At the previous Full Council meeting on the 15th October the following motion was agreed on a cross party basis and passed by Full Council:
“Medway Council is sympathetic to the plight of refugees fleeing war torn Syria. Many members have received letters from constituents regarding the refugee crisis and are touched by their generosity.
We are aware that the Prime Minister, together with the Department of International Development and the Department for Communities and Local Government is looking to settle 20,000 refugees throughout Britain over the next five years.
Medway is willing to play its part in providing a safe refuge to those in desperate need. This Council prides itself on the high level of services that it offers to all residents. It is understood that the Department of International Development will be paying local government for the increased costs.
For reasons purely practical, our offer of refuge has to be conditional on financial support from central government. Notwithstanding regulations regarding DfID expenditure and aware that the funding cannot always be used for domestic expenditure, this Council is of the view that we cannot jeopardise the vital services currently being delivered to all of our residents. Therefore, if the funding cannot come from DfID, then the Treasury must arrange the alternative.
The Council therefore instructs the Chief Executive to write to the Rt. Hon. Justine Greening MP asking the Government to:
· consider the full implications of having refugees homed in Medway, including the costs of housing, education and healthcare as well as any other costs.
· ensure full financial consideration is made for subsequent years, as much as the first.”
On December 16th you stated on BBC Radio Kent that “Medway is not able to house refugees” What correspondence had Medway Council received by the 16th December which led you to making this statement as it seems to be contradictory to the information received by your party colleague and Leader of Ashford Borough Council Gerry Clarkson and if we had not received a substantive response by 16th December it is not clear on what basis you were making such a sweeping statement at odds with what this Council agreed?
Minutes:
“At the previous Full Council meeting on the 15th October the following motion was agreed on a cross party basis and passed by Full Council:
“Medway Council is sympathetic to the plight of refugees fleeing war torn Syria. Many members have received letters from constituents regarding the refugee crisis and are touched by their generosity.
We are aware that the Prime Minister, together with the Department of International Development and the Department for Communities and Local Government is looking to settle 20,000 refugees throughout Britain over the next five years.
Medway is willing to play its part in providing a safe refuge to those in desperate need. This Council prides itself on the high level of services that it offers to all residents. It is understood that the Department of International Development will be paying local government for the increased costs.
For reasons purely practical, our offer of refuge has to be conditional on financial support from central government. Notwithstanding regulations regarding DfID expenditure and aware that the funding cannot always be used for domestic expenditure, this Council is of the view that we cannot jeopardise the vital services currently being delivered to all of our residents. Therefore, if the funding cannot come from DfID, then the Treasury must arrange the alternative.
The Council therefore instructs the Chief Executive to write to the Rt. Hon. Justine Greening MP asking the Government to:
· consider the full implications of having refugees homed in Medway, including the costs of housing, education and healthcare as well as any other costs.
· ensure full financial consideration is made for subsequent years, as much as the first.”
On December 16th you stated on BBC Radio Kent that “Medway is not able to house refugees”. What correspondence had Medway Council received by the 16th December which led you to making this statement as it seems to be contradictory to the information received by your party colleague and Leader of Ashford Borough Council Gerry Clarkson and if we had not received a substantive response by 16th December it is not clear on what basis you were making such a sweeping statement at odds with what this Council agreed?”
Councillor Jarrett stated that there was a very good reason why the quote in the final paragraph ‘Medway is not able to house refugees’ had no punctuation mark. This was because it was only part of what he had said. Councillor Jarrett informed Members that what he had said was entirely consistent with the two parts of the motion moved by this Council in October 2015 as follows:
“Medway is not able to house refugees until central government can guarantee the long term funding for local authorities to cover the additional cost this will inevitably bring. We cannot let vital services for local people suffer and therefore an assurance for long term funding is needed”.
Councillor Jarrett stated that this was the Administration’s position and that this was a very reasonable position.
He stated that the Government, in an exchange of correspondence with Medway, initially guaranteed funding to all Councils for one year and no funding for any period beyond that. The Government was then talking about a five year funding envelope and they wrote to all local authorities, including Medway (because Medway had asked them the specific question) and the Government said there would be full funding for the next year and a taper thereafter.
Councillor Jarrett stated that this was not good enough and that he had requested the Chief Finance Officer to write to the Rt. Hon. Richard Harrington MP on 20 January 2016 in response to the MP’s letter dated 16 December 2015 regarding the support available to the local authorities to accept Syrian refugees under the Government’s dispersal scheme.
Councillor Jarrett stated that this scheme did not provide the reassurance required by Members that it would not represent an additional burden on the Council’s already overstretched resources.
He stated that the provisional settlement announced on 17 December 2015 represented a worse position for Medway Council than had been anticipated in the already pessimistic medium term financial planning assumptions. Even taking advantage of the 2% Council tax flexibility and identifying around £13 million of efficiencies for this year, the Administration was struggling to close the gap in order to budget for 2016-2017. He stated that the Council would be unwilling to take on the additional burden the dispersal scheme might represent unless there was a clear commitment from central government to cover the full cost of such a scheme over the medium term.
He stated that this clarified the Council’s position and that position was entirely consistent with the decisions taken by Full Council.