Agenda item

7.1   To receive and consider the question(s) submitted by the public for response by the relevant Cabinet Member, in accordance with Standing Order 33.

Members are asked to note that one public question has been received, which has been attached to the agenda along with the written response provided.

7.2   To receive question(s) submitted by the Brent Youth Parliament for response by the relevant Cabinet Member, in accordance with Standing Order 33(c).

Members are asked to note that one question has been received, which has been attached to the agenda along with the written response provided.

8.1      Questions from the Public

The Mayor advised that one question had been received from a member of the public, for consideration at the meeting which was as follows:

Question 1 from Ms T.J.Chaudhry regarding the Council’s approach towards debt management, recovery & enforcement.

In noting the written response provided by the Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources, as circulated with the agenda, the Mayor informed members that Ms Chaudhry had also been offered the opportunity to attend the meeting in order to ask a follow up supplementary question and advised he was therefore pleased to welcome Ms Chaudhry to the meeting.

Following the Mayors introduction, the following supplementary question was raised:

Question 1 supplementary Question from Ms T.J Chaudhry to Councillor Mili Patel, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance & Resources

Given the legal obligations under Paragraph 7(2) of Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and the proportionality duty in Section 15 of the Public Law Act 1998, can the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance & Resources:

(1)       State how many enforcement agent contracts have been revoked since 2021 for failing to produce proper written authority or breaching debt collection regulations, as required by law.

(2)       Confirm if Brent's policy on small debts has been updated since the 2021 High Court ruling against blanket approaches without individual assessments; and

(3)       Explain why it uses Experian's system rather than the Financial Conduct Authority’s full vulnerability criteria, and whether it will adopt proper 'breathing space' schemes given that current alternatives lack these legal protections?

In raising the question, Ms Chaudhry as also referred to various examples of case law in support including:

·            (per R (Kamby) v Birmingham Magistrates’ Court [2021]) or breaches of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013.

·            ‘sub-threshold debt’ policy R (CPAG) v Secretary of State [2021], which ruled blanket approaches unlawful without individual vulnerability assessments.

·            FCA’s holistic vulnerability definition (e.g., health crises, literacy barriers, per R (Bridges) [2020]), breathing space’ schemes (Leeds City Council v Broadley [2022])

In response, Councillor Mili Patel thanked Ms Chaudhry for the questions and advised that given the detailed nature of the legal and technical issues issues raised, she would need to arrange for a full written response to be provided following the meeting.

In terms of the Council’s broader approach towards Council Tax collection and debt recovery the opportunity was taken to highlight the importance of the “one borough, one community” way in which the system operated, stressing the importance in the way residents were currently expected (under the current funding regime) to contribute, as local taxpayers, for services being provided through the Council.  The impact of ongoing social and economic pressures along with the cost-of-living crisis and programme of austerity introduced under the previous government had, however, been recognised in terms of many residents struggling financially and the resulting effect in terms of areas such as Council Tax arrears and enhanced debt.

In response to these ongoing pressures, the Council had therefore actively moved towards debt resolution strategies that prioritised early engagement, support, and long-term financial stability as part of the Council’s Ethical Debt Recovery policy in order to provide a more supportive approach to debt recovery,  This included an aim to reduce the need for enforcement, assisting residents in the management of their debts in a way that was fair and sustainable.

The opportunity was also taken to offer to meet with Ms Chaudhry in order to discuss any further issues or concerns regarding the approach outlined.

Having thanked Councillor Mili Patel for the response provided and Ms Chaudhry for attending the meeting to ask her supplementary question, the Mayor then moved on to deal with a question submitted by Brent Youth Parliament.

8.2      Questions from Brent Youth Parliament

The Mayor advised that the following question had been received from Brent Youth Parliament:

Question 1 from Brent Youth Parliament to Councillor Grahl, Cabinet Member for Children, Young People & Schools, relating to the engagement of young people under the Brent Youth Strategy in shaping local policies, especially in areas like crime and safety.

The Mayor thanked Brent Youth Parliament (BYP) for their question, with members noting the written response provided, and advised that representatives from the Youth Parliament had also been invited to attend the meeting in order to ask a supplementary question.  As a result, the Mayor welcomed Kiran Govan from BYPto the meeting who asked the following supplementary question.

Question 1 Supplementary Question from Kiran Govan to Councillor Grahl, Cabinet Member for Children, Young People & Schools regarding the steps taken by Brent Council in supporting the promises made in their Brent Youth Strategy to include young people in policy making decisions.

Having thanked Councillor Grahl for her written response andreferenced the Brent Youth Strategy, Kiran Govan highlighted the pledge which had been made by the Council to ensure positive activities were made available for young people.  Based on the written response provided by the Cabinet Member for Children, Young People & Schools, which indicated that the Council was now in the planning stages of developing further opportunities for young people's involvement, in advance of the new academic year, details were sought on how the Council planned to obtain funding for these activities, how much new funding the Council planned to allocate toward these initiatives and what specific kinds of positive activities the Council planned to offer the younger generation in Brent.

In response, Councillor Grahl thanked Brent Youth Parliament for the question and work they were continuing to undertake to represent young people across the borough.  Acknowledging the importance of the issues raised, the opportunity was taken, in responding to the question, to outline the different type of funding opportunities and activities being explored along with the existing and extensive nature of support already being provided for youth activities.  This included funding being provided for over 70 different grassroots organisations across the borough with these organisations providing a diverse range of activities for young people and the Council having successfully secured approx. £1m in grant funding from the Mayor of London specifically to contribute towards youth organisations and additional activities, with Councillor Grahl advising she would be happy to provide a more detailed outline (given time constraints at the meeting) in relation to the activities being developed outside of the meeting.

The Mayor also took the opportunity to acknowledge and commend BYP for the work undertaken in seeking to represent young people across the borough and, in outlining his support for the contribution made, thanked Councillor Grahl for her response and Kiran Govan for attending the meeting in order to ask his supplementary question.  With no further questions to be considered, the Mayor advised that concluded the public question session.