Barnet Council published its Cabinet Committee 5 December 2024 report here:
https://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s87121/Business%20Planning%20and%20Medium%20Term%20Financial%20Strategy%202025-2030.pdf
The report paints a stark picture for Council funding.
Barnet Council, in response to the serious overspend for 2025/26, has published a savings plan which is outlined in Appendix B here https://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s87123/Appendix%20B%20Breakdown%20of%20savings%20and%20income%20generation%20proposals%20v2.pdf
Whilst the Government repeats the tired old phrase of needing to fix the foundations, they have ignored the fact that councils have been seriously underfunded over the past 14 years and they are teetering on the point of bankruptcy. They need upfront funding (not a loan) now whilst a new funding formula is agreed which will allow councils to plan and keep our communities safe.
This financial crisis means Barnet Council needs to take a serious look at how it is organised. It must decide whether to keep the organisation it inherited from the Tories or to rebuild it.
This means addressing the “elephant in the room”, Barnet Homes.
Currently Housing services are delivered by Barnet Homes which is part of The Barnet Group (TBG).
Click on the three links below if you want to know more about the history of Barnet Homes and The Barnet Group
- “No stone left unturned” What is The Barnet Group (TBG)? Number 5: Part One https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/15/part-one-who-is-the-barnet-group/
- “No stone left unturned” What is The Barnet Group (TBG)? Number 6: Part Two https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/15/9925/
3 “No stone left unturned” What is The Barnet Group (TBG)? Number 7: Part Three https://www.barnetunison.me.uk/wp/2024/11/15/part-three-who-is-the-barnet-group/
Barnet Homes is one of the few Housing Services that is still outsourced. Across London in both Labour and Tory Councils, senior officers and politicians have all come to the same conclusion that Housing must and should return in-house.
Earlier this year a senior officer report to Cabinet Committee recommended that Barnet Homes continues to be outsourced. Barnet UNISON submitted our report calling for Housing Services to be brought back in-house.
Considering the serious financial crisis facing Barnet Council and the knowledge that Barnet UNISON members are now facing redundancy and services are at risk, UNISON has reviewed what other Councils had to say about the outsourcing of Housing services.
- Haringey Council Cabinet meeting 7 December 2021
Title: Decision on the Council’s proposal to bring Homes for Haringey (HfH) in-house https://www.minutes.haringey.gov.uk/documents/s128415/Cabinet%20December%202021%20HfH%20insourcing.pdf
“Value for Money
4.3.1 The rationales for bringing HfH back in-house to deliver VFM [Value For Money] are based on the
following:
- Efficiency savings are anticipated by eliminating areas of duplication and bringing together Council and HfH back-office services;
- Corporate services supporting the HfH Board and subgroups will no longer be needed;
- Client-side monitoring resources in the Council can be repurposed;
- Some HfH functions will be integrated with Council functions to deliver added value;
- Any efficiency savings to the HRA can be reinvested in resident services or add value by funding capital investment in estate improvements and new homes.”
- Lewisham Council approved at a Cabinet Meeting in Dec 2022.
https://councilmeetings.lewisham.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?AIId=32800
Appendix 3: Cost Benefit Analysis
“Immediate annual savings of £300k would be made through the changes to governance structures and no longer servicing Lewisham Homes’ boards, as well as removing the need to client Lewisham Homes.”
“There will be one-off costs to the transfer of services relating to project management, professional services (IT, Finance, HR and Legal) and any one-off rebranding costs.”
“The transfer of corporate and shared services offer additional opportunities for savings to be made through the removal of duplication and restructuring; the level of these savings cannot be calculated at this stage and are dependent on decisions made by individual services.”
