Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Good morning. I'd like to welcome Members and the public to the meeting of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. The public items of the meeting are being broadcast live on Senedd.tv and a Record of Proceedings will be published. I'd like to state that apologies have been received from Peter Fox MS this morning and Anthony Slaughter MS. No substitutes have been allocated. This meeting will be bilingual. Simultaneous interpretation from Welsh to English is available. I'd now like to ask Members if there are any declarations of interest in the room. None. Noted.

This is item 2, a follow-up inquiry into empty properties: evidence session. The purpose of this is that, at its first meeting on 9 July, the committee agreed to conduct a follow-up inquiry into empty properties, and so today the committee will take evidence from three panels, the first panel being two academics, a housing consultant and a representative of the Empty Homes Network. Papers have been circulated to all Members to digest. First of all, I'd like to welcome the witnesses to the meeting and ask if you could introduce yourselves to the Members and the public, please. 

Shall I go first? Dr Henry Dawson from Cardiff Metropolitan University. 

Dr Helen Taylor from Cardiff Metropolitan University.

My name's Andrew Lavender, I'm a housing consultant. Morning.

And Adam Cliff, executive director of the Empty Homes Network.

Good morning. So, without further ado, it's a case of inviting Members to ask questions of the witness panel. Marc, did you want to start?

Shall I get the ball rolling?

Get the ball rolling.

Yes, welcome and thanks for attending. This is something I feel very passionately about. That's why I wanted it on the agenda. And when you look at the figures—and I want to start with the figures, really, because there doesn't seem to be an accepted figure of how many empty properties there are in Wales. And I find that a difficult thing to comprehend. Buildings don't disappear and appear. Where do you think we're sitting? There are figures ranging from 22,000 all the way up to far more than that. Where do you think we are realistically? 

May I start? There are a number of different classifications for empty properties, and of course, particularly as we're very reliant on council tax registers, we also have a range of exemptions from the council tax registers for empty properties, particularly if we've got long-term derelict properties, which get taken off the register completely. And so it can make it quite difficult to ascertain how many properties are empty at a given time. We'll always have to have some empties that need to be there because of market churn and such like. The things where we ought to be gathering data are on long-term empties that are the sort of stubborn kernel of properties that we need to return back into use. The rest of them will gradually drift back into use through market forces, and so having more accurate data on that is very important.

But it can be challenging to maintain up-to-date records with that, in particular because at times the data collection for them is very reliant on self-reporting with council tax resources. And then we've also got fairly limited and variable communication between empty property officers and council tax enforcement teams, which maintain these records, in order to update them on what's happening with individual properties. Properties that could be occupied as residential, such as flats over business units, often also fall outside of the definitions. So, the Land Registry data only captures a proportion of the ownership of the housing stock. We have similar information deficits, so it's something that you're trying to capture that is constantly in flux, and often quite difficult to capture due to the variety involved.

Andrew, would you have a comment on that? I know you gave us, via a Zoom link, when I was a councillor in Wrexham, a very informative update on compulsory purchase orders, I don't know—[Interruption.]—if it's particularly useful to discuss so early, but, from your perspective, how do you think local authorities are doing in terms of bringing these empty properties back into use? And could you flag up best practice anywhere in Wales?

To be fair to Wales, you've done an awful lot. You've got a number of mechanisms and funding streams to deal with long-term empty properties. But one of the bottlenecks with local authorities is always a matter of resources and whether they've got enough empty property officers or officers to dedicate, and sometimes the service is split between different departments. Those authorities that have dedicated officers generally have a better output on a number of properties brought back into use.

The other issue, particularly with the work that I've done, is that there is often a split between the regeneration of town centres and actually dealing with long-term empty properties. One of the issues you often have in local authorities is a lack of corporate approach. So, often you find that the enforcement powers are particularly linked to the empty property officers, who have got strong knowledge in that area. Regeneration has no knowledge in that particular area itself, but regeneration is about investing in our town centres and getting commercial properties into use. So, a lack of corporate approach within local authorities, resources, not having enough staff, and the necessary support through legal solicitors and other departments working together is one of the big barriers to bringing long-term empty properties back into use, both from a regeneration town centre point of view and actually long-term empty properties as well.

As far as the council tax information goes, as Henry's mentioned, those properties that are above commercial properties aren't within the council tax remit. The other issue is that the properties that are in the worst condition, the owner can ask the Valuation Office to take them out of council tax banding as well. The council tax database is your principal source of information. The other issue is that those authorities that still offer a discount for long-term empty properties, what we call band C council tax, if you give a small discount of 10 to 20 per cent, then there's a financial incentive for owners to notify the local authority that the property is empty. Where local authorities are trying to maximise their council tax take from owners, they've removed the exemption and therefore there's no incentive for owners to inform the local authorities, and that, to a large extent, is why we get fluctuations from different sources on the overall numbers. 

Because what I'm seeing is a huge variation across Wales in terms of bringing things back into use. I'll refer back to my old council, Wrexham, which had zero properties brought back into use, others bringing 12 per cent, 14 per cent back into use. I think that's because Wrexham doesn't have an empty properties officer, and hasn't had for a number of years, which strikes me as a failure on the part of the council to take this matter seriously, and what you said about the lack of a cross-cutting approach to it. It's seen as an add-on within the housing department, when it should be considered in health. How is the Welsh Government going to address that, because, at the moment, it's just passing the buck to local authorities, as far as I can see? How do we ensure that the Welsh Government takes this issue, which I think is absolutely core, more seriously?

Empty property services is seen as a cinderella service in most local authorities. It's not a statutory requirement, so when there are cuts to be made within the authority, it is seen as quite an easy service to lose. However, if you look at the empty property officers per se, the amount of work they do and the amount of investment that creates into the local community, as far as bringing empty properties back into use and job creation go, it's quite significant, so they pay for themselves many times over, but it's a matter for the authority. As far as the Welsh Government goes, I suppose the only suggestion is whether you make it a statutory requirement, which would put the onus of obligation on the authority to provide a service in that regard.

Could I just ask one supplementary to that?

Sure, and I'll bring Rebeca in then.

I'm sorry to hog you, but if I don't ask you now, I won't see you again. You've had quite a lot of success in terms of compulsory purchase elsewhere. I don't see Wales doing that to any great degree. I know it is a carrot-and-stick approach, but at the moment, we have a fairly big carrot—there's a £50 million pot of money—but the stick, the compulsory purchase order and empty dwelling management orders, do you think they're being used sufficiently?

There's a range of enforcement options from a range of legislation. There are certainly improvements in each piece of legislation that will de-risk the process for local authorities, to a large extent. Compulsory purchase orders are seen as very cumbersome; they take a significant period of time to deal with, and, ultimately, the authority will overpay on what the property—so, when you look at the overall market value of it, the authority will end up paying significantly more, because you've got the planning inquiry costs, you've got market value, you've got basic home loss payment and you've also got, possibly, stamp duties. So, they are a measure of last resort. They are very necessary. The threat of them is sometimes sufficient, but there'll be a small cohort within local authorities where a CPO is appropriate, and they're just seen as being cumbersome and quite time intensive. We've tried, through training, encouraging local authorities, but there are also the solicitors within the authorities that often don't have the necessary skills, but there are outside services that can be bought in. So, I think local authorities use them for, perhaps, larger regeneration schemes, but perhaps not so much for individual properties. So, they can be used. EDMOs have got their own properties, but I'll curtail it there, otherwise I am going to talk too much.

May I come in on a couple of those points? Just to follow on, I thoroughly agree with all of those points that Andrew has made around compulsory purchase. It's slow, legally complex, costly, resource intensive and it needs very specific expertise. Often, because we don't do so much of it, particularly compulsory purchase orders for housing need rather than for the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the development of an area, then the expertise in legal services and in individual local authorities diminishes. Those legal teams have other priorities, so having some continuity within those teams and those skills and a bit of confidence—there's a lot of it that comes down to confidence—and having central support, such as the industry experts that we've got in Wales, greatly helps with easing some of those problems. But it's something that's used to target long-term, seriously poor properties that are eyesores and a real blight on the communities.

Scotland has been doing some work to try to shorten some of the timescales to have a more efficient process, reducing some of the procedural complexity whilst maintaining that balance between the rights of the owner and the needs of the community. But anything that can be done to make this a more streamlined process would certainly be welcome in Wales, as it's very difficult to facilitate.

For empty dwelling management orders, I did a quick tot up before this and I came up with at least seven opportunities to appeal an empty dwelling management order and three opportunities for people to apply for an order from the tribunal service to affect the operation of that management order. Each time a local authority has an appeal, it costs a few hundred pounds to the person making the appeal; it costs a local authority weeks or months of work in order to invest in defending these appeals. They're high risk and problematic. We don't have the added burdens they have in England, where they have to be having an impact on the local community and be two years empty—we only have to have six months empty for an empty dwelling management order to be brought in in Wales—but they're still a tool that, although they need to be used sparingly and then we shout from the rooftops about it so it becomes a legitimate threat to owners to encourage them to bring properties back into use, they are fraught with difficulty, and management orders are a particularly cumbersome tool in the way they're set out in the Housing Act 2004. 

Thank you. Rebeca, can I bring you in?

Hang on. Can you hear me? 

Yes, great. Thank you.

Bore da. Thank you, everyone, for joining us. It's much appreciated. It's a really important subject to many of us on this committee. Just in terms of the data, as Marc has already outlined, and some of the responses to the consultation really did note the over-reliance on council tax records, I'm wondering what other data would be useful regarding empty properties. Also, you already, obviously, touched on the enforcement powers, and I just wanted your thoughts on the current proposals in Scotland in terms of the overhaul of that system and doing things like allowing the local authorities to take temporary possession or bringing CPO procedures and compensation together. So, I'd be grateful for your thoughts on those proposals as well. Diolch yn fawr.

Adam, would you like to come in on this? 

Yes, I'm more than happy to come in on this. On the point of data, I think, certainly from an empty homes officers' point of view, we can only go with what we've got or what we have access to. The data that council tax provides gives us 95 per cent to 99 per cent of all the information we need and what we're looking at. The other 1 per cent is made up from complaints, referrals from councillors, from members, from the public. By simply driving around and going to visit other empty homes, you might see a case that you'd not picked up on before. So, yes, we'd love to have more data, we'd love to have more access to other sources of information and other complaints and referrals of empty homes, but we have to go with what we've got, and that data is, essentially, mostly council tax.

Picking up on the points that the panel have made so far, council tax is only as good as what goes into it. Across what we believe are the seven definitions of types of empty homes to record, to look at and investigate, one of those is properties that are recorded on council tax as being occupied and owner-occupied, but the empty homes officers themselves know they're empty. We will never know how many of those there are out there without complaints or referrals from the public. We could explore more where councils look into commercial property and business property. We could look at domestic rates valuations and rates of compliance there. But, again, that is much of an unknown for an empty homes officer that's only really ever dealt with residential property. So, the data is as good as it can be for what we need it. Obviously, it could always be better with some input and maybe some reform later down the line.

In terms of what Scotland are doing, I echo what Andrew has already said, that Wales is—. And I always refer to Wales as being three or four steps ahead when it comes to empty homes work. The programmes, the schemes, the initiatives always are way ahead of the game when it comes to comparing Wales with England and Scotland. Scotland are only just a little bit behind, but they are at least having these kinds of conversations and looking at exploring other types of enforcement power. Compulsory sale orders is one that's been talked about over the past five, six years, but has never been brought to fruition. But, from our point of view, the fact that it is being talked about, that it is being considered and that these things are an option is very good.

Going back to what the panel have said so far in terms of enforcement, all of the enforcement powers that we have, the EDMO, the compulsory purchase order, the enforced sale order, none of those are designed to do empty homes work en masse. They're only designed to do and deal with empty homes individually, kind of on a case-by-case basis. That's why you'll only ever see a handful of them done, if at all, throughout a year. They're not designed to bring hundreds of empty homes back into use in one fell swoop. So, they are case by case; they have to be a last resort. That's the way that they're designed, that's the way that legislation deems for us to use them. With that in mind, and with the fact that all of these powers will only ever bring maybe 1 per cent or 2 per cent of properties back into use a year, we need more powers or we need more options. We need more solutions.

