The Children, Education and Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee met to discuss the call-in of the Cabinet's decision to approve the Private Rented Sector Discharge Policy. After extensive debate, the committee voted to take no further action on the call-in, allowing the policy to proceed. The committee also reviewed and agreed its work programme for the upcoming year.

Call-in of the Private Rented Sector Discharge Policy

The committee considered a call-in request regarding the Cabinet's decision on 9 June 2026 to approve the Private Rented Sector (PRS) Discharge Policy. The call-in, initiated by Councillor Sally Keeble and supported by several other councillors, argued that the policy lacked sufficient justification, financial analysis, and consideration of equality and human rights impacts. Concerns were raised that the policy, as presented, would make the PRS the primary route for discharging homelessness duties, potentially without consent and out of area, and that the policy document itself was deficient in detail.

Councillor Keeble, a former Housing Minister, stated that the policy was a complete disaster and lacked the necessary detail for a reasonable or workable policy. She argued that it would end the Northampton dream of coming to work and staying to live, and that the best way to solve a housing crisis was to build more social and affordable housing. Councillor Julie Davenport echoed these concerns, drawing parallels to a previous failed social lettings agency initiative and questioning the deliverability and financial guarantees of the new policy. Councillor Keefe Holland-Delamere highlighted the potential for inter-department ping-pong and increased costs if out-of-area placements led to additional support needs, such as home-to-school transport. Councillor Bob Perser expressed concern about the council's increasing reliance on the private sector and the lack of focus on increasing public housing stock. Councillor Jonathan Havis noted the scant detail in the policy, particularly regarding out-of-area placements, and compared it unfavourably to policies from other councils like Oxford and St Albans. Councillor Fatun Ishmael questioned the council's long-term plan to increase sustainable housing supply and whether homeless people had been included in the policy-making process.

Councillor Charlie Hastie, the Cabinet Member for Housing and Communities, and officers, including Antonio Taylor (Head of Housing Solutions and Strategy) and Jodie Archer (Assistant Director – Housing and Communities), presented a defence of the policy. They stated that the PRS Discharge Policy reflected established best practice and made lawful use of powers under the Localism Act 2011. They assured the committee that the policy was not financially driven but aimed to balance demand, resources, and improved outcomes. They acknowledged that the financial section of the report could have been more detailed and committed to revising the wording to clarify that PRS would not be the primary route and that decisions would be made on a case-by-case basis. They also stated that suitability assessments would continue to take into account individual circumstances, including vulnerability, and that out-of-area placements would only occur with consent.

Following a lengthy debate, Councillor Scott Packer proposed that the committee take no further action on the call-in, citing assurances that the policy would be reworded to clarify that PRS is one of several tools and not the primary route, and that consent would be required for out-of-area placements. This was seconded by Councillor John East. After a vote, the proposal to take no further action was carried, with the Chair casting the deciding vote.

Committee Work Programme 2026/27

The committee then discussed its work programme for the upcoming year. James Edmunds, Democratic Services Assistant Manager, presented a draft programme, highlighting potential topics for scrutiny, including recurring business, single committee items, and areas for in-depth scrutiny. The committee agreed to add the pre-decision scrutiny of a new council private sector enforcement policy to its agenda for the September meeting. Discussions also touched upon the importance of focusing on issues that would have the most positive impact on residents, such as school exclusions, home-to-school transport, preparing for adulthood for young people with SEND, and support for young people not in education, employment, or training (NEET). The committee acknowledged that the work programme was a living document and could be reviewed and amended throughout the year.

The meeting concluded with some councillors expressing dissatisfaction with the process, suggesting that the debate had been predetermined and that the committee was not functioning as a proper scrutiny body. The Chair, however, confirmed that the meeting was quorate and that the committee would proceed with its work programme.