The Strategy and Service Development Manager introduced the report and highlighted the five key strategic aims and priorities.  She said there will be a six week consultation running from 21 September to 3 November 2017 and various stakeholders will be engaged in a variety of ways.  The Council would be actively targeting hard to reach groups and going out to engage with them at their own meetings.

The Board Member for Housing added that the Council could not solve the housing crisis in the city and needed to work with a range of partners.  The Council was making strong representations to government about national housing and homelessness policies and funding.

The Chair invited some external contributors to speak to inform the Panel’s deliberations on the strategy and the two subsequent items.

The Service Manager of the Oxford Street Population Outreach Team (SPOT) addressed the Panel.  She said that her team was fully funded by the City Council and included seven outreach workers who worked within the parameters set by the Council, its partners and government.  They worked on the basis that rough sleeping was harmful and dangerous and was not a safe option for people, so all other options would be explored.  Rough sleepers had very differing needs that had to be considered on an individual basis.  As such it was not helpful or accurate to describe rough sleepers as being a ‘community’.  There had been a significant increase in the numbers of people sleeping rough in Oxford, with about 25 new arrivals per month.  The Council was looking creatively at options which St. Mungo’s had some experience of from Bristol, Brighton and Reading.  She welcomed Council initiatives such as looking to utilise empty buildings as shelters.

A homeless person known as Neo addressed the Panel.  He said that in his view the numbers of rough sleepers had been under-stated but he agreed that the numbers of new rough sleepers were increasing, with a number of recent new arrivals coming from Banbury.  These people had complex issues and there was a need to break down barriers and build their trust but the approach taken by Outreach was too heavy-handed.  The local connection policy was a big issue because some rough sleepers had been in the city for a long time now and were clearly not going anywhere and needed more help.  It was now starting to get cold, which would lead to increased alcohol and drug use as rough sleepers struggled to cope.  There were not enough beds in the city and although the churches were coming together to provide ten extra beds, rough sleepers needed somewhere warm they could go 24 hours a day.  He said he was looking to open a shelter and had volunteers, some money and public support but needed a building. 

Sgt. Peter Neale addressed the Panel.  He said that there were massive vulnerabilities associated with rough sleeping and the feelings of hopelessness people felt, including addiction, debt and human exploitation.  As it got colder, more drugs and alcohol would be consumed, resulting in ancillary crimes such as shoplifting and thefts, begging and used syringes being left in public places.  The police tried to minimise the impacts on the public and to push rough sleepers towards Outreach and other support services.  The police had a welfare-based system for dealing with begging, with people given three warnings before civil or criminal options were considered.  The police had a homeless liaison officer in their problem solving team who was visible in the city centre and sometimes out until 4am.

In discussion and in answer to questions the Panel noted the following:

·         The Council wanted to engage with service users and people like Neo, as well as stakeholder representatives and they could provide their views confidentially.

·         Services were in place to support rough sleepers and this support was made clear to them but people needed to want help.

·         Problems with drug use were societal not specific to homeless people and required a range of solutions including addition support, arresting dealers and help for people to repair their circumstances.

·         There was an issue with dealing with people who want to sleep rough given that the 1824 vagrancy act was very outdated and there was a work stream to investigate this.

·         Combining the three strategies was more efficient but it was important that specific issues did not get lost.

·         The consultation survey would be available online but paper copies could be provided on request and people could phone in with their views.  There would also be posters in community centres, leaflets, etc., and focus groups based around the survey questions.

·         People could report empty properties online and the Council took a staged approach to bringing them back into use.  There was also a county-wide officer group.

·         The Council was broadly aiming to provide the same level of service despite financial pressures from rent reductions but was taking a more innovative approach.

·         There was a backlog of assessments for home adaptations from Occupational Therapy and an increasing number of cases of people having changing and complex needs.

·         While the Council owned 62 5-bed and 392 4-bed homes, mostly in the city, only around 12-15 of these became available each year.

The Panel welcomed the strategy and agreed to make the following recommendations to the City Executive Board:

1.    That leaflets promoting the consultation are provided to elected members and that paper copies of the survey are also made available to members.

2.    That consideration is given to how the Council engages with rough sleepers and service users on the strategy and other issues that affect them, including the option of forming a ‘service user group’.

3.    That as part of Empty Homes Week the Council promotes the issue of empty homes and its online reporting tool.

4.    That the final documentation should include:

a.    Some explanation in the evidence base as to why 13 Council-owned dwellings were long-term empty as of 1 April 2017. 

b.    Some recognition that combining the three strategies and holding one consultation saved officer time and some costs.

c.    Some mention of learning points from the previous strategies as well as successes.