One of my famous quotes that people always quote me on is that if there are a million empty homes in England or if there are 25,000 empty homes in Wales, we actually need 25,000 different solutions because every home is different. Every property is different. Most importantly, every person's circumstance is different. So, we have to look at all of our options. We have to explore everything that we possibly can do, both from a local authority point of view, but also at a higher level, a Government level, to spread those options out, or at least increase the availability and suitability of options for empty homes.

Thank you. Oh, Helen. Of course.

[Inaudible.] Thank you. So, building on those comments, I think, if we're thinking about what the ideal situation would be, it would be about empty properties being brief, rare and non-recurrent, to borrow the language from homelessness policy—this idea that there's a quick turnaround in how they're tackled. And I think it's that point that Adam made about those tailored solutions; if local authorities are able to do that relational work and to make it really easy for owners to not leave their properties empty and easy for them to find solutions, be really visible, then I think that would be a really good step forward, because, when we think about empty properties and we think about data and we think about the housing market, we're looking at people who have got empty properties for particular reasons. Perhaps there's been a bereavement; it's still part of their sort of social identity or family situation.

So, although we're talking about it in really technical terms, we're talking about people's emotions as well. So, making it really easy for people to approach the local authority and know the suite of options that are available to them—. And that's, I think, where we see best practice emerge: where there's that corporate responsibility for empty properties across a local authority, there's that shared data between different elements, that shared responsibility between different departments, that appropriate staffing resource, so that there are teams working on this, and that individuals can approach local authorities having known what's available and how they can stop that empty property becoming empty for a long time, because often that's not for their benefit either. So, I think it's that idea of visibility, flexibility and, obviously, having the appropriate staffing around that.

Thank you, Helen. I'm going to just quickly say we really are up against the clock this morning with everything. So, as Marc has already said, this is a very important subject, so I think what I'm going to suggest is that, for everybody that wants to ask a question now, if you could just make a written note of it and we will submit it to the panel; I'm sure they'll accommodate us with a suitable response. And then we can move through it that way. It's just that we've got so many questions and so many contributors today that I'm just mindful that everybody gets a fair shout.

And with that in mind, Mike, did you want to ask a question around the Welsh Government's strategic approach?

I'll ask it in two parts. I think the first one is: how can you have a strategic approach when you don't know the reasons for empty properties? I won't go into detail, but there are about four or five major reasons why properties are empty. Until you know what's causing it, how can you have a strategic approach? Previously, we've had legislation on the carrot of grant funding in order to bring properties back into use and the stick of charging additional council tax. We also have compulsory purchase orders, which are incredibly difficult, from my understanding, and you can't just say, 'I want to compulsory purchase that'; you have to try and negotiate first. Then they have a certain period of time to respond, and I've seen it, for land, take up to 10 years to get from the first start of negotiations to compulsory purchase, and they replied always on the last day, always ask for more information and always try to make it as difficult as possible. The question really is that: if we're going to have a strategic approach, what is going to be the strategy? We want to bring these houses back—fine, I think we're all in favour of that—how? And increasing council tax and the grant funding has made some effect, but nowhere near the effect that some of us expected when it was passed.

Can I respond to that? I think it's that idea of where the strategy sits, so where the strategic approach is, and I think, linking on to that point from Adam about flexibility, local authorities know their areas, they know the reasons why local properties might become empty, and I think if we have that sort of blanket approach, we might continue with some of the issues with them not being addressed. I think this idea of intelligence sharing, best practice sharing, empowerment for local authorities to be able to tackle those issues in the right way in their places is really important.

So, the strategy might not necessarily be these certain policy directives or pieces of legislation for the country, but more around empowering those local authorities, resourcing them to be able to take that flexible approach to make it easy for people to adopt or to access the support that they need around tackling empty properties.

Can I just make a short point on top of that? I'll just say that if local authorities—. Empty property work often is a cinderella to other services, because it isn't a statutory duty in local authorities. And without a central Government strategy and a central Government push that empowers those local authorities and presses those local authorities to take action and to continue that action, then it's something we'll keep on having to return to in future years.

And so you mentioned these cases that take 10 years to pursue. Well, we need 10-year time frames for action plans from Welsh Government, a sort of long-term direction for this, which then enables local authorities and presses local authorities to maintain that funding and resource stream and to continue reporting. And when reporting, think about how you're measuring the activities of local authorities and not just counting properties brought back into use—because that can favour short-termist approaches, favouring counting empties—but the actual actions that local authorities are doing to bring empty properties back into use. You can also include cross-cutting themes, such as data sharing between departments and a corporate responsibility to encourage different council departments to work collaboratively in order to bring the empties back into use, because with 25,000 empties, you've got 25,000 different solutions.

Thank you.

I was going to say, finally from me, that one of the problems is that some of them are empty because of battles over probate, battles over wills, the fact that, even when probate is granted, people want to go to court to say that the will is not fair and that they hadn't done what they expected. Is there anybody in this room who has not come across that? The other one that we get continually is, 'It's a family home; I don't want to lose it.'

I'll come back on that. So, normally, with the probate issue, that comes under class F of council tax. So, the Welsh Government has made recent changes on council tax to remedy that. So, it used to be that, once a person died, council tax liability stopped until probate was granted and then for six months—it expired after that. So, the Welsh Government has made changes to it so that council tax becomes payable, I think, over 12 months from the point that probate has been granted. It's a fairly small number within local authorities overall on the number of empty properties.

Thank you, that's very useful. Can you give us the percentages for each reason for empty properties? You said that that was a very small number. Can you tell us what the bigger numbers are?

So, as far as the reasons why properties are empty—

If you can give us the numbers—. Can I ask for them in writing after this meeting? But if you could let us know the reasons you've got in percentages, or approximate percentages, for why these properties are empty. 

Under Data Cymru, you'll have a list of all the exemptions. There's about 19 under council tax and they'll have class A, which is uninhabitable, very poor-condition properties. Class C is properties that are empty between lets. Class F would be exemptions from people dying. So, you will have from Data Cymru—I can certainly provide them to you—. They will be able to give you the split for the reasons why the exemption applies under council tax. 

Sometimes people make houses uninhabitable. There is a house in Penllergaer that is a four-bedroomed detached house, which is very nice and it's on the main road, and the doors have been bricked up, the windows have been bricked up. It's uninhabitable, because you cannot get access to it, but it is an empty property that is very nice and incredibly saleable.

So, that would be generally a useful case for an empty dwelling management order. But one of the exemptions under the EDMOs is that you can't do an EDMO on a property where the owner's died and you've got to wait until at least six months after probate. So, there is quite a wide range of exemptions under the EDMO, which frustrate local authorities—they need to be simplified.

As a fellow Member for the area will know, that is not a recent one; that goes back well over a decade.

But I think those points demonstrate why it's so complicated, because we're talking about people's lives, we're talking about houses, which are full of emotion and social ties, but also financial commodities, sitting between those two things, and I think that's why it's such a complex issue. And, yes, we can present some solutions, but it is going to continue being complex.

Just to comment that, where the property is subject to probate, it doesn't stop the authority from taking enforcement action. It's just about being proportionate and reasonable in the circumstances. 

Well, a court will decide that.

Thank you, Andrew. Thank you, Mike. I believe that Jennie can get some of that data for us, so she will look into that for you. I'm going to move on to local authority capacity, because time is against us. Marc, did you want to ask a question on that?

Yes. It's a very simple question: do local authorities have enough capacity, and do we need to see an overarching body to support with those expert skills in terms of CPOs or legal skills? How do you improve the service at a local council level?

I think there is a really varied picture with the level of resourcing that goes into empty properties and where those obligations sit, so I think more consistent staffing and an increase in that. I think where you see real success is where there are teams around the problem, but also that corporate responsibility. You don't want half a person being the person who has to tackle empty properties in that area. What we want to see is a commitment across all of those different departments. I think a particularly interesting point that was raised in the development of the handbook was where you have people coming in who have private sector skills, so they're joining those teams but they've got skills from beyond the local authority around how to tackle those properties as well. So, I think it's about investment, that corporate responsibility, so sharing the load, but also thinking about those skills that you might need in those people. 

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Marc. Adam, did you want to come in on that? 

I was just going to add, to directly answer that question from Marc, that we can quite easily look at two cases in Wales of local authorities that are very close together but are at completely opposite ends of the spectrum. Conwy County Borough Council currently have two empty homes officers and they're looking at exploring a dedicated third officer that is focused entirely on enforcement. As a local authority they are doing some fantastic work on empty homes, both with residential properties but also properties and spaces above shops on the high street. And yet down the road in Wrexham, they don't have an empty homes officer, to my knowledge, yet they are both under the same Government. They're under the same direction from the national Government. At the moment, empty homes could be a political priority nationally, but locally they are completely separate. They're completely different and at completely opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to a priority. You've got Conwy with two, possibly in the very near future three officers, and yet in Wrexham, just down the road, they don't have any. So, I think that that, in a nutshell, explains the challenges that local authorities have got. Some see it very clearly as a priority, yet very close by some others don't.

I would just add that, in those successful local authorities, generally, what they've done, where they've increased the teams, is they've top-sliced the empty homes premium to provide revenue to support the staffing of officers, and that's really quite cost-effective. But it does depend on the priority of the authority as to whether empty properties is a subject that they need to deal with. 

That was the reason I asked the original question about the data, because according to the data we've got here, Wrexham has got 400 empty properties. I know from being a councillor—. I was told last year that we had 1,616 empty properties. There's a huge variation there, and not having an empty properties officer means that nothing's happening.

There's also the demarcation. An empty properties officer would say that an empty property is one that is six months empty or more, whereas often when you're looking at high statistics, the third sector, when they're trying to make arguments, will often report the total number of empty properties as ones that have just become empty. So, yes, technically they're classed as empty, but the normal churn of the market will deal with the vast majority of those. So, really, local authorities only need to intervene with those properties that have been empty more than six months, which indicates that there's perhaps more of an issue, rather than the churn of the market.

But if you invest in empty property officers, then you get better records. 

Just one question on the capacity piece there: are local authorities focused mainly on residential, or are they looking at empty commercial properties as well?

Regen teams are dealing with the town centres. You've got the town centre loan schemes. You've got other grant funding streams available for dealing with them. Empty properties tend to deal with the empty properties side, with empty property officers themselves. So, the regen and the empty property officers don't really work co-operatively, if I can put it like that. They're seen as two separate strands, and it's very difficult to get them to work together and see that each party, with the funding and the skills, are cross-serving. So, it's a slightly different approach for commercial properties.

Whilst gathering the data for the empty properties handbook, we found widely differing approaches to the level of regeneration work being done on empty commercial properties between different locations in Wales.

Thank you. Talking about funding, I think that brings us on to the next question. Marc, it's you again, on funding.

There's a pot of money there, the £50 million being perhaps the biggest. Only £5 million has been spent since it was opened. Does that suggest a failure? I don't want to be critical, because I know how difficult it is to engage with some landlords. In Swansea, I have a property just around the corner from where I live—it's an old printworks—that's been empty for 18 years. It's got planning permission for five flats, but the owner doesn't want to stop there. He wants to build eight flats, and so there's a planning issue. I'm going off script here—it should be about funding—but I think these are the things that bother people, those blights, those eyesores in communities, the long-term eyesores, and people realise there's a housing crisis. In those specific instances, shouldn't the kitchen sink be thrown at solving that problem? It doesn't seem to be happening, whether it's Swansea or Wrexham, or those really difficult ones. I take your point, Adam, about how every one has an individual solution, but those seem to be the ones that get stuck in the system, because they're planning, they're housing, they're all sorts of different things, and nobody's doing the joined-up thinking. I'll get back to funding now. How do we focus the funding on those really difficult ones?

