Agenda item

To submit the report of the Cabinet Member for Finance.

 

 

For the 2023/24 financial year, that Cyngor Gwynedd:

·         Allows NO discount on class A second homes, in accordance with Section 12 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (i.e. no change from 2022/23).

·         Allows NO discount and CHARGES A PREMIUM OF 150% on class B second homes in accordance with Section 12B of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (i.e. increase from 100% to 150%).

·         Allows NO discount on homes that have been empty for 6 months or more and CHARGES A PREMIUM of 100% on homes that have been empty for 12 months or more, in accordance with Section 12A of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (i.e. no change from 2022/23).

 

 

The Cabinet Member for Finance, Councillor Ioan Thomas, presented a report asking the Council for formal ratification for 2023/24, of previous decisions not to allow any discounts for second homes and to disallow discounts on empty properties, and to raise a Premium of 150% or 100% on such relevant properties. The Head of Finance gave an outline of the principal points of the public consultation, and he thanked the Communication and Engagement Team and the Research and Information Team for their invaluable work preparing the consultation and analysing the results. 

 

 He also thanked his colleagues in the Finance Department who had assisted with the work.

 

Members were given an opportunity to make observations and ask questions. 

 

A member noted:-

 

·         That he welcomed the additions to what had been before the Governance and Audit Committee, however he was not convinced that the additions, and specifically the reference to Simon Brookes' report on second homes, had not been considered deeply enough.

·         The impact of a holiday home on an area's language profile was less than the impact of a non-Welsh speaking residential dwelling, and the report did not entirely consider the likely impact of increasing the Premium on the percentage of the population who speak Welsh in those areas, nor the direct impact that is likely to be on the native population.

·         There was a risk for the proposal, as it stood, to deliver unintentional and deviant results, namely to motivate native people to sell property to outsiders and motivate holiday home owners to transform them into residential households.  

·         He did not believe that the report gave consideration to the possibility of working from home, the impacts of the pandemic or the arrival of the Bontnewydd Bypass, that all facilitated the demographic shift.

·         There was not a never-ending population of Welsh speakers in these areas or a matching demand for houses compared to the number of holiday homes we have in these areas. The demographic/linguistic situation in these areas was extremely fragile, and the Brookes report referred to the catastrophic results of moving too quickly to reduce the number of holiday homes. 

 

Based on these arguments, the member proposed the following amendment, and it was seconded:-

 

That the Premium should not be increased for the 2023/24 financial year, and a comprehensive linguistic impact assessment should be received of the likely impacts of increasing the Premium, clarity regarding exceptions, and to also give full consideration to the other measures to control holiday homes. 

 

A member noted that it would be better if the Council voted on the three clauses of the recommendation separately, as there were some matters that he would support and others that he would object.  

 

The amendment was supported by a number of members.  It was noted that:-

 

·         If a public consultation was conducted, then the results should not be disregarded, and 75% of the respondents objected increasing the Premium for linguistic and economic reasons.

·         The owners of second homes spent locally, and increasing the Premium would have an adverse impact on the area's businesses, such as shops, restaurants and public houses, builders, plumbers and electricians, as more and more second homes would be placed on the market.

·         As the Welsh Government had agreed at last to differentiate between a home and a holiday home, and had issued Article 4, for the local authority to be able to determine which thresholds are acceptable in any community, there was a risk that increasing the Premium currently would undermine that process, that was already fragile, in the sense that a reaction to this decision could be far-reaching. 

·      That increasing the Premium would not make houses more affordable for local people, and it was the lack of quality jobs and low wages in the area that were responsible for the fact that people could not afford housing, or even to become homeless. 

·      That it was not possible for local families in the tourism industry to pay more Premium, and what about those people who inherit a house that had been in the family for generations?

·      It was asked why couldn't the Council buy some of the houses on the market in Aberdyfi, and renovate them for local people to buy or rent, e.g. 3 floor houses could be converted into 3 flats. In response to the comment, the Cabinet Member for Housing noted that there was a plan within the Housing Action Plan, and the Department was very busy buying houses that come up for sale throughout the county, including Aberdyfi, for rent or sale to local people.   

·      It was believed that a Premium of 150% would cause more harm than good to the community. 

·      A great deal of finance had already been raised through the Premium, however it was not being spent. 

 

 

 

 

The amendment was objected by a number of other members.  It was noted that:-

 

·      Although the Welsh Government had proposed some solutions to the situation regarding holiday homes, this was not tantamount to a Property Act, and those solutions were not comprehensive that would to get to the root of the problem.

·      The most vulnerable people in our community are the victims in this situation, and not the owners of second homes, and over 3,000 people facing homelessness and on the waiting lists for housing did not get an opportunity to be part of the discussion.

·      Having a comfortable and safe home was one of our most fundamental needs, and hearing that 1,400 people will be homeless by the end of the year was frightening.   Also, the figures regarding the additional cost to the Council to deliver its statutory duty to home people was alarming, with expenditure of over £4.7m gross over this year's budget, and £6m over next year's budget.

·      That increasing the Premium to 300% overnight would be unfair and unreasonable, and the consequences could be very harmful. On the other hand, should the amendment to remain at 100% be accepted, the Council would lose the £3m needed to get to grips with the homelessness crisis, and the only way to address the gap then would be by cutting the Housing Action Plan, the Premium was assisting to fund. It was believed that this would be a major error and it would mean breaching the long-term plans to prevent homelessness and to assist young people into the local market.   

·      It would not be an increase in the Premium that would close local business, but rather the policies of both Governments over the last 12 years - austerity measures, inflation and wars.  

