The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Volume 1
Chapter 4 Making it Happen

Introduction

4.1. Each local authority will need to develop and carry through plans to implement its strategies for action on private housing. This is likely to be an iterative process. The demands of implementation may affect the feasibility of the planned approach, particularly in the short term, and may mean that the authority has to amend its strategic proposals accordingly. It is for each local authority to decide how to implement the new arrangements within the framework provided by this suite of guidance.

4.2. The preparations for implementation that an authority makes may well differ from those made by other local authorities because circumstances vary so widely. However, there is likely to be value in exchanging ideas and experience through informal or more formal contact. We aim to facilitate this (see proposals for a network at paragraph 4.14) and encourage the use of such opportunities.

The transition

4.3. The transitional arrangements that we propose are described from paragraph 1.38. These arrangements are intended to help with local planning while, at the broader level, avoiding the situation where local authorities that are ready to make use of the new powers have to wait until all other authorities have made the necessary preparations. The following paragraphs expand on some of the considerations that could have an impact on the detail of implementation.

4.4. The first aspect of the transitional arrangements is that the various powers in the 2006 Act will commence [at a date in] 2008, but the repeal of powers in the 1987 Act will not be activated until a later date. The two sets of powers will run in parallel and each authority will be able to decide when to move from one set of powers to the other. Ministers wish that to be when the authority publishes its statement of assistance under section 72 [subject to the outcome of consultation - see 1.41].

4.5. In general, each of the two Acts (1987 and 2006) provides a framework of powers which is internally linked but externally separate from the framework provided by the other Act. For example, there is a general power to make grants in the 1987 Act which becomes a requirement to make grant when the authority makes an improvement order under the 1987 Act and the owner applies for grant. But making an order under the 1987 Act does not trigger action under the 2006 Act.

4.6. For this reason, and to avoid confusion, it is in general better to make a wholesale change at a given point. Nonetheless, it is open to each authority to make use of elements of either set of powers where its legal advisers confirm that there is not a specific legal conflict.

4.7. The one significant exception to this generality of which we are aware is maintenance orders. The provisions in Chapter 6 of Part 1 of the 2006 Act are new and have no parallel in the 1987 Act. An authority could implement them before a more general transition from 1987 Act powers to 2006 Act powers as a self-standing initiative, presenting them locally in a way that did not create confusion. However, we feel that unless there are strong arguments for taking this course in particular authority areas it is preferable to present and introduce maintenance orders as an integral part of the suite of new powers.

Question: Do you think it would be helpful to use maintenance order powers before other aspects of the new powers are ready to be introduced locally?

4.8. The second aspect of the transitional arrangements is that the various duties in the 2006 Act will be brought into effect from a given date. In some cases the new duties will conflict with existing duties under the 1987 Act. Because it is not tenable for a local authority to have two conflicting duties at the same time, we will repeal some of the 1987 Act duties at the same time as we commence the conflicting duty in the 2006 Act.

4.9. An example of this is s73 of the 2006 Act which places a duty on a local authority to provide grant when it receives an application for assistance with certain types of adaptation to a house to help a disabled person. A similar duty also exists in s244 of the 1987 Act, linked to the making of improvement grant. An improvement grant is specifically defined by and made under the 1987 Act. If we did not repeal s244 at the same time as commencing s73, a confusing situation would arise with an application triggering a slightly different duty under each of the Acts. Repealing the 1987 Act duty would avoid this confusion and would not disadvantage the applicant because the authority would still have a duty under the 2006 Act to provide grant. Since that duty does not define the nature of the grant, the authority could make whichever type of grant was appropriate to the assistance regime it was operating (under the 1987 Act or the 2006 Act) at the time.

Question: Do you foresee any problems if we repeal conflicting duties in the 1987 Act at the start of the transition period?

Resource planning

4.10. The scale and pace of implementation and the use of the new powers once an authority has made the switch will be largely influenced by the scale and timing of the internal and external resources available, as discussed in chapter 3. This makes effective resource planning vital.

4.11. An authority may well have commenced resource planning some time ago in response to the publication of the Act and of initial guidance in March 2007 ⁹. The following guidance is intended to assist the authority's internal processes by pointing to some particular issues in the present context.

People and skills

4.12. In planning for the people who will deliver services internally and externally, each authority should consider the people and skills already available, and the gap that needs to be filled. The main options for filling that gap include:

• joint working within the authority - what scope is there, for example, for joint service delivery to streamline delivery or bring in suitable expertise?
• recruiting staff - what is the nature of the employment market, what will be the effect of corporate policies and what is the case for recruitment?
• developing existing and new staff - what provision can be made for training and development and how can external support help?
• delivery partnerships with external providers - is there scope to agree delivery arrangements with other authorities or Community Planning partners, or to establish shared service or simple contracted delivery with commercial or third sector organisations?

4.13. Our research has shown that local authorities believe there is a significant training need for staff working with the new powers. To augment what authorities are able to call on locally, we propose to initiate support centrally. We also believe there is a case for developing a clearer and better recognised discipline within the housing professions for dealing with the range of issues that arise in the private sector. This could extend beyond local authorities to their partners and other property professionals.

4.14. We are in discussion with the Chartered Institute of Housing ( CIH) and the Scottish Housing Best Value Network ( SHBVN) about developing a framework to help practitioners develop skills and share knowledge and experience of private sector issues. The main proposed elements are:

• a network for communicating ideas, experience and knowledge between practitioners, using electronic communication and with administrative support for meetings and events;
• a structure for moderating key examples of good practice through a process of peer review; and
• possible training modules for work related to private sector housing conditions.