May I make a couple of points on this? We've got very strong funding with regard to incentive approaches in Wales. There are excellent resources being poured into that, and it's something that's definitely to be celebrated, because we're leading in the devolved administrations on this, certainly. But there's a finite number of people involved in dealing with empty properties in local authorities, and they're spending an awful lot of their time administering these more incentive-based approaches, which is all very laudable work and needs to continue. But each of these stubborn, difficult properties, these eyesore issues, the bricked-up house on the main highway, and those sorts of things, requires years of work in order to move them through the process and use these resources.

What you're using is a proportion of what is available for the manpower across Wales in order to develop the cases to use some of these more almost draconian enforcement measures in order to bring them back into use. In these blight cases, which require a lot of co-ordination between departments in councils, the reason I think you had a lot of your money not spent is because you don't have enough coal-face people that are actually doing the spending and doing the operational side of things, so you've got a bottleneck there, which needs to be invested in and supported.

The central expertise and support that's provided and the funding has been essential for the work that has been done across local authorities, because it oils the wheels and makes everything work with regard to taking this legal action, both through training and providing support, not just for empty property staff, but also for their associated legal teams, and briefing appropriate councillors, who may be antagonistic or supportive of the action. And so that needs to continue, but what we're seeing here is a resource constraint, which is then limiting the available drawdowns on some of that funding, in addition to the fact that these are long, slow processes that periodically require a big chunk of funding, but only periodically.

You have to speculate to accumulate, so the more of these you get going, as you start moving along the process, you'll gradually have more of them using up that funding, but it will take some time for that action to increase, and that will always be bottlenecked if you minimise the funding being put in, in individual local authorities, to empty property officers, which brings me back to the points you made about redirection of council funding and council tax premiums. Where that's been redirected into the empty properties team, we're seeing it growing and flourishing, whereas where we don't see that, we can see the reverse occurring. 

Thank you. Elyn. 

Diolch, Chair. That leads on nicely to my question. In terms of the revenue that is raised from the empty homes council tax premiums, do you think that that could or should be ring-fenced specifically for empty properties? And secondly, are there any wider changes to taxation, for example land transaction tax or the way that council tax premiums are structured, that could be looked at to improve bringing empty properties back into use? 

I'll just quickly say that, where we've seen that being ring-fenced and used to bolster capacity, that's really good, and that's had an impact. So, you can see where the best practice is there, on that first point. 

Something to add to that is that if you do that publicly, then it provides reassurance around the reasons that we are asking for the council tax premiums, and that they are being spent wisely on something that's addressing a civic interest issue.

On the potential reforms—and these are my own personal opinions—of some of the land transaction tax, reliefs tied to bringing long-term properties back into use are certainly advantageous. The council tax A and C exemptions, as long as they are quite tightly managed, certainly seem appropriate and fitting in order to try to incentivise developers to bring these properties back into use, or to try to get them moved on to another owner.

Incentives linked to occupation and improvement, and targeted relief for regeneration areas, are all worthy of consideration, but we do have to bear in mind that market forces still have a part to play in this in certain areas of Wales. Where an economy in a locality has resulted in a strong housing demand, then it's much easier to bring the properties back into use. And something I would say is that, if you've got an area with significantly reduced housing demand, punishing the owners of properties that are very keen to bring them back into use with extra costs around their empty status significantly burdens people who are already struggling to bring these properties back into use, and so that's something that does need to be weighed evenly. 

Thank you. Adam, would you like to come in on this? 

Our position when it comes to empty homes premiums across the board is that we feel that they should only be applied where councils have dedicated empty homes teams. If I were to put myself in the position of an empty home owner, and I was being told by my local authority that I was being charged an empty homes premium, that would effectively tell me that the empty home that I own is a problem. Then, on approaching the council and asking for a solution, if they don't have an empty homes officer or a team that can support me in getting those solutions, I think that would be a bit perverse, to be honest. 

We feel as though those premiums should be applied only in circumstances where empty homes teams are there to support owners out of that circumstance. We do feel as though they work in terms of providing the disincentive for owners, but, conversely, they also work as an incentive for councils to not do much empty homes work because they're generating more money. Certainly, in England, we're seeing more and more councils take that position. 

It has to find the balance. It has to find the right balance. On whether they are working in general, the empty homes premiums have been in place and applicable now for a number of years, and yet the empty homes numbers have only ever increased. So, whether they are providing the right incentive for owners, we don't know. Whether they're providing the incentive more now for councils is yet to be seen, but it is another tool, it is another option, it is another opportunity for councils, and we just need more of them. We need more solutions.

Like I said earlier, each solution that we can provide probably only targets 5 per cent of the overall numbers. With funding streams, we're looking at bringing 5 per cent of all empty homes back into use. With council tax, and council tax premiums, second homes premiums, we're again looking at probably 5 per cent. So, it is a case of needing more solutions and more opportunities, but it all starts with a council having a dedicated officer in post.

We'll move on to Rebeca on legislation and enforcement powers.

That's okay, Chair, I asked my question earlier regarding the Scotland proposals. So, diolch yn fawr.

Great. Marc, anything you'd like to add in?

Well, we've kind of touched on it already, haven't we? How do we make sure that we change the law to make things better? I think it's clear from the conversation we've had so far that there are things that need to happen, I would say, at a national level, to make things better. So, what specific laws or regulations would you, if you had those powers, like to see happen?

I will come in on this side, given our 16-page recommendation for the Welsh Government on potential changes. One of the main powers we've got is the Housing (Wales) Act 2014, but if you look at the statutory guidance, it pushes the authority away from taking enforcement action in relation to empty homes. Similarly, you have no powers for warrants to enter the property to do works in default once you have served the notice. That could be simply changed.

In relation to things like your planning powers, mostly urgent works notices—section 215 notices—under a lot of our legislation, like the housing Act, the building Act, the prevention of damage Act, the local authority charge takes priority over the mortgage. So, when we enforce the sale of a property, we get our money first—legal costs and auctioneers. But, in relation to the planning legislation, our charge doesn't take priority. So, if a property is in negative equity or it is highly leveraged, it is really quite high risk to ever do works in default in those scenarios. So, prioritising the charges under the different legislation could be helpful.

Uprating some of the offences: if you look at section 215, in Wales it's a £1,000 fine and then one tenth for the second prosecution again. In England, they have introduced unlimited fines and then £250 to £500 for a second or subsequent prosecution. So, that could be dealt with similarly under section 79.

So, there is a whole host of fairly straightforward measures that could be introduced that would reduce the risk to the authority but actually give greater security on ensuring that the authority will recover the money and give them comfort. In addition, the Welsh Government has given an enforcement fund, which enables the authorities to pull down money and underwrite the risks to them. So, they have got all the tools, but there is always a reluctance to take enforcement action on the potential of the ability to not recover your money or, possibly, prosecutions as well.

I think, on this, what we have heard is that it is incredibly complex and the variety of stakeholders and people interested in this that should be involved in this work is really, really broad. We're thinking community groups, developers, landlords. It is a huge swathe of people who might be involved in this. I think, yes, there is a role for legislation, but if we think the solution is only going to come from legislation, that's not going to work. I think we need to look at a really broad suite of policy tools because what we have seen through developing the handbook is that ways of working and that idea of culture and corporate responsibility at a local authority level are really, really important. So, it is finding, I think, the appropriate policy tools to enable that to happen that is really important.

Can I just make one point on that? When I was working on the no-use empty scheme, we looked at the types of intervention on bringing empty properties back into use for about 6,000. About 56 per cent was through advice and guidance; 13 per cent was from financial grants and loans; threat of enforcement was above 13 per cent; the actual heavy enforcement— prosecution, empty dwelling management orders, enforced sales, CPOs—was only 3 per cent of the cases; and then 7 per cent was honest broker reduced auctioneer scheme. So, enforcement is critical for those very poor conditions. Those properties that have been empty up to two years have got a good chance of being brought through advice, guidance, financial. Once it is over two years, generally, the big stick threat of enforcement or enforcement has to be taken to encourage the owner to engage.

Just a very short point, just as a general principle, which is we have got already a pretty good toolbox of pieces of legislation we can bring to bear—anything that makes those easier to use. So, we have already discussed CPOs—compulsory purchase orders—and empty dwelling management orders as being particularly fraught with hurdles for local authorities. You have mentioned, Andrew, the financial risk of undertaking measures, particularly where we do default and don't get our money back, in local authorities. I would also add to that considerations around GDPR and national guidance in order to facilitate better information sharing between council departments, who often fail to share information freely with empty property officers. It varies by local authority, but particularly between council tax, council tax enforcement teams and empty property officers, but, in general, just due to a risk-aversion approach. Some central guidance to help iron out some of those problems would be very welcome, although not a legislative solution, more straightforward.

With regard to forcing councils to ring-fence elements of their council tax, that might have some potential, but I would imagine that it would encounter certain issues over precedence in the direction of spending in local government and, fundamentally, anything that can be done to support local authorities doing this work, because they're the experts and it's a regional and local problem for each property.

Thank you. Mike, I'll bring you in now, but Adam's got his hand up. Adam, did you want to come in?

Yes, just quickly to add to what the panel have said. Irrespective of how many financial tools, enforcement tools, supportive and negotiative tools councils may have, if they don't have an empty homes officer or they don't have that central cog of the wheel to actually go out, do the work, do the investigative piece, do the homework and the legwork behind looking at all of these empty homes, then it doesn't really matter how many tools they have. If they don't have that head of the snake to go after these empty homes, then the councils won't do the work. The councils themselves will remain very reactive to complaints and referrals. Whereas the success that we see and the benefit of using all of the tools, both enforcement and financial, is where councils are proactive, and having that empty homes officer in place enables a council to be proactive.

Thank you. Mike.

Quite simply, enforcement is wonderful. How do you enforce against somebody in prison? How do you enforce against somebody who's moved abroad, and how do you enforce when, having started the enforcement action, they then transfer the property to someone else? These are examples I can give you from Swansea.

It's no problem with people in prison. I often go and actually pop in and have a visit and you can serve notices in that regard. So, that's not an issue, from that point of view. I would say 95 per cent of properties can be dealt with through enforcement. It's about political will and whether you've got the necessary skills and the finance to support it. So, you've got the finance, and a lot of authorities have got the skill, but, echoing Adam's point about resources at the front end, it's the empty property that starts the engine and gets the process in it.

If they live abroad, that's not a particular problem as well. As long as we serve it at the Land Registry address, then we've got good service. But, again, it's having the knowledge to have the confidence in the guidance in relation to that. If you've got any particular case in mind, I'm happy to have a chat.

Danbert House, which is a very big building in Morriston and which has been derelict for about 20 years, the council have only taken it on every time they've had to do safety work and, having done the safety work, they can then sell it in order to recoup the cost. It's then sold to somebody else and 'please repeat' several times. And sometimes when they go against the owner, the ownership transfers to the British Virgin Islands or somewhere like that, which makes it, as far as I can see, very difficult, but you may think it's easier.

So, the one in Morriston is a listed building. Listed buildings are a particular problem in their own right. The difficulty is that the private sector will not deal with listed buildings in a large number of cases because the cost of development exceeds the end value, so you're spending more money on the property than it's going to be worth. So, by doing works in default, the listed building legislation is one that doesn't take priority over the mortgage, which is a risk to the authority. And if you spend £50,000 on doing up the property and, ultimately, you're not going to get that money from the sale from the auction, then it's a loss leader to the authority. So, when you're dealing with listed buildings where the cost of development is excessive, the only solution is normally the local authority taking the project on and then providing grant funding or funding from another source to supplement the shortfall so that it stands up. Most developers, when they're dealing with listed buildings, won't get out of bed unless they're making at least 20 per cent profit. If the property is in negative equity at the end, then it's going to stand stagnant. So, listed buildings are a particular problem in their own right.

Thank you. We have five minutes left, so we can cover off communities and partner agencies. Marc, did you have a quick question? 