·      Over 800 of the county's population were homeless, more than 200 living in bed and breakfast establishments/hotels, 3,000 had to wait for over 3 years to get social housing and 60% of the people of Gwynedd could not afford one house, not to mention two. 

·      That we need planning / housing tools and resources to create the type of communities that are needed, and although the fact that the Government now recognised the fact that it was a crisis, those tools were not received quickly enough, if at all.   

·      There were plans in the Housing Action Plan to assist local people that had inherited housing to rent those houses to local families, rather than sell them. 

·      More and more people saw their houses as a business opportunity and bought the stock to be let as Airbnbs in Gwynedd.  However, by increasing the Premium to 150%, the Council had the opportunity today to send out a message that we are not for sale, and to take a break to re-visit the situation.

·      It was not unreasonable to expect the owners of second homes to pay a little more than others, bearing in mind of course that they have the option to pay monthly. 

·      Hotels were suffering as nobody were staying there, and it would be better if the money raised would go to assisting these small hotels to support themselves.

·      The proposal was supported on condition that more affordable houses would be built and that the money would go towards ensuring that the homeless would have a home in Gwynedd.

·      Sustainable tourism that could be managed in the right place and of the right size was supported, however tourism was not under consideration here, but houses bought from the housing stock that remained vacant for the majority of the year. Also, it was not believed that the argument regarding the impact on local businesses held water as those people who live here throughout the year use those services.

·      There was much talk about the impact of increasing the Premium on native people, however those people who stay in temporary accommodation are also native people.   A great deal of homelessness was hidden - it was not always people sleeping on the street, and the hidden element meant that we did not notice or turned a blind eye.  

·      It was not believed that the 106 Section clause was a barrier anymore to get a mortgage, and the use of this clause should be encouraged on new housing development.

·      There was a perception that there were no jobs available in Gwynedd, however, there were plenty of jobs available.  There was a scarcity of carers, social workers, health workers, teachers, classroom assistants, doctors etc.,here and a hope was expressed that local people would apply for these jobs, and would also apply for a place in the new Medical School that will come to Bangor, and remain in the area to work in due course.  

 

There was a request for a registered vote on the amendment not to increase the Premium for the 2023/24 financial year, and to get a comprehensive linguistic impact assessment of the likely impacts of increasing the Premium, clarity regarding exceptions, and to also give full consideration to the other measures to control holiday homes. 

 

In accordance with Procedural Rules, the following vote was recorded on the amendment:-

 

In favour	21	Concillors Glyn Daniels, Anwen Davies, Dylan Fernley, John Brynmor Hughes, Louise Hughes, Anne Lloyd Jones, Gwilym Jones, Eryl Jones-Williams, Beth Lawton, Dewi Owen, Gareth Coj Parry, Nigel Pickavance, John Pughe, John Pughe Roberts, Richard Glyn Roberts, Peter Thomas, Rob Triggs, Hefin Underwood, Eirwyn Williams, Gareth Williams and Gruffydd Williams
Against	37	Councillors Craig ab Iago, Beca Brown, Dafydd Owen Davies, Elwyn Edwards, Elfed Wyn ap Elwyn, Alan Jones Evans, Delyth Lloyd Griffiths, Annwen Hughes, R.Medwyn Hughes, Iwan Huws, Elin Hywel, Elwyn Jones, Berwyn Parry Jones, Dawn Lynne Jones, Elin Walker Jones, Gareth Tudor Jones, Huw Wyn Jones, Kim Jones, June Jones, Menna Jones, Cai Larsen, Dafydd Meurig, Dilwyn Morgan, Edgar Wyn Owen, Gwynfor Owen, Llio Elenid Owen, Rheinallt Puw, Arwyn Herald Roberts, Gareth A.Roberts, Meryl Roberts, Paul Rowlinson, Dyfrig Siencyn, Ioan Thomas, Rhys Tudur, Einir Wyn Williams, Elfed Williams and Sasha Williams.
Abstentions	0

 

In his closing comments, the Cabinet Member noted:-

 

·         There was no guarantee that some of the developments that the Welsh Government have in the pipeline would occur tomorrow, and they would take a considerable amount of time to realise these.

·         Regarding the pilot in Dwyfor, there were 2,138 second homes and 2,110 applications open for a social house in the area.

·         He believed that raising the Premium to 150% was reasonable. 

 

A member noted that the report did not include data that was thorough enough to measure the impact on communities and individual wards, in terms of how many houses were moving, etc., and the proposer was asked to consider an addition to the proposal that the impact of the Premium on communities would be monitored seasonally, so that the impact could be seen from month to month.  In response, the Chief Executive explained that there was no need to add to the proposal as impact monitoring work would take place anyway, and the Council would consider this matter again next year.

 

The Leader noted that he believed that the point raised was fair, and the Cabinet Member should be asked if he was willing to accept the addition to the proposal. In response, the Monitoring Officer noted that he did not think that it was appropriate to change the wording of the proposal at this point as the matter had not been considered as part of the discussion.   Also, assurance had been given that the work would be undertaken anyway.

 

RESOLVED for the 2023/24 financial year, that Cyngor Gwynedd:

·                Allows NO discount on class A second homes, in accordance with Section 12 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (i.e. no change from 2022/23).

·                Allows NO discount and CHARGES A PREMIUM OF 150% on class B second homes in accordance with Section 12B of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (i.e. increase from 100% to 150%).

·                Allows NO discount on homes that have been empty for 6 months or more and CHARGES A PREMIUM of 100% on homes that have been empty for 12 months or more, in accordance with Section 12A of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (i.e. no change from 2022/23).