Wrthi'n llwytho
Does dim crynodeb o'r cyfarfod hwn eto. Caiff crynodebau eu hysgrifennu pan fydd y cyngor yn cyhoeddi'r cofnodion, sef ei gofnod swyddogol o'r hyn a benderfynodd cyfarfod. Maen nhw fel arfer yn ymddangos ychydig wythnosau ar ôl y cyfarfod.
Response by the Cabinet Member: I thank the member for the further questions. A member briefing on this policy area is scheduled to take place tomorrow which will provide further detail and information as well as offering Councillors the opportunity to ask questions and gain a greater understanding. Further to the initial response above please see the responses to your specific questions, which are repeated for ease of reference: 1. Clarification of the Council’s Model vs. Pilot 2 Your response to Question 1 suggests the Cabinet has adopted a model different from the Home Office’s Pilot 2, stating that newly built homes would go to those on the housing waiting list, while older existing stock would be leased to the Home Office. However, the Cabinet minutes explicitly reference the Home Office’s Pilot 2 model, including a direct quotation describing the 10-year lease of newbuild homes to the Home Office. This raises the question: Was the Cabinet decision based on a formally submitted alternative proposal by Powys County Council, or was it based on the Home Office’s original Pilot 2 model as described in the minutes? If an alternative proposal was submitted to the Home Office, please provide a copy of that submission to clarify how it diverges from the original Pilot 2 outline. · ANSWER: Powys’ proposal, based on the suggested Pilot 2, was set out in the Cabinet papers, attached as Appendix A, page 7 and is in the public domain. 2. Availability of Information on Alternative Pilot Models In response to Question 2, you state that Cabinet had the necessary information, but the original agenda item referenced a non-functional link to the other pilot models. This raises two issues: Why was a broken link included in a formal Cabinet report, particularly in relation to a decision of such public and strategic significance? Can you confirm whether all Cabinet members were provided with the full details of all four pilot models, including those not selected, together with full details of the alternative pilot model which appears to have been adopted, but not included within the original agenda? · ANSWER: I believe this was already answered in the initial response. 3. Accessing Equivalent Funding for Local Housing Need Your answer to Question 3 deflects the issue by stating that social housing funding in Wales comes from the Welsh Government, not the UK Government. However, this does not address the core of the question: Did Powys County Council at any point explore whether the capital funding offered through this Home Office scheme could be re-purposed or requested directly from UK Government for general housing use, rather than being conditional on participation in the asylum dispersal scheme? If not, why was this not considered, given the pressing local housing need? · ANSWER: Officers attended an in-person consultation with Home Office staff where it was made clear that funding for additional homes was entirely predicated on participation in the dispersal pilots. The Resettlement Project Manager attended the Home Office consultation on 3 April 2025 at the Wales Strategic Migration Partnership offices in Cardiff. The Home Office consultation was led by Lou Le Roux of the Home Office 4. Tenancy Rights and Post-Lease Outcomes In response to Questions 4, 5 and 6, you state that asylum seekers will be asked to vacate after the 10-year lease ends, and that tenancy rights do not accrue. However: What happens if an asylum claim is granted during the lease period? The response confirms they would then gain the right to rent. Would Powys County Council then house them as part of its statutory obligations? If so, how can it be claimed there is no impact on the waiting list? · ANSWER: There will be multiple asylum decisions made during a ten year period. The average to process a claim is currently one to three years. In the event there is a successful outcome and the individual seeking asylum is granted either refugee or similar status, they will be provided with assistance (as would any other citizen) to find alternative accommodation. This may include assistance to find accommodation in the PRS (private rented sector) or, if they meet the criteria, they may be offered homelessness assistance. Experience shows that the majority of individuals, who are placed in rural Counties, and who receive a positive outcome, move to larger cities. Can the Council confirm whether, in practice, any households granted refugee status during the lease term will transition into Powys’s social housing system, and if so, how this will be managed in terms of waiting list prioritisation? · ANSWER: See above. 5. Impact on Housing Waiting List Your repeated assertion that there will be “no effect” on the housing waiting list remains unconvincing, especially in light of the Council’s own admission that new housing stock will be temporarily diverted for Home Office use. While I note the argument about recycled capital and long-term benefit, it remains the case that: In the short to medium term, individuals and families already on Powys’s housing list will not have access to properties developed through this scheme. That is a clear and measurable impact. I would respectfully request that this position be reconsidered and acknowledged with greater transparency. · ANSWER: Additional new housing would be built under the current proposal – that is houses that would otherwise not be built. For each household accommodated under the proposed dispersal programme, an additional unit of housing, of a more appropriate size, would be built to meet local need. 6. Prior Housing of Asylum Seekers Your final responses (Questions 9 and 10) confirm that at least one family has already been accommodated in Powys under the UK Government’s dispersal programme, despite earlier statements from you denying so. I acknowledge that the statement may have been made “in good faith,” but the fact remains that inaccurate information was provided by a senior member of the administration to another councillor. Has a formal correction been issued to all councillors or external press staff who may have received or relied on that original message? Will lessons be learned to ensure greater accuracy and accountability in internal communications on this highly sensitive issue? · ANSWER: This has already been answered. I will not provide a further response on these questions as they have been answered. We will update council as the EOI progresses.
Rhaid i gynghorwyr ddweud pan fydd ganddyn nhw gysylltiad personol â rhywbeth sy'n cael ei drafod, fel swydd, eiddo neu aelod o'r teulu. Mae buddiant sy'n rhagfarnu yn ddigon cryf i'r cynghorydd adael yr ystafell fel arfer a pheidio â chymryd rhan.
Caiff datganiadau eu darllen o'r cofnodion unwaith y byddan nhw wedi'u cyhoeddi.
Dyw'r cyngor ddim wedi cofnodi presenoldeb ar gyfer y cyfarfod hwn.
Yn rhestru cynghorwyr presennol y cyngor yn unig. Nid yw aelodau cyfetholedig, swyddogion a chyn-gynghorwyr yn cael eu dangos.