Okay. Helen, you raised earlier the possibility of communities becoming involved, and we're talking to community-based solutions this afternoon, which is good. But, from your perspective, because we're not seeing results, I don't think—sufficient results—via the current system, how do we encourage communities to take ownership of, if you like, problem properties in their communities? Is there a pot of money that we can put towards that?

I think it goes to my broader point, I guess, about it being relational work, that it's all about those local empty property teams having relationships with those active stakeholders in their area. So, that can be community groups, knowing what groups are out there, having relationships with them, knowing, if they're looking for properties, what their aims are and what they would like to do in the community. I guess it's a bit of brokerage, isn't it, around, 'Okay, we've got this property that's empty and we all want to find a solution. How can we work together to make that happen?' And not to repeat the point we've made constantly throughout, but that's about having time. Relational work takes time to do that. So, I think there's definitely a role for communities in that. There are some brilliant community groups, third sector groups, that you're talking to later, who will have really specific examples of that. But it's being aware of who might be interested in that work in that area, I think.

Okay. Thanks.

So, just to say that these community organisations often involve a lot of not-for-profit bodies, people working and giving their time for free. They're already dealing with a lot of committee responsibility, so the basic mechanics of how they operate, and then trying to bring empties back into use is already a particularly complex process in itself. So, anything you can do to make that process easier for them is something that would be welcome—extending support for community asset transfer, community-led housing, social enterprise-led refurbishment initiatives, some form of financial support for them. We've seen small pockets of this, but nothing that we're seeing getting any momentum on a larger basis, and, again, that central support to help keep them going with this, because the people who are doing this aren't experts, the people who are doing this are amateur individuals.

Just to note that, in partnership with housing associations, we have had some real progress with that historically, but with particularly problematic and particularly pre-1920s properties that are harder to insulate and suchlike, the Welsh housing quality standard is actually a bit of an obstacle to housing associations and council landlords coming on board with these bodies. So, having a separate outfit that lets them use that in a community-based initiative, but something that doesn't require WHQS, might be a solution for unlocking some more of those problem properties.

I'll just make one point. With the third sector, we've got some very good small services in Wales itself, but often, with the funding, whether it's private sector funding or local authority through Houses into Homes, the issue is that they don't have the property, they don't own the property, to actually secure finance against it. Therefore, it's quite difficult to raise finance. They can give them money to do the projects on it. So, what a lot of local authorities do in England is potentially work with local authorities where they've got empty properties that are owned by the organisation or, perhaps, Government departments or the Welsh Government. If you've got properties that are, perhaps, available, that they could then plug into, do the renovations on the property, let it out for a period of time—affordable rent or whatever—then that gives them a source of properties for them to facilitate the partnership arrangement. So, that works quite well, but it tends to be quite a small percentage of properties brought back into use.

But it's that starting one, isn't it? That's the problem.

Yes. Once you start it, it'll roll.

Thank you, Andrew. And finally, Elyn, the last question is yours.

A very quick point in terms of community asset transfer. As to the circumstances you've mentioned, about volunteers running these things being quite difficult, I find that the enthusiasm is there at the start but then wanes off when life gets in the way, things get more complicated, processes are drawn out. Is there anything that we can do here in terms of empty properties that can kind of allay that?

I think centralised support for that sort of thing, and also what you can do to get them to work with empty property officers locally. I'd say they've got that willingness to continue with it, but having somebody that's already done that sort of thing before, or has a good awareness of it to take them through the process, being able to go back to that expert, and the expert can also—. And a sustainable funding pot for it as well, rather than something that's limited over time, because they might have aspirations towards something, but if it looks like the funding is going to get pulled, then they won't take steps towards it at all, because why would you use your time?

So, those two measures: sustainable funding centrally, something that's a replenishable pot over time would probably be the most ideal model, and then having some form of central support. I'm not sure peer support would work in that sort of context to a great extent, because these things tend to appear and then people move about and change, and then you lose the expertise again. So, you need that consistency.

Thank you. I'd like to thank you all for attending today and Adam for coming on via Zoom. You will, of course, receive a transcript of the hearing this morning to check its factual accuracy. Again, thank you very, very much. We're now going to take a break until 10.25, so we can change over the witness panel. Thank you again.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. 

Okay, so welcome back. We're into item 3, the follow-up inquiry into empty properties, and this is evidence session 2. This is the committee's second evidence session to inform its inquiry into empty properties, and in this session the committee will hear from local authorities' representatives. So, first of all, I'd like to welcome everyone on the Zoom call and in person to the meeting. Could I ask if you could introduce yourselves one by one? Shall we start with who's in the room first, with Georgina?

My name's Georgina Wayman. I'm an environmental health officer for shared regulatory services for Bridgend, Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan councils, but I'm the empty property co-ordinator for Bridgend County Borough Council. 

Thank you.

Bore da. My name's Osian Jones, I'm the empty homes officer for the Isle of Anglesey County Council. 

Thank you very much. Rhian.

Hello, my name is Rhian Brown, I'm the housing delivery lead at Newport City Council.

Thank you. James. 

Good morning. My name's James Bolton. I'm the empty homes development officer for Flintshire County Council.

Thank you. And finally, Jamie. 

Hi, good morning. My name's Jamie Wagenaar, I'm the empty property officer for Caerphilly County Borough Council.

Thank you. So, welcome everyone. I'm now going to ask the members of the committee to put some questions to you. So, here we go. Just for the record, I know that some people didn't get to ask a question in the previous frame, so if you'd like to put your hands up. If you've not already indicated that you have a question, put your hands up and we will endeavour to get to you. Is that okay? Thank you. So, it's pretty much going to follow the same format again. So, Marc, is there anything you want to ask around the data area?

Well, yes, but we're asking a different group of people this time, so I will ask about whether you think the 22,500 figure that we're looking at is an accurate figure according to your expertise, because you're the front-line staff, and whether the Welsh Government is doing enough to ensure that the data is correct, which enables you as front-line officers to deal with that. 

Yes, the data surrounding empty properties can vary. What we identify sometimes is that definitions of empty properties can distort the figures. We work towards getting long-term empty property back into use. What sometimes can be included are properties that are in receipt of exemptions, which are still empty and vacant, but are not the target priorities for local authorities, such as properties that are going through probate, or where there are people in residential care homes or receiving care elsewhere. Whilst they are still empty, they may not be our priorities.

We also have definitions surrounding empty properties that include what are classed as second homes as well. So, the definitions can be confused in some senses: a long-term empty property is an empty property that is empty and unfurnished, whereas a second home is an empty property but is furnished. So, that can essentially distort figures as well, and our priorities lie with getting long-term empty properties back into use.

What we often come across as well is that not all properties are accounted for. The previous panel touched on it. Properties that are taken off the rating system are the most difficult properties to deal with, and they are not made available to empty property officers. That information is not available to us, which makes it difficult for us to establish which are empty properties and which ones we prioritise.

I think it's just important to note as well how we measure performance in the empty properties, because it does impact on the overall data collection. So, we measure the number of properties that are brought back into use, but that doesn't measure the amount of work that goes into each of those properties that comes back into occupation, and I think that has an impact on the data. I believe our colleague, who's come in on Zoom, Jamie, has done some preparation work around the data collection as well, so you may want to revert to him for some more information.

Okay. Rebeca, did you want to ask any questions around that?

Yes, thank you, Chair.

Just regarding the data, many organisations have noted the over-reliance on council tax records for the data. Do you have thoughts on any other data sources that would be useful on residential or commercial empty properties? Diolch.

Does anyone want to answer that one?

Hi. I think I'll answer that one, thank you.

Thank you, Jamie.

I think Osian did touch mainly on the point around properties that have been taken out of valuation. We don't have information on these figures. These properties are not being charged council tax or a council tax premium either, which sort of gives a get-out-of-jail-free card for empty property owners who don't wish to return their property to beneficial use, engage with the council or predominantly pay the penalty for having an empty property. So, I think having that data and having it accessible to empty property officers would certainly be beneficial and welcomed.

Okay. Has anybody else got anything? No. So, the strategic approach. Mike, did you want to take the lead on this?

We had the carrot of grant money, didn't we, for people who wanted to do work on a house to bring it back into use. We had the stick of having higher rates of council tax able to be charged. And then we had the big stick of compulsory purchase orders. Have the first two worked and have any of you ever used a compulsory purchase order?

Yes, I've actually just completed our first compulsory purchase order under our empty homes strategy in Bridgend. That process completed this month, at the beginning of September. I will say that it wasn't a decision that we took lightly. It was an absolute last resort. And whilst we're very pleased to have completed that process, it's not without its challenges. It was certainly a very lengthy process, taking two years to get to completion. And that is just to take possession of the property. We now have to sell that property and allow sufficient time for that property to become renovated so that it can be lived in. So, we're looking at another 18 months to two years to get to that stage. It's been an extremely lengthy process. It's very heavy on procedure. There are lots of notices and lots of methods of service. It's very, very time and resource intensive. So, being a part-time officer, it's very much taken me away from all of the other work because I've needed to dedicate my time to doing that. It's not something that we would relish the thought of doing again, if I'm totally honest, unless the needs are absolutely there.

Like I say, we have done it; we're pleased to have done it. There have been many challenges, and I think anything that can be done to streamline that process, make it easier, quicker and more cost-effective to reduce the risk to local authorities, we would welcome, to enable us to take more. I think the easier it is to get through the process, the more local authorities will use that power. Financially, it's been very costly to the local authority, and it's reducing those risks to the authority to enable us to pursue it.

I did mention the two previous things of the carrot of, 'You can have grant funding for renovation', and the stick of, 'You've got to pay additional council tax, if you don't bring it back into use.' Have those worked at all? Somebody else can answer, if you like.

Yes, with the national empty homes grants scheme, I think it has been successful in Anglesey. We've had a lot of good outcomes from offering this scheme, whether they have proceeded with the grant or, initially, just getting those discussions and dialogue in place. So, I think it has been worthwhile.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Mike.

Sorry, could I add to that? Apologies.

Of course.

In terms of the empty homes grant, we've been very, very successful in Caerphilly in the administration of it. One thing I would find as a barrier, which is touched upon in many of our other groups, is surrounding second homes. So, second homes are, obviously, predominantly very problematic, particularly in our borough. What we do find is, because a stipulation of the grant is that the property is unfurnished for 12 months and empty for 12 months—. What we find is that many properties that are either second homes or deceased estates, because these properties are furnished and, in many cases, furniture is removed at the very last minute at the point of sale, these properties are then purchased but are unable to access that funding through the empty homes grant service, which means that, obviously, support isn't available for that person who's actually bought a problematic empty property. And due to the cost-of-living crisis, with materials and labour actually increasing, that £25,000 now, which five years ago may have been sufficient, we're finding is not enough to bring these most problematic empty properties back into beneficial use.

Thank you, Jamie. Yes, Georgina.

Sorry, may I add to that? Just in terms of funding, I think there's uncertainty in terms of how long the funding will last for. With the empty homes grant and, particularly, Leasing Scheme Wales, both of which we've found beneficial in shared regulatory services, in particular in Bridgend, we're at this point now with Leasing Scheme Wales where we're having to turn properties away, because the certainty as to whether there's future funding is unknown. So, I think that anything that can be done to ensure we've got sustainability, I guess, with funding would be really welcomed, because, without the tools like funding, it makes our jobs really difficult to get properties back into use.

Just to touch on the enforcement fund as well, if I may, a lot of our enforcement work that we've done would not have been possible without accessing that enforcement fund. We've made four applications to the sum of £450,000, so it's made a massive impact in enabling us to deal with our worst properties across the borough.

Okay, thank you. David, did you want to ask a question?

Yes. I'm glad to hear the answer there just now. I was going to ask about the £25,000, and whether you think it's sufficient now, because it has gone on, but you've answered that. Out of the 18 of the 22 authorities that opted into the grant, I wonder whether any of you here on the panel didn’t opt into the empty homes grant. There are four authorities, so are there any of you here that didn’t opt into that grant?

I believe Cardiff may have been one of those authorities, but I've been informed recently that that may have changed now. So, I don't know if they are one of the four, but, in terms of the Vale and Bridgend, we are very much using those grants.