Source: https://councilmeetings.lewisham.gov.uk/documents/s103862/06%20Appendix%203%20Cost-benefit%20Analysis%20171122.pdf
- Brent Council
“54. It is the In-House option that, by a wide margin, best interacts with the requirement to make significant savings. The Council has a track record of successfully delivering large budget reductions whilst carefully managing the impact on services and residents over recent years. These experiences will be directly relevant to, and can be directly applied to, an in-house option. In contrast BHP will find it harder to achieve the savings potentially required due to being ‘arms length’ with the associated costs this structure carries. The Joint Venture will take time and money to implement and in any case becomes difficult, if not impossible, to engineer as the cost reduction requirement increases.
- The financials are the most important factor in reaching the recommendation.
- Control is another important factor. The In-House option gives the highest level of strategic and operational control. The Reformed ALMO and Joint Venture options offer good levels of strategic control (though the ability to change course operates more slowly) and lower levels of operational control.
- In conclusion, taking into account the challenging financial landscape, and all other factors outlined above, it is recommended that the In-House option is chosen. Moreover, the InHouse option offers the opportunity to re-position the housing service within the Council with the aim of improving a broad range of outcomes for almost 12,000 households. This is not the lift and shift of a self-contained housing service into the Council’s structure. This is the engagement of the housing service with the Council’s wider agendas in order to secure improved outcomes for residents and to enable the Council’s expertise in cost reduction to be brought to bear. However there are two areas for particular consideration within the planning for the In-House option and these are identification and mitigation of the key risks arising from the new position of the housing service within the Council’s wider business and providing effective arrangements for resident and Member oversight and scrutiny.
Source: https://democracy.brent.gov.uk/documents/s46023/Review%20of%20Housing%20Management%20Options%20Full.pdf
- Enfield Council
“The reintegration of Enfield Homes offers opportunities to streamline functions across the Council and Enfield Homes, which will enable more efficient working so resources can be effectively prioritised to improve the services delivered to local residents.
The reintegration of Enfield Homes offers the potential for efficiency savings of up to £540K through the deletion of the Enfield Homes Chief Executive post and the governance function, accountancy services, HR savings and from a review of the senior management structure including the appointment of Joint Chief Operating Officer and Joint Head of Housing Finance.
There is the opportunity to improve the performance of the housing management and maintenance services by building on synergies that exist between the services provided by Enfield Homes and those by the Council.”
Source: https://governance.enfield.gov.uk/documents/s45967/ALMO%20Reintegration%20Cabinet%20report%20Final%2023-07-14%203.pdf
- Harrow Council
“Keith Burchell, cabinet member for housing at Harrow, said keeping housing within the authority would save it £3.6m over 30 years since the running costs of the ALMO were expected to exceed £15m over this period. ”
https://www.building.co.uk/harrow-council-to-drop-almo-plans-in-pursuit-of-better-financial-deal-/3042326.article#:~:text=Harrow%20council%20is%20to%20become%20the%20first,it%20could%20get%20better%20value%20for%20money
- Tower Hamlets
“Reasons for the decision
The current Management Agreement between Tower Hamlets Homes (THH) and the Council ends on 31 March 2024 (with a possible extension of a further four years). The Council must take a decision on whether to extend the Management Agreement no later than six months prior to this date.
Having reviewed the options for the future of housing management services, the Council has assessed that bringing services back in-house will:
- provide an opportunity to join up services.
- increase accountability to residents and the Regulator for Social Housing (RSH).
- enable the Council to take a strategic approach to delivering good quality and new homes.
Given that no more additional Decent Homes funding is available, the Council did not find a significant reason to justify sustaining an Arms-Length Management Organisation (ALMO) model.
Between 24 October and 18 December 2022, the Council consulted residents on the future of housing management services. A mixed methods approach was used to collect views on if the Management Agreement with THH should be extended or if services should be brought back in-house under direct control of the Council. 86.21% of tenants and leaseholders agreed with the Council’s proposals to bring services back in-house.”
Source: https://democracy.towerhamlets.gov.uk/documents/g13217/Decisions%2022nd-Feb-2023%2017.30%20Cabinet.pdf?T=2
- Ealing Council
“Cllr Bell said he hoped the local authority might be able to bring the ALMO back in-house before its contract runs out in March 2011.
