Issue - meetings

Council Tax Reduction Scheme

Meeting: 21/01/2021 - Council (Item 90)

90 Council Tax Reduction Scheme 2021/22 pdf icon PDF 432 KB

To adopt a Localised Council Tax Reduction Scheme which will ensure that all working age Borough residents who may experience financial difficulties in paying their council tax liabilities have access to a scheme of assistance, designed locally, offering financial help to them.

 

RECOMMENDATION:  That Council agree the proposed Council Tax Reduction Scheme for 2021/22:

 

1)       a local CTR scheme for 2021/22 is adopted on the same basis as the 2020/21 scheme with the addition of disregarding Carers Allowance in the award calculation

 

2)       that the full disregard currently allowed for War Widows and War Disability Pensions is continued from 1st April 2021 in respect of the Prescribed and Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme and Housing Benefit schemes

 

3)       that funds be made available to the hardship fund, known as Section 13a (S13a) scheme, for those who cannot pay their council tax liabilities.

 

4)       Members to note the linkages to the broader Anti-Poverty Strategy of both the Council Tax Reduction Scheme and the S13a scheme.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Council considered the Council Tax Reduction Scheme 2021/22.

 

It was proposed by John Kaiser and seconded by John Halsall that the recommendations within the report be agreed.

 

John Kaiser advised that it was proposed that the carers allowance be disregarded in the award calculation of the Council Tax Reduction Scheme, meaning more carers would be able to access the financial resources.  The exclusion from council tax would also be extended to care leavers up to the age of 25, which would take effect from April 2021.

 

Sarah Kerr was pleased to note the disregarding of carers allowance income in council tax reduction assessments, and the removal of council tax for care leavers up to the age of 25.  She indicated that in the UK there were 900,000 unpaid carers who relied on carers allowance and who received just £67.25 a week, the lowest benefit of its kind.  Disregarding the carers allowance from the calculation was therefore the right thing to do.  Sarah Kerr went on to state that the consultation on the council tax reduction scheme had been very confusing and asked why views on child maintenance and child benefit had been included in one question, when they were two different matters.  Consultations needed to be sufficiently clear.  With regards to the exemption of care leavers from council tax, whilst positive, this measure had been requested some time ago by the Corporate Parenting Board.

 

Rachel Burgess welcomed the proposals relating to care leavers and carers allowance but felt that they could have been put in place much earlier.  She questioned why only one of the seven proposals considered, proposed an increase to support.  In addition, she stated that previously the savings levels that recipients were allowed to have, had been reduced from £16,000 to £4,000, reducing the number of those who were eligible for the scheme.  The amount available to the scheme had also reduced since 2013.  Rachel Burgess questioned whether other measures could be put in place such as the back dating of claims.

 

Pauline Helliar-Symons and Emma Hobbs welcomed the removal of council tax for care leavers up to the age of 25, and indicated that this had first been raised by the Children Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee, but at that time there had not been sufficient funding to put the scheme in place.

 

Andy Croy commented that the consultation had received a large number of responses, many of them positive, and that it was important to give residents a scheme which met their needs.

 

Prue Bray reemphasised that it had taken some time for the proposals around care leavers and the carers allowance to be brought in.  She felt that there was more that could be done but things were moving in the right direction.

 

John Halsall commented that at a time of national emergency he was pleased to be able to help vulnerable residents.

 

Carl Doran questioned the relevance of John Halsall’s speech in relation to the item.

 

In accordance with rule 4.2.15.4,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 90