I was hoping one of them didn't opt in, because I wanted to know why they didn't opt in. So, that's the question.

Sure, okay. Any other questions in this area? Marc.

Yes, to go on from Mike's point in terms of the stick, it serves two purposes—obviously, to bring a problematic long-term empty property back into use, but is it also a deterrent to others, if people in the borough know, ‘Oh, they will go down that route in extremis’? Have you found that that has, perhaps, helped other people to come to the table?

I definitely think it can act as a deterrent. Just sometimes the threat of taking enforcement action is enough to get the owner to engage, and then you can go down all of the routes of offering support. You will always get those owners who won't do anything, and that's when you end up in your enforced sales and your compulsory purchase orders, so I definitely think it's a deterrent.

What we've also found is, recently, across SRS, we've implemented a better communications strategy, so we're now promoting the work that we do. So, any enforcement action that we take, we're promoting that via social media and we're getting people engaging with us then, because they can see, actually, what the end point is. So, I do think it is a very positive thing, but it's key to promote the work that we're doing to show people that we are actually going to do it.

Yes, thank you.

Can I chip in there? Is that possible?

Of course.

In Flintshire, we've actually undertaken four enforced sales, where we’ve taken four properties, done works in default, registered the charge, taken it to auction and sold the property. Three of them are back in use and one only got sold last week—sorry, last month. So, we've actually been very successful with the enforced sales, with the assistance of Andrew Lavender, and we do share that information with other empty property owners and say, you know, ‘If you do not look at bringing your property back into use, this is what will happen.' And it's becoming quite successful.

Thank you.

Can I pick up on that? Thanks for that example, because that was exactly what I wanted to ask about as well. Do you feel you're getting sufficient support from the Welsh Government to do that work? I know, as a Wrexham councillor in a previous life, Andrew Lavender spoke to councillors and was very inspiring and helpful, but has that followed through for front-line officers?

We have to bring in—. Because we're very reliant on our loan scheme, the empty housing to homes loan scheme, our legal team focus on that, so we can't ask them to prioritise more time doing enforced sales. We have to bring in external legal assistance to oversee the enforced sales. That money obviously gets repaid from the sale of the property, so it doesn't come out of the council budget, but we could do with, maybe, the usual—clerking officer time, and maybe assistance with more and more admin time, legal time. A bit more assistance, and we could probably do more each year.

Thanks.

We've found that the enforcement training was invaluable, both for officers and for our members, and I think it’s keeping that refreshment of training and also that expertise when it comes to the enforcement, enforced sales and CPOs. But the enforcement training and that support in terms of legal were fantastic.

Thank you, Rhian, and I'm sorry that I didn't notice your hand up when you had it up earlier, so apologies for that—that's my fault. Does anyone have any questions around local authority capacity? I know, Marc, you'd asked a question earlier. Anyone else? Francesca.

Thank you. I find this really interesting. Like Marc, in a previous life I was a councillor, and I was chair of a scrutiny working group looking at empty properties, so I do appreciate the challenges that councils do face and I'm sure that's going to impact next year with financial decisions as well. You mentioned, Georgina, that things could be made easier in terms of streamlining. I appreciate there's no silver bullet—if only there were, it would make life a lot easier. However, is there anything that really jumps to the forefront of your mind that would have made, let's say, the compulsory purchase a little bit easier, or is there anything that, day to day, would make life a little bit easier? What I don't want us to do is have a top-down approach. I’m all for regulations. However, before we start thinking of that, I would look at, maybe, sometimes, the red tape and bureaucratic processes that we might have at local government level so that we can make your life a lot easier to execute your work properly.

In terms of the CPO, it was very paperwork heavy, so, lots of stages throughout the process and lots of documents that needed to be served—you're talking bundles at times—so, I think cutting down on the number of steps in the process would be useful.

I think there are also challenges with certain types of enforcement measures, which I think they touched on in the first session. We often rely on planning legislation to deal with particular problems with properties, but then we can't do the work in default because we may not get our money back, because the charge isn't a priority. So, I think ironing out those sorts of issues would really make things easier for us. I don't know if anyone else has got anything to add to that.

If I may add regional training—we often, in north Wales, meet up as local empty homes officers, I think twice a year, where we come together, discuss the issues, discuss certain cases. And we discussed recently arranging a regional meeting for all empty property officers, conducted by Andrew Lavender, or a similar organisation, but we are arranging that ourselves. So, maybe a national approach would be worthwhile.

I think the input of the industry expert as well has been really beneficial, and continuing with that would be useful—somebody that's got the expertise across the board. We've had lots of conversations with the industry expert throughout the processes that we've taken and it's been invaluable, if I'm honest. And I think legal support is where we really do struggle, either because local authorities don't have the knowledge or the expertise internally, but mainly because of resources and staff, and we've had to buy out our legal services.

Thank you. 

Anyone else got any questions in this area?

Just to follow on from that, that pooling of expertise sounds very simple, and, I would imagine, very useful, because if you're working on your own in a council as an EPO, you've got no one to bounce off. So, in practice—. Obviously north Wales is doing it, do we assume that the rest of Wales is doing it as well, or is it ad hoc? Couldn't Welsh Government do this on a more strategic level?

Yes, certainly. There are empty homes conferences in England, which invite specialty speakers. So, they've had Ministers from Jersey, from Scotland, coming down to speak at these conferences. A Wales approach would be as beneficial, to get empty property officers together to discuss further. 

That should be a recommendation. 

Absolutely. 

Can I add to that? So, in the south-east Wales area we do have a working group where empty homes officers, environmental health officers, do come together on, I think, a quarterly basis. So, we will discuss best practice, problematic cases and just get a feel for what others' views are on how we should maybe approach certain properties. We discuss things like performance and performance indicators, guidance et cetera. So, we have got that regional group. If we had an industry expert that could maybe tap into that, like Osian has said, then I think that would be beneficial.

Okay, thank you. Funding. Marc, I know you're down to lead on this.

Yes. In terms of funding, there's a big pot of money in terms of the empty homes grant, but only 10 per cent, is it, has been accessed. Would you consider that to be a failure?

Well—. 

It's a bit of a leading question. But I'm curious, because it's not often that there are pots of money in local government these days, and the fact that 90 per cent of it is unallocated suggests there's a problem, and whether that's a lack of EPOs, lack of engagement with landlords—. How can we spend that money?

The structure of the scheme—. It is in place on a national level. We appreciate the reasoning behind it, for consistency throughout. But if you look at the statistics in terms of how many enquiries there have been for the scheme, it's a relatively large number in comparison with what's been approved. I believe someone touched on it earlier, whereby the eligibility has been an issue. So, as per the eligibility criteria for the scheme, properties have to remain empty and unfurnished for a period of 12 months or more. So, each local authority will have different statistics on that, but lots of properties have been excluded.

The target audience, I believe, was to approach people who are in ownership of properties to get them to work on their properties and bring them back into use. But what we've found, especially in my area, is that a lot of people purchasing the properties have enquired about the scheme and, of course, they're not in control, or they're unaware of the status of the property. The owners may not have adequately informed the council of what the status of the property is, which has led to a lot of cases being declined. But if you look at the amount of people who have enquired about the scheme and applied initially, it gives you a good indication that there is interest there. 

How many apply? What's the percentage of people who apply and actually go through with it? 

I don't have the statistics in front of me, but where we could, we could make them available.

Marc, Jennie can get us that.

Yes, there we are. Diolch.

Great, thank you. James, you've got your hand up.

Yes, thank you. Back with funding, for the empty homes grant, unfortunately, in Flintshire, we have had next to no interest. So, I think it is area to area. However, the empty homes loan scheme, which is the Houses into Homes loan, has been very successful. In Flintshire, we had 110 applications, we've given out £3.8 million of the scheme, it's created 140 self-contained units. It's been very successful, while the empty homes grant hasn't. So, I think it is going to be area to area, different loan schemes or different grants, types of funding, need to be available to the authorities.

My concern is that, obviously, the empty homes loan is a fantastic tool in our toolbox, but it is coming to an end in 2030. So, something similar needs to replace it. If, in Flintshire, the grant's not working or it hasn't taken off, then ideally we would like to continue with the loan scheme. Because I'd say that, in the last six months, I've had about £0.5 million-worth of requests, which I've had to decline because they're not getting the five years interest free. So, it's something that we need to consider.

Thank you. Georgina, can I just bring Rhian in quickly and then we'll go to you? Rhian.

Thank you. I was just going to say that, for our authority, we recently joined the empty homes grant. We've only joined as of April and, since April, we've had 15 applications and 14 are currently going through to approval. So, I just wanted to show that level of interest and uptake. I think part of that, it is unique, obviously, it's that owner moving into that property for a five-year period and that can be a barrier in terms of that commitment over such a long time.

Then, touching on James's point about the loan scheme, that has been instrumental to us in terms of both returning empties to use and the creation of new residential units from empties. So, the removal of that scheme will be significant in those incentives that we can offer empty home owners.

Thank you. Georgina.

Just to add, really, our experience has been quite different to that of Flintshire. Our empty homes grants have been really successful in Bridgend. We've approved 81 grants since the scheme was introduced. So, it's been a massive benefit in terms of having that tool available to us within Bridgend. Whereas, our loans, whilst we have that, we don't get the appetite for people to take on the loans, and that's mainly because it takes us so long to get through the process, because we haven't got the resource to be able to push them through quickly in terms of officer resource and legal resource to do the loan agreements, et cetera. So, again, we're struggling because we're lacking on the resource side to push it forward.

Okay. Thank you. Taxation. Elyn, did you want to ask a question?

Yes. I have been forewarned that you're not tax experts. [Laughter.] The first question is: is this working? Does the council tax premium have an effect on people's decisions to do up their properties? On the opposite side of that coin, are you finding any issues with people actively trying to avoid the premium? 

I'm happy to answer that. In terms of the council tax premium, I think there is value in having that in place. In Bridgend, since it was introduced, we have noticed a reduction in the number of empty properties because people are actively trying to do something with them to avoid, obviously, paying that premium. However, that has levelled off as of this year, I've been informed. There is the downside, where property owners are looking for measures to try and avoid paying that premium. So, we are coming across properties where the owner is saying that their son is living there or their dad is living there, claiming there's somebody living there, so that they can claim the single person discount rather than pay the premium.

We're not coming across those properties until we're getting complaints about them. You speak to neighbours, you go out on site and you can't even get to the front door, let alone live in the property. So, it is an issue. How vast that issue is, we don't know; I guess that would need further investigation. But, for us on the ground, it is a problem.

Thank you, Georgina. Jamie, I see you've got your hand up.

Thank you. To answer your question as well, there are many cases we've seen where an empty property has changed its classification as an empty, so it's resorted to a second home simply by adding furniture. What that does as well is reduce the amount of premium that the owner's paying. For example, in the case of Caerphilly, if a property has been empty for five years or more, a 400 per cent premium can be charged on the property. If that property classification changed to a second home, purely due to furniture being added to the property, that premium then reduces to 200 per cent. So, although a premium is still being charged, a maximum premium is not being paid, which obviously is avoiding that premium, and it's a simple thing to do to change the classification.

Thank you, Jamie. David, do you want to come in?

Yes. Thanks for that, Jamie. If you catch someone who's wilfully saying that there's someone living in the property and you find out that they're not, what can you do about that? Are they fined or are they—?

I have a good example of that, actually, from my colleagues in Cardiff. They entered what they believed was an empty property under housing legislation. According to council tax, it was being lived in by a single person. They entered the property under warrant, confirmed that it was, in fact, vacant. As a result, evidence in terms of statements and photographs were provided to their council tax department. The owner was subsequently brought in and interviewed under caution. It was also found out that he was connected to another person, and they were claiming single person council tax benefits, so the end result was that they were ordered to repay the costs. It was quite a process to get to that point, but they've recovered the difference, so it does pay off to feed back any information to the council tax department.

Thank you.

I think that brings us nicely on to enforcement powers in legislation, if anybody's got any further questions about that.