4.15. We are also discussing with the Chartered Institute of Housing the practicalities of developing a qualification to complement training. One possibility is that the training modules could be available as stand-alone training tools. Modules could potentially aggregate to a recognised qualification if individuals wished to do that.

4.16. Experience with existing networks (for example, for HMO licensing) shows that there can be considerable benefits from a network of personal contacts 'owned' by the practitioners, particularly if there is support for the administration of meetings and events, and our aim is that the network should be 'owned' by local government rather than run directly by the Scottish Government. Not all practice is good practice, and there is always the risk that disseminating examples of practice could have the reverse of the intended effect of improving practice across the country. Our discussions have highlighted the need to develop a mechanism for validating good practice.

Questions:

Should non-local authority interests be involved in training and if so, how?

Would you be in favour of the development of a recognised qualification focusing on private sector housing issues?

Are there examples of processes for identifying, validating and disseminating good practice that you think would be useful?

4.17. The Scottish Government has a part to play in generating and contributing to discussions around training, and has a short-term role in delivering an initial phase of training linked with the powers going live. But we do not see an ongoing role for the Scottish Government in delivering training once the new powers roll out. We believe that practitioners are best placed to identify their own training needs and to decide the shape of training, and that structures and activity will develop over time in the same way as they have done for the social rented sector.

Information management

4.18. The new powers and approach to service delivery will make new demands on information management. For example:

• A "one stop shop" (see vol. 5 ch. 1) approach will need effective systems for tracking the handling of cases, to make sure that they are completed, to be able to analyse and improve how the arrangements work, and to be able to report on performance.
• Maintenance orders have a five-year life and so need a systematic method for collecting, storing and using data for monitoring over the rolling five-year periods.

4.19. Each local authority will need to assess information needs and flows to meet short and long term objectives, and assess the extent to which existing IT and paper systems can handle them. Having identified the gaps, a technical analysis should show the scope for filling them. Cost and timing issues will influence how best to deal with those gaps. If necessary, they will feed back into implementation strategies as a constraint on the scale, pace or timing of what the authority intends to do.

4.20. The City of Edinburgh Council has carried out an exercise with consultants to assess the information needs that a large programme of maintenance orders would generate. The existing variety of IT systems in different authorities means that there is no simple solution to data management that can be applied nationally. There may well be benefit in local authorities that use the same existing IT products exploring options for the adaptation of those products through the relevant user groups.

Money

4.21. Each authority will need to plan for the funding of activities using the new powers. The various shifts in emphasis on the nature and delivery of services may require a review of budget structures and control systems so that they reflect the changed arrangements. It is likely to include a review of the balance between the costs of running services and the cost of directly provided financial assistance, and how the authority deals with them in its accounts.

4.22. Authorities may also have to adjust their budgets to recognise new joint working arrangements, and should give serious consideration to the potential for shared or pooled budgets to benefit the delivery of joined-up housing and community care services, particularly for disabled people. This would be in line with Joint Future principles.

4.23. Our letter of 21 December outlined the arrangements for central funding of local authority activity in the private sector in the three financial years commencing with 2008/09, reflecting the Budget announcement on 14 November 2007. It is for the local authority to determine and manage the funding it applies to private sector activity, subject to the continuation of ring fencing in the first two of those years. Ring fencing has been retained for this period to give financial stability in the initial implementation phase, although on a more flexible basis than before. It is open to the authority to enhance the ring fenced funding from its general fund.

4.24. These new arrangements challenge practitioners to make the case within their authority for suitable investment in private sector activity. The case can build on the national case provided by the Housing Improvement Task Force and referred to in the "Policy" section of this guidance. This reinforces the importance of building the local evidence base (see ch. 5) and planning strategically. The case should show the good outcomes that can be achieved for the area and its communities over the short, medium and long term. The case will be easier to make if the authority grasps the opportunities that the new powers in the 2006 Act offer for a cost-effective approach to encouraging owners to invest their own resources in their homes.

4.25. In financial planning for action in the private sector, authorities should take full account of the potential for lending to create future flows of income from repayments. They should consider the potential build-up of more expensive problems that would result from inaction. They should also factor in the secondary benefits of intervention in the private sector, such as:

• savings on community care and social work budgets from assisting disabled people to adapt their houses or move;
• maximising individual income from benefits as a by-product of a personalised approach;
• avoiding the homelessness or reduction in disposable income that can result if major works are required through a lack of repairs and maintenance; and
• benefits to the local economy from an increase in house repair and maintenance.

4.26. A further factor in financial planning will be the impact of lending on the funding available. Assuming the National Lending Unit proposal proceeds (see vol. 5 ch. 3), we will give further guidance on likely timescales, which will depend on the preferred delivery model and other factors. In the early stages, there is likely to be some impact from the need to fund national lending, on the funds available by direct allocation from the Scottish Government funding. But as the Unit borrows from other sources and as its activities build to receive income from loan repayments, this call on public funding should reduce substantially. Should an authority decide to subsidise individual loans made by the Unit, there will also be a call on local funding to provide annual subsidy towards the interest on each loan.

4.27. We will provide planning assumptions on these effects as proposals for the Unit develop and as implementation proceeds. In the meantime, you should be aware of this prospect for planning purposes and should make working assumptions as necessary.

Proceeding with implementation

4.28. This chapter of the guidance has covered overall aspects of the preparation for implementation. Volumes 2 to 5 of the guidance cover the detailed implementation of the various powers and duties in the 2006 Act.

« Previous | Contents | Next »