He added: ‘We need to look at the books closely, but we believe that we can make around £5 million worth of savings by running the service ourselves. The tenants and leaseholders who were at the meeting were very, very pleased that we won the vote.’”
https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/ealing-to-take-housing-management-in-house-19754
“This Council resolves that with immediate effect it withdraws its support for
privatising the Management Contract of Ealing Homes. It instructs officers to
draw up proposals immediately to return Ealing Homes to direct management by
the Council in such a way as to ensure that:
- a) tenants and leaseholders have a genuine say in how the stock is managed
and the Council proactively encourages the setting up of tenants’
management organisations;
- b) costs are tightly controlled; and
- c) management of the housing stock will in future be closely scrutinised in
public so that problems such as poor repairs, expensive and slow Decent
Homes works and lack of adequate communication with tenants and leaseholders can be resolved and future problems avoided.”
https://ealing.moderngov.co.uk/Data/Council/20100518/Agenda/Minutes%20-%2018.05.10.pdf
- Havering Council
https://democracy.havering.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=2095
Reasons for the decision:
- The Council no longer needed to have an Arms Length Management Organisation (ALMO) in order to access funding from the Decent Homes Programme
- Tenants and leaseholders had expressed their views clearly, that they would prefer their homes to be managed by the Council rather than retain the existing ALMO structure
- The integration of the housing management service with the remaining housing services would provide a more transparent and accountable structure for the housing service
- The removal of duplication in the management and governance arrangements for the service would save at least £300,000.
- Westminster Council
https://www.publicsectorexecutive.com/News-archive/westminster-city-council-to-bring-almo-housing-scheme-back-in-house-after-performance-concerns
“Pursuing option 2, bringing the service back in-house, would be in the best interests of tenants and leaseholders and in line with feedback from tenants and residents’ groups. This should be combined with consultation and engagement with tenants and leaseholders on the future provision of housing management services and how these services can improve, in order to re-establish residents at the heart of service delivery.”
- Hammersmith and Fulham Council
https://democracy.lbhf.gov.uk/documents/g1546/Public%20reports%20pack%2010th-Jan-2011%2019.00%20Cabinet.pdf?T=10
4.4 Financial advantages from the creation of single direct management
Housing & Regeneration Department 4.4.1 There will be some significant immediate savings that will flow from the integration of the ALMO into the Council. These will result from the deletion of vacant posts, which would otherwise be duplicated in the new structure, and the elimination of agency workers and contractors to whom TUPE does not apply.
4.4.2 The present organisational structures were created to facilitate the formation of the ALMO and not because they represented the most efficient or cost effective managerial teams. As a result there are some significant areas of overlapping responsibility and accountability which give rise to higher costs
than is necessary.
4.4.3 By bringing the two separate structures together, it will be possible to significantly streamline the current Assistant Director structures under one Director of Housing & Regeneration. Recruitment of the Director of Housing and Regeneration is currently under way.
4.4.4 In addition, It is recommended that the Housing Management Division in the ALMO is linked to the Housing Options Division to create a new Housing Services team. LBHF is currently in the process of recruiting an Assistant Director of Housing Services to develop and lead the integration programme for the Housing Options and ALMO Housing Services teams. Appendix C provides a summary of the proposed Structure of the integration Housing and Regeneration Department.”
UNISON comment.
What is clear from reading the reports of other senior council officers is that there are clear organisational and financial benefits to bringing Housing services back inhouse.
The financial crisis facing the Council means that they can no longer continue to allow the expense of running a shadow council with its own bureaucracy and senior management structures. If it is good enough for all the other London Councils, then why is it not good enough for Barnet Council?
UNISON is asking for the Housing Services to be brought back inhouse.
**Please note: This article will be periodically updated as we discover more evidence of Councils bringing back housing services in-house.
End.