How can we streamline that process? Because if it's taking so long to do these things—. It should be fairly straightforward, shouldn't it, if somebody is gaming the system. How would you like to see that streamlined?

Do you mean in terms of the council tax side of things, or do you mean enforcement?

Do we need legislation? Do we need greater enforcement? Do you need greater powers? Is just making somebody repay it sufficient?

I don't know if I can answer that because it's from a council tax perspective, I guess, but I think it's having the manpower to be able to monitor the properties to identify when this is going on, because we're only becoming aware of this when we get a complaint. Generally, we only get that complaint when the property's falling into disrepair. There are certain checks that can be made and are being made in certain local authorities, so owners are asked to provide confirmation that they're living there in terms of utility bills and that sort of thing. So, there are checks that can be made, but, again, it boils down to staffing, I believe. I don't know if further legislation is needed to manage that better. I don't know if anyone else has got any views.

No. I think we've got a question from Mike, and then we'll go to Rebeca. 

My question is that we were told earlier there is no difficulty in enforcing against somebody living in prison: do you find that there's no problem enforcing against somebody living in prison? Are there any problems enforcing against somebody who lives abroad and where the property is registered in, let's say, the British Virgin Islands?

There's a hypothetical for you.

Well, there are actually cases of this.

Personally, I've had no experience of either of those. I would imagine that it—. Well, providing that the property is in a condition where it needs enforcement, then there are routes you can take so that you can serve the notice adequately and it would be deemed as acceptable. So, you can carry on with the process, you could see it through to an enforced sale or a compulsory purchase order as far as I'm aware, but I've not personally ever been in that position.

Me neither, but it wouldn't stop the process of enforcement taking place. If a property is in a dangerous condition, of course measures will be taken to secure it.

Thank you. Rebeca.

Yes, great. Thank you for that. So, as discussed earlier, I think there's a kind of broad agreement that legislation is there; it just needs to be streamlined and maybe easier to be used. And also the importance of sharing information between authorities—that needs to be something that's more consistent.

I'm just wondering if you had any thoughts on the proposals in Scotland allowing some measures that might be brought forward in terms of allowing local authorities to take temporary possession and bringing the CPO procedures and compensation together. So, just grateful for your thoughts on those. Diolch.

I am aware of the changes that they are investigating in Scotland in terms of the compulsory purchase, and I think it touches on what I said earlier about trying to streamline the process, making it easier, quicker and more effective. I know they are looking at something called compulsory sales orders and compulsory leasing orders, and I can see the benefits of those systems, because as it stands at the moment, the property that we've compulsorily purchased in Bridgend is now in Bridgend council ownership, so we are liable for that property until it changes hands, and that's not going to be until the sale has gone through and then the sale completes. So, with these two measures that they are proposing in Scotland, it would take away that risk, because they don't ever take possession of it.

So, I can see the benefits of that and I think that is something that could be explored. It may encourage more local authorities to take action in that way because it minimises the risk for the authorities.

Thank you, Georgina. Anything else, Mike? No. Any other questions? No. And then finally, communities and partner agencies. Marc, did you want to—.

Yes, this afternoon we're talking to more community-based agencies, who may be able to access different sources of funding and be able to act in a different way in terms of bringing back especially the long-term eyesore properties, which I think we've all got in our areas and you are probably sick to death of having to deal with. What are your views as front-line officers for councils in terms of allowing community groups to perhaps access funding from councils? Because, at the moment, this empty homes grant is only available for landlords, isn't it? Would there be scope to perhaps allow funding for community-based groups to do the job that we all want to see being done and bring homes back into use, basically?

So, the grant is, of course, for owner-occupiers rather than landlords. We work closely with a few organisations on Anglesey, based in town centres, which are community led. We have schemes in place for them. There's a town centre regeneration scheme if they want to acquire properties and convert them into either part residential or part commercial properties. The term can be extended for such organisations. Rather than repaying the loan over five years, which is the standard, we can increase it to seven years, which we are hopeful makes it a bit more attractive to these types of organisations. But certainly more of them, more organisations like this would definitely be beneficial. We only deal with a limited number of them. It differs from area to area, I would say.

I think it may be, if we were to extend it to community groups, that they were able to access some type of support to help them through the process, if they’re coming from, maybe, a background where it’s not as familiar, possibly, giving them the support to get them through the process would be useful.

Yes. Thanks.

Mike.

I was going to raise that you must all have pubs and you must all have chapels that used to be very popular but have now gone into disuse and are in various stages of dereliction. I think everyone else in the room recognises those. Have you any experience of working with third party organisations, charities or housing associations to try to bring those back into use? Although they're not actually technically an empty house, they're an empty property, which can quite easily be turned into several flats.

Yes, there are schemes in place, such as the town-centre loan scheme. It is, of course, limited to town-centre properties. So, there are limitations when we deal with more rural areas. I think that the Bevan Foundation recently did work on empty properties with churches, which is a very interesting read. And, yes, trying to work more closely with those types of organisations would be very beneficial to everyone, really, but it's getting those schemes in place. What you find with vacant, maybe, religious buildings is that they require substantially more investment to bring them back into residential or beneficial use. 

I can only speak on Morriston, where I live, in great detail, and Swansea in much less detail, but there are chapels all over the place. The one thing that south Wales has got, and I'm sure north Wales as well, is lots of chapels. Their congregations have collapsed and these buildings are now left. And there are different people taking them on for different uses, but do you support housing associations and others when they come to do it? It can be expensive to change a chapel around, much less so a pub, which is, effectively, especially the smaller pubs, really just a big house.

I think it's important to note that different local authorities treat commercial properties, when it comes to empty properties, in different ways. So, just within our shared service, my role doesn't extend to commercial premises. I'm very much residential, unless we have a particularly problematic property that needs intervention. So, I'm very much residential. In the Vale, it's very different. It's more commercially driven at the moment, and, again, Cardiff is very residential. And that would be the same across Wales. They sometimes are very separate roles within the organisation. Maybe there's a need to bring that together so that it's more coherent, but it does make it difficult to deal with things like churches and chapels, because, from my experience, that remit sits with regeneration and relies on the grants and loans that they are able to offer, and I wouldn't really be able to input to that. 

Thank you, Georgina. Jamie, I noticed you had your hand up earlier but it was withdrawn. Is there anything you'd like to add to that, and then we can go to Rhian and then Elyn?

Yes, thank you. Sorry, I'm going to go back to the question about working with RSLs and local partner agencies. What we have found here in Caerphilly, where we've enforced the sale of a property, it was within our enforced sale strategy to, firstly, offer those properties to RSLs. But, on occasion, unfortunately, there has been no appetite to purchase those properties, which could be for many reasons: (1), being able to bring that property up to standard; (2), being away from their other local housing stock; (3), probably because it's not financially viable to then purchase that property at fair value, spend the money, obviously, to get it up to that standard, to make it a worthwhile project for them. So, maybe something could be done, which would be welcomed, in assisting those RSLs in bringing back those properties that may be problematic or difficult for them to bring back into use otherwise.

Thank you. Rhian. 

We did have an instance where we enforced the sale of a property and it was sold to a preferred purchaser. It was ex-local authority stock, so it was sold to that housing association, who then used the social housing grant to renovate it and bring it back into use. That fitted really well. But what we do find is we do actively engage with RSL partners, but they're not interested in those owners who wish to sell their property for social housing. The requirements of the Welsh housing quality standard mean that it's unaffordable for them to renovate or purchase and renovate that property. But we certainly do actively engage with RSL partners, because they've got the skills and the resources to do some of those works.

Elyn, you had a—

Yes. I want to quickly go back to Georgina's point about you working predominantly for residential and some people doing commercial. What avenues does that leave for properties that are mixed use? Because, I imagine a lot of community groups would be looking at places where they can make themselves sustainable by creating their own income from a retail part of that, but you might have a flat above et cetera. How does that work for mixed-use properties?

So, it does work in that we would work closely with regeneration and other departments. We meet regularly. Every department that has an involvement with empty properties, we meet, we discuss properties, so we would always consider those types of properties. We've obviously got the funding, like the loan scheme, which enables us as well to convert commercial to residential. So, there are lots of aspects and opportunities. That would never be ruled out. It's just that my main role is residential. We would always consider any opportunity, really, to work with mixed use. It's just engaging with the right departments and working out what schemes you've got available to support the owner to bring it back into use. So, yes, there's always consideration of that.

Thank you, Georgina. Well, we've pretty much covered everything off. Does anybody have any questions for the witnesses—any further questions? No.

Listen, thank you very, very much for coming here today and coming on the call. It's much appreciated. You will, obviously, be sent a transcript of the hearing so you can check its factual accuracy. Again, I'd just like to thank you all for attending and giving of your time. We'll reconvene at 11:35. Thank you again, everyone. Thank you.

Welcome back, everyone, to the committee. So, we're on to item 4, the scrutiny session with the Cabinet Minister for Local Government, Housing and Planning in relation to the Representation of the People (Electoral Registration without Applications) (Electoral Reform) (Wales) Regulations 2026. So, the purpose of this item is to take evidence from the Cabinet Minister on the regulations, and this follows the evidence sessions with electoral stakeholders on 17 September.

So, first off, welcome, Cabinet Minister and your officials. Would you be so kind as to introduce your colleagues?

Yes—introduce yourself.

Thank you.

I'm Ben Mincher, with the Welsh Government legal services elections team.

Welcome. Thank you very much. And it just leaves me now to invite the Members to ask any questions of the Minister. So, we'll start off, and we've got some subject headers. So, regarding the timing for introduction of automatic voter registration, Francesca O'Brien.

Thank you, Chair. Good morning, Minister. I've just got some concerns on the timing of the introduction. I know that has been picked up in some of the reports, but, obviously, we've got the Gould convention, which states that it shouldn't be longer than—. You've got that six-month buffer. I appreciate we're now at 1 October. So, it's just flagging that as a concern on the time for implementation, and the reasons why we might be pushing up against that deadline. I don't know, maybe you want to pick up on that first, and I can come back then on the Gould convention.

Thank you. The second part of that question—.

Yes, the second part. Thank you, Minister, for that. I noted in the report as well—. Sorry, I'm getting feedback on the headphones. I think the committee wrote out to various stakeholders. In particular, I'm interested in victims of domestic abuse who've had to flee their home for those reasons. I've noticed that not one representative from that group have responded, for one reason or another. But, again, just a red flag there. Because I don't want these women, who equally have a really strong voice in our society, who are fleeing terrible circumstances—I don't want them to miss out because of this new regulation. I don't want their voices not heard in May's election next year, Minister. So, what reassurance—? Or is there anything that we can do to make sure that we can capture those women's voices for May's elections, which are not long away?

I completely agree with you that vulnerable groups, including women in refuges or women who are worried that they can be recognised from the register by abusive partners—. I absolutely understand that concern. So, there is an ability for people to register anonymously. So, you can register yourself, you can vote, but your name would not be out there in public. That's been a long-standing ability, but people haven't really recognised that that is something that they can do. So, we are really eager now to push information out regarding that ability, because the last thing we want to do is create tension, create fear. So, that is a real opportunity within this now to—. So that people can vote. And it's very important that we don't disenfranchise people in vulnerable positions from having their vote, because this is what it's all about, really, making sure that more people have that ability to vote if they wish to. But we don't want to create any unforeseen circumstances. And for that reason, the anonymity clause is something that we will be writing—. It will be in the letters that go out to people. The initial letter will point out that you can have this anonymity through the new system.

Can I—? And I'll be very brief, Chair.

Can I interject there just slightly and say that we did get a response from Welsh Women's Aid? It's in page 141 of the pack. But they have responded. Please continue.

Okay. Thank you. Only because today, on the news, we've got 700 early-release prisoners coming out, and some of those, I know, in my own constituency as well, have fled domestic abuse. So, they have flagged this with me. I know that we're only checking the register once a year, I believe, so I'm just conscious that, if women are now having to be moved in the next few months, how will that impact? So, for argument's sake, if they are living in one property today or in a month's time, thereafter, if they're having to be moved, how are we capturing that data if we're only checking the register once a year?

