needed to be put in place. The scheme should be area-based to take the process closer to the people.  Although there had been a low response to the consultation, there had been a flavour of what the tenants wanted.  He was happy to support selection at this stage with the proviso that a different way could be considered if there was a clear steer.

There was concern at the apathy of residents in the participation in something this significant and the importance was stressed of a structure that truly represented tenants and allowed the ‘small  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11