Okay. Well, I'll ask officials to just—. Because that's a good question.

Yes. Only because that's just come out this morning. So, not to put you on the spot, but it just—

I suppose it's a bit of a balance, isn't it? Because, originally, I think, in the pilot, there was talk of doing checks four times a year.

That's correct, Minister, yes.

It's a matter of getting that balance, really, in terms—. I understand your position, but I'm sure there is—.

Yes. I think, to bear in mind, that it's once a year in respect to this process in particular. So, there are still other processes out there for the maintenance of the register throughout the course of the year that they can still be picked up by once they've been registered. So, the most important one is the annual canvass process, when they check the accuracy of the register every year. And it's likely that these will take place at different times in the course of the year. So, they could be picked up in both by virtue of that. Also, just throughout the year, they're under a kind of general duty, electoral registration officers, to continue to look at and maintain the accuracy of the register and they do get notifications that come through when things have changed from individual departments.

So, there will be an element of adjustment throughout that—? I'm just looking for that reassurance going forward that if we have—. I know these are extreme circumstances, but they are relevant for today. So, thank you.

Thank you. Are there any other questions for the Cabinet Minister? David.

Thank you. One instance I've got is homes for older people and care homes. What I found in the local election was, I looked in one of the care homes—and my mother was in that care home, and she actually voted. Now, my mother had dementia. My mother didn't even know me, and I asked the question, 'Well, how did my mother vote?' Everybody in that care home had voted, and 50 per cent of that care home were people with dementia. So, I asked the question—and there was a police investigation into it—and the answer I got was, 'Your mother had a moment of lucidity.' Now, my mother didn't know me for two years. Now, I don't know what lucidity she had and who she voted for, because, obviously, that's private. But what safeguards are in place for that not to happen? Because, obviously, if everybody's going to be able to vote, which I don't not agree with, but, if everybody can vote, what safeguards have we got in place that people aren't abusing the system for care homes and for situations like that? 

So, today we're talking about the automatic voter registration, which doesn't necessarily mean that people have to vote. It's about giving people that opportunity to vote, should they wish. There are too many examples. During an election, sitting in an election booth, as we all do, you see people turning up saying, 'Oh, can I vote?' and they haven't registered.

Yes. Oh, I agree with that. I agree with it.

So, that's what these regulations are actually about. It's about making sure that people are on the register, and, should they wish to take that up then, they can. The point you make about the specific care home, I've no idea what that would be about. But if there are concerns, obviously, they are matters for the police. But, on the other hand, I would say it is a delicate balance, isn't it? Do you want to disenfranchise a particular cohort of people? It is a balance. But if there are obvious signs that something is not right, well, that's a matter for the police, then.

Thank you. Any other questions on that subject, regarding the timing of the introduction? No. Okay.

We'll move on to the cost of automatic registration, and I, obviously, have a question, Cabinet Minister. Looking at the revised figures for this cost, it's gone up from £2.6 million to approximately £4.4 million. I guess the first question is: who's going to bear that cost? And if that's been projected, if you like, into the budget, for local authorities to deal with, at their upper end, what guarantees or assurances do we have that that won't increase again? And then who bears that cost? It's the same question again. I'm quite sceptical, sometimes—when I look at projections, they always overrun. So, I think the first question is: who's going to get this cost and take it on the chin? And then, after that, what guarantees do we have that it won't rise again?

So, as the Cabinet Minister says, there are two types of costs here. One is the software costs, which are one-off costs. That has risen as a result of—. The first RIA that we published was based on expenditure relating to the pilots, and then, on further commercial conversations with the software providers, we had to revise what those costs were going to be because more information was available to us from the software providers on the different work they needed to do following the pilots. So, those are one-off costs in-year, met by the main expenditure group for where we are.

The ongoing costs, the recurring costs, will be those that fall to local authorities. So, in the first year, we've done that as a specific grant because it's a one-off new process that's being met. Then, in subsequent years, which is—. The Cabinet Minister recently re-signed the strategic partnership agreement with the Welsh Local Government Association. That commits to meeting new burdens and putting it into the revenue support grant, where we should. So, we shouldn't be sending lots of small pockets of money to local authorities to do individual bits of work. So, the RSG—. Obviously, local authorities need to meet their statutory duties. The new way of registering people through automatic registration will be a new statutory duty, so they'll need to meet that through funding that we're allocating through the RSG in future years. As the Cabinet Minister says, we expect that to go down as the register is more complete year on year.

Okay. Thank you, Michael. I'm going to go off on a tangent here slightly, because obviously you just mentioned software. Whenever somebody talks software to me, I always get worried. How confident are we that we can land the software itself? I'm 62 years old. I'm old enough to have seen some catastrophes when councils have tried to land software. So, how comfortable and confident are we, given the tight deadlines we're working to, that a third-party provider, or a software provider, can land this right first time?

So, the software providers, they're existing, they've already got contracts with the 22 authorities. There are three software providers in Wales that operate. What we're talking about is adding on a workflow process and then a bit of data-matching functionality. We are talking to them almost every day, just to keep an eye on progress. At the moment, we're confident. We're keeping it under very, very close review.

Thank you very much. Any other questions from anybody? No. Francesca, you've got a question on the notification period to opt out.

Yes. Just flagging that, in the pilot scheme, it was originally 60 days. So, I just wanted to try and dig out why we're reducing that so significantly, really—the reasoning behind that, please.

Yes, it was something that the Electoral Commission were quite clear on in their evaluation of the pilots, that the 60-day period was too long and it should be reduced. So, we looked at 28 days because it seemed more in line with other processes for responding too, on the basis that 28 days, four weeks, if people are on holiday when the letter first comes in and they want to opt out, then the likelihood is that they will be able to respond in that period. I think Sandra from Powys spoke about the fact that most people responded in the first two to three weeks of receiving the letter if they were going to opt out. So, I think we're fairly confident that 28 days seems appropriate.

I was just worried on the rural—. Sometimes, in our constituency, we've got some parts where it can be weeks, sometimes, for some unknown reason—with the Royal Mail it can be weeks. So, it was just more that I'm conscious, on the rural side—. And I've got to pick up on the Cabinet Minister as well. I do agree, actually, that if you're not doing it within the first few days, it's not high in your priorities, but I could also flip that and say that, if you were against automatic voting registration, you would be wanting to go out and vote and register yourself as well. But I do pick up on the point, but it was more on the rural side that I was flagging that concern, on the length of time of delivery.

Marc.

Diolch.

Okay. I guess I'm going to go back to that notification period. So, I'm actually looking at the pack. The concern, I think, that I have is: does it provide the right balance between the effective administration of this scheme and the safeguarding of vulnerable people? I'm going to cite an example: if you think of a victim of domestic abuse who has to leave the marital home, and then that mail goes to that home, she's no longer there, so how do we capture that? How do we deal with that sort of issue?

So, I think the data will be—. The registration process will follow the data that the council holds on somebody. So, if somebody moves within the 28-day period, as you say, it would be registering them at their old address. But one overarching point, I suppose, is that this doesn't replace the ability for somebody to register on an individual basis. So, if you are moving and you're registered at the address you've just moved from, you would still be able to go online and register to where you are now.

And I think the other point, in relation to people in that kind of situation, is around the—. We've spoken already about anonymous registration, that that can happen once—. If somebody raises that, it just stops the clock for the 28 days, so it doesn't mean that they have to produce the evidence and so on within that 28-day period. And also, they can do it after they've registered. You can then go on and apply for anonymous registration.

Thank you. I guess I'm thinking more along the lines of: is going online and changing your details or remembering to do any of those things the first thing on the mind of somebody who's suffered maybe horrific domestic abuse? It certainly—. I don't think it would be on mine, and I think that's why the first question was: have we struck the right balance between landing this and safeguarding people? That's the bit for me, because if there's even 1 per cent that we haven't, then I have concerns. I'm sure all of us in this room wouldn't wish that to be the case.

And I think that's a broader point than these regulations. I think what these regulations may do is raise more awareness, because of the letter that the Cabinet Minister said that people will receive, which draws their attention to the right. I think there may not be enough visibility. When I looked at the official statistics about the number of people that were registered anonymously in Wales, it was fewer than 100 people. So, there are a lot of people who probably would be eligible who aren't aware of it or aren't confident enough in the value of being registered. So, I think there is a broader bit of work that we'd like to do with civil society to raise awareness and to encourage people to register anonymously if they're eligible to.

Okay.

Yes, that's the point, really. It's a wider point than just around the regulations, isn't it? It's about raising the awareness about anonymity and the ability for you to remain anonymous but still not be disenfranchised, because at the moment that isn't used enough, as you say. So, moving in that direction is really helpful for vulnerable groups.

Thank you, Cabinet Minister. I can see that we've, obviously, consulted with stakeholders, but will this be an ongoing thing? Obviously, because domestic violence is an ongoing thing, and I just don't want people to slip between the cracks.

No, absolutely. Absolutely. It is a priority for this Government to be taking care of vulnerable groups, and, in this case, domestic abuse, obviously. So, we will continue to engage with them. There will be a process of learning within this. As things are rolling out, there will be opportunities to tighten up some parts of it as well.

Thank you. David.

One question I've got is—. We've just had empty homes organisations in earlier on, and there is a disparity in numbers from the council records and the actual empty homes. I'm led to believe that most of our information will come from the electoral roll and the council tax roll. So, what about those who are not on that roll? How are we going to collect their data?

Again, that's a wider point, isn't it, about who is actually on the council tax roll and who should be on there. But we are using other data sources, and comparing other data sources, obviously with all the GDPR rules in place as well, so that we have a fuller picture of who actually is entitled to vote but is not captured at the moment on the electoral register. There are other data provisions that we are actively working on. That's the work that the local authorities are doing now in preparation for the election in 2027. 

If I could expand on that, the Cabinet Minister recently wrote to registered social landlords, to universities and to local authorities just to make sure that they are aware of this, and that data sharing will be really helpful in terms of the accuracy and completeness of the register. We're also sharing with local authority colleagues a sample data sharing template, data sharing agreement templates or data protection impact assessments, so that it's really helping local authorities get to the data that would help them have a broad a picture of potential electors as possible.

One other question I've got to ask is on the duplication of registration of these students living in one place and also registered at home: how can we be sure they're not voting in both places?

So, you can be registered in two places, but you can't vote in two places. 

How do we know? How can we know if they have? 

That's a wider point again, isn't it, that you're making, which is in the current system anyway. You know, there are checks and balances that the electoral officers do in the local authorities to try and mitigate against that. But they can't check every single person, can they, and every single vote. But students should be allowed to vote.

Oh, I agree, yes.

So, the information that we, hopefully, will get now from the universities on their data, which is really up to date since September now, of all the students that they have, will make sure that we're capturing and giving them that opportunity to vote. Because sometimes they're not on their home electoral register, so they find themselves disenfranchised—they turn up to a polling booth, they want to vote, but they can't, because they're not registered. So, this would capture that particular cohort, as well as lots of other people. I think there are—. What's the figure?

Four hundred thousand.

Four hundred thousand people in Wales don't vote because they're not on the register. So, you know, they're missing out on a huge opportunity, aren't they? And many of those are young people. I think it's 48 per cent [Correction: 43 per cent of 16 and 17-year-olds]—

I'm not sure.

There are—. Lots of those would be young people as well. And you know, we're ahead of the curve here in Wales in terms of bringing in automatic voter registration. I'm really proud that we're doing this, because it is enhancing our democracy, and countries like Canada and Australia, they do it. And I think, as well, if I can say, the UK Government is actually actively looking at what we are doing here, talking to my officials, thinking of bringing a similar process forward in the UK as well.

Thank you. Mike.

I want to ask you about data. I'll be briefer than I really want to be. Are there any legislative barriers that prevent access to national data like national insurance numbers? Actually finding people can be incredibly difficult. The ability to have data out there that exists within Westminster-covered areas, is there access to that?

Ben may want to correct me or speak further, but the Elections and Elected Bodies (Wales) Act 2024, which allows automatic registration, which was passed by the Senedd in 2024, doesn't allow regulations to be made in relation to national insurance numbers, for example, to data held by UK authorities. That was obviously in the context of 2024. There may be a different—. Now that the UK Government is more interested in this, there may be an opportunity to revisit that in the future. At the moment, the regulations relate to local data sources, because that's what is within the powers of the overarching Act. Ben.

The particular thing that we can't do, which happens at the moment, is get the Department for Work and Pensions to verify national insurance numbers, because the restriction in particular is around modifying the functions of reserved authorities or adding to them. It's not so much that we can't use national data sets per se, if they have them for other reasons, lawfully, locally, but you can't be getting other people to check them for you. They've got to be things that you know are data already. There might be other reasons for that, to do with, say, benefits information that might have been held centrally. No doubt, most of the information they're going to have easy access to is going to be locally held, so locally held by the local authority, but it needn't be exclusively that.

Just to take one example, we've discussed those universities. It's local in the sense of being close to certain local authorities, but it's not their data as such. They can get it from them, and from other bodies potentially as well and providers of other services, but then it's for the electoral registration officer to be verifying that against other data that they have, rather than getting other bodies to verify it for them, like, in particular, the national insurance number.

Take me, for example—and I'm going to move on to more complicated ones afterwards—I'm known as Mike Hedges, Michael Hedges and Michael John Hedges in different places. But it's also more complicated in some families, where first names and surnames run down the family. The classic is, for those interested in golf, Curtis Love IV. I don't know if he's got any children. My guess is they'd be called Curtis Love V. And actually trying to match data, when you've got names, but are they two different people both called David James, or is it one person called that? That I see as a problem. I've got no solution to it, but that is a problem if you're trying to match. You may find more matches than you expect because of those sorts of problems.

That's a really good point that you make there. It exists now, of course; it's not just related to automatic voter registration. Again, it's the mitigation that happens. There are checks and balances within the system now, aren't there? I have a similar problem because, on my passport, I actually am Siân Gwenllian Jones, but I don't use the Jones, and it does create a bit of a tension sometimes. The agencies are always checking. There are checks and balances in there. I never get to use both names for registering for voting, and I wouldn't dream of trying anyway, of course. But it is a common problem. I can tell you from personal experience, even now in the system as it is now, there are checks and balances in there that can root out that kind of issue. I don't know if there is anything in particular on the AVR.

The point I'd make is that we call it 'automatic voter registration' for shorthand, but formally and technically it's 'registration without application'. The point is, and I think stakeholders share this view—Sandra Matthews, who's probably the most expert in the process for this in the United Kingdom, she was talking about the amount of manual work that has to happen—the duty is on the electoral registration officer to make sure that there is consistency. So, if it's Mike versus Michael, then I would think that the ERO could be very easily satisfied, but when it gets more complicated, then that's where they might look for more information. They might need to send out an invitation to register, so to send them through the—. Not doing it on their behalf, but asking them to register, and at least they've been identified, I suppose, is the benefit.

And finally from me: some women, when they get married, change their name to their husband's surname. That's their decision; I'm not going to say whether it's right or wrong, but some people do that. You may have two of somebody there, especially if they got married in the last few months. One of them is Margaret Jones and one of them is Margaret Williams, because Margaret Jones married Mr Williams. Are you able to identify those sorts of problems, or are you confident that's not going to occur?

The thing we'd always come back to is that the fall-back position is that the duty with this is that they have a duty to add people to the register. If they can't be satisfied that the person is eligible, what happens there is they don't just reach a deadlock; this duty is discharged, and then they can seek to try and register them by other means. So, this is an add-on, really, because it's undoubtedly the case, as you say, that there will be hard cases and ones where they can't be satisfied, for some reason, but it's just that that then opens up a new route to try and find out more information from the person, either by invitation to register or other means of contact that they're allowed to do, and then they can try and pursue it that way again as well. That will always be at their discretion to decide, 'We can't do it with this position, we'll try another way.' 

Thank you. Francesca, do you have a question?

No.

I beg your pardon. Elyn.

We know there is a mixed picture across Wales already about the way that they use internal data. The example we're doing already about registered social landlords, some people, when housing stock transfers have happened, they didn't have visibility of their social housing tenants, for example. So, that's part of the reason why the Cabinet Minister wrote to RSLs. There were some areas like council tax that weren't previously being shared.

So, electoral registration officers have had the power for, I think it's over 10 years now, to already use data that's held by the local authority for the purpose of electoral registration or verification. Some of them haven't been using that as much as they could've done. Some of them have been using it really well, and there is a broader opportunity here for local authorities to see the benefit of sharing data. So, I know that Newport, for example, in their pilots, already used a lot of data sharing, which meant that the council had a lot of better insights about their local population, and other local authorities were building that as part of the pilots. So, there is a mixed picture already.

I think part of the continuous improvement that we'll see with this registration process in the future would be seeing the opportunity for better quality data, better comparable data sets in the future, and maybe introducing things like UPRNs, where they are appropriate.

Thank you. Rebeca, you've got a question on future evaluation and alignment of AVR.

Thank you. Are there any other questions for the Cabinet Minister, because I just want to jump back to one area, if I may? No. I just want to go back to frequency of registration, and I know, Michael, that you covered that off a bit in terms of the decision to go to one year. I guess the report cited the pros and cons of that and, obviously, one of the concerns was around mobility of people, for example, students, certainly in Swansea, where you've got places like the Uplands, where we've got a very, very mobile population. Have we considered that enough? And if we are going to go to one year and we're going to use a rolling programme, have we considered how we're going to capture that? How does that trawl capture those people? And I guess, finally, what reassurance have I got that a local authority is conducting that in an accurate way, rather than just using it as a tick-box exercise? Sorry, that's three.

So, as you say, it's a minimum of once a year.  I think, just in terms of good use of resources and public money, they can have the benefit of doing a repeated exercise. Obviously, in an ideal world, it would be a super-automated, up-to-date register. As you heard from stakeholders a couple of weeks ago, there is a lot of manual work in it. So, I think it would be difficult to justify asking local authority teams who are quite small, working on elections, to be spending a lot of their time trawling through data to make sure that the registry is up to date as much as possible when there's not an electoral event immediately on the horizon. So, I think it's just that balance is probably what I'd come back to.

It is a balance, isn't it, of where do you put your resources. In our local authorities, some of the electoral teams have become very, very small because of cuts to public spending where councils have been protecting education and social services, quite rightly. It's these kinds of services, the electoral services, which are really important to enhance our democracy, that have been cut back. So, it is a matter of making sure that we're using our resources properly, and I think the balance, on the whole, is correct, but, in the run-up to an election, there may be more activity happening during that period than, say, in 2028, where maybe there won't be an election, and time to sit back and look at the process during that period. Diolch.

Okay. Thank you. Francesca. 

Sorry, this will be my last question. While you were talking, it was quite interesting to think of the next stage. I appreciate this might be off the cuff, but is there the facility with this software—and I'm not a software expert—and is there any scope, going forward—. You know, we've talked about, maybe, the duplication, of the potential voting in two different areas, perhaps. Is there a facility, going forward, where that software could perhaps reduce the likelihood of a person voting either twice or—? Even in the Senedd elections in May just gone, I had residents phoning me to say that they'd gone to vote and somebody had already voted instead of them. So, I appreciate that was—

That's not right.

Absolutely, it's not right. So, there are obviously issues there. That can't be an isolated situation. I just wonder if there's any sort of capacity in terms of the software that could be looked at to avoid that, going forward.

Well, the software is about the registration, isn't it? It's not about how people actually use their vote.

But I wonder if the two—. Obviously, when you go to vote, you do have the IT system there. If there is going to be the two that are going to talk—the IT systems—could they talk to each other? Because I'm sure, in this day and age now, with the advancement in technology, if there's any way that we can try and reduce the chance of that happening—.

So, obviously, this is a broader point and I'm just speaking off the cuff: longer term, one could imagine electoral registration officers being able to pool their electoral registration data and having one big database. So, for example, in Northern Ireland, they've recently introduced a single—. You can look up whether or not you're registered, and that's the only part of the United Kingdom where you can do that because there's only one electoral register for the whole of the north of Ireland. If it were in GB, we would be—. Every local authority or every electoral registration officer has their own register. So, it is, I suppose, hypothetically possible. It would require a change in the law, and if you were to do that, you could then see if people are registered in two places and, therefore, look out for them trying to vote in two places. But, ultimately, that is quite a way away from where we are now, and it would require changes to legislation—possibly primary. I'm not sure. 

But the main point is you're not supposed to use your vote twice. 

No, no, absolutely.

It's against the law.

Okay. Does anybody have any further questions for the Cabinet Minister or her team? Okay.

I think it just leaves me to say 'thank you very much', Cabinet Minister, and your team for coming here, assisting and giving evidence. We will break for lunch right now.

Thank you again. We will, obviously, send you a transcript of today so that you can check its factual accuracy, which is quite telling given that we're discussing AVR. But, again, thank you for your time. Thank you.

We'll take a lunch break until 1.15 p.m. Is that okay? Thank you.

Welcome, everybody, back. We're on item 5 now. This is the follow-up inquiry into empty properties, evidence session 3. The purpose of the item is the committee's third evidence session on its inquiry into empty properties, and I'd like to welcome the witnesses to the meeting. Thank you for coming and giving of your time. Could I ask that you introduce yourselves to the Members before we start?

Shall I go first?

Please.

Casey Edwards. I'm the community-led housing manager at Cwmpas.

Thank you.

I'm Wendy Dearden. I lead on the housing work at the Bevan Foundation. To declare, I'm also a former empty homes officer, so I kind of come with many different hats to this, I feel, today.

You've let yourself in for that one.

Chris Bailey from Action on Empty Homes, also known as the Empty Homes Agency—primarily English based, but, obviously, we do work across the four nations.

Thank you so much. Trystan.

Trystan Jones. I'm the chief executive of the Community Impact Initiative. I'll be bringing some practical light to this, maybe.

Thank you so much. It just leaves it for me to say that, obviously, we're going to invite the Members to ask you some questions over some themes that we've been running through all the morning. So, in relation to data, Marc, did you want to lead on this again?

Yes. I'll ask you slightly different questions to the ones I asked the other people because you're coming from a different perspective. I just wondered what role you think community organisations, community councils and councillors have in collecting data, because one of the big issues, I feel, is that we don't have accurate data on what's an empty property, and in particular those empty properties that blight neighbourhoods and cause the greatest angst in our communities. So, do you think there's a role there?

I'm happy to start, if that's helpful. I completely think that there's a role for community organisations and even community members to contribute to the data on empty properties and empty homes. A really practical example of community-led data collection is the Ynys Môn Public Map platform. So, they've trained a group of community researchers who have been able to map key assets on the island, but not only assets; they've actually been able to map where there are anti-social hotspots, for example. So, obviously, that key community insight is invaluable, isn't it? They're the people living and working in these communities, so they obviously know their areas best. So, I would really advocate for that kind of community-led and community-member data collection. And working with stakeholders and organisations like rural housing enablers as well, I think they can support that community collection of data as well.

Yes, I would agree. It's what we call community intelligence. And the other thing I would say in relation, Marc, to your commentary on data is what we've certainly noticed in looking at data at a micro level, when either we've been working with individual authorities or looking at the reports from local authority-level data, is that where there's a rationale for a local authority to do something about finding out what's actually going on in its housing stock, like a change in a premium regime or a change in some of the regulations, or even a change of administration sometimes, you see wide change in the reported data for vacancy and types of vacancy, because they've gone out and looked at it harder. And community intelligence, as we call it, can be really helpful, I think, in this area.

It can also be helpful in other areas as well, because sometimes things people think of as empty homes turn out not to be; they turn out to have an isolated older person in who really needs some assistance. So, I think it's a really valuable overall part of the package, really.

Thanks.