APPENDIX 2
Stage 1 Equality Impact Assessment – Initial Screening

Assessor(s)
Name(s):

Debbie Vallas

Directorate:

Resources

Date of
Completion:

September 2019

Name of Policy/Strategy/Service/Function Proposal
Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme review of scheme for 2020/21

The Aims, Objectives and Expected Outcomes:
The original EIA stage 1&2 set out the scope of the EIA and can be found at:
http://www.iwight.com/documentlibrary/download/eia-local-council-tax-support-stage-1-2
Since 1st April 2013, the Council has maintained a local Council Tax Reduction scheme known as
Local Council Tax Support (LCTS). This replaced the national Council Tax Benefit scheme, which
ended on 31st March 2013. LCTS helps provide support to council taxpayers who have a low income.
It supports the taxpayers by providing a reduction in the actual amount in Council Tax payable.
The Council has the ability to determine the level of support given to working age applicants only. The
scheme for pension age applicants is determined by Central Government and therefore the ability of
the Council to vary that part of the scheme is limited and can only enhance the national scheme in any
event.
The Council has made a number of changes to the scheme since 2013 including the reduction to the
level of the maximum support for working age to 70% and restricted to a maximum level band C
Council Tax property. This is in addition to changes to the scheme to match the continuing changes to
Housing Benefit and Universal Credit.
The amount of grant received from Government to pay for CTS has been included within general
grant (revenue support grant) which has been significantly reduced each year resulting in less money
available to meet the costs of CTS as well as significantly reduced resources to pay for all council
services.
In order to meet this funding gap, the Council has to consider a reduction of local council tax support
paid to working age claimants. The estimated gross cost of the Isle of Wight Council LCTS for
2018/19 is approximately £10.0 million. The Isle of Wight Council’s share of this cost is around 86%,
in line with the split of council tax with the Police and town and parish councils.
The total expenditure at 31 March 2019 was £10.0 million and at 30 August 2019 the expenditure was
at £10.3 million. Since 2013 there has been a reduction in expenditure of £3.3 million which has
already been reflected in previous years budgets. This is due to both a reduction in caseload and the
changes to the working age scheme since 2013.
The assumed Settlement Funding Assessment (SFA) grant towards CTS during 19/20 = £5.480m. A

C - 34

 one-year spending review was held in September 2019 although specific allocations to individual local
authorities are not expected to be announced until December 2019. The expectation is that the 201920 forecast figures will be rolled over to 2020-21 which would mean that the 2020-21 CTS grant would
remain at the 2019-20 level of £5.480 million. This means there is currently a funding gap of £3.24
million.
An LCTS Exceptional Hardship Fund was introduced during 2016/17 to recognise the potential
impacts to some low-income households that might be faced with genuine hardship as a result of the
LCTS 2016/17 scheme changes agreed by Full Council 20 January 2016. This provision was reviewed
again by Full Council January 2017 and November 2018 and continues to provide support for those in
genuine hardship. This requires individual applications and takes into account individual
circumstances including the claimant’s income and essential outgoings
The proposed potential changes to the scheme for 2018/19
The corporate management team in consultation with Cabinet members determined that in light of the
council’s current financial circumstances that exploration of further options should be considered and
that a full review be undertaken as to the effectiveness of the current LCTS scheme. A public
consultation has been undertaken to gather views as to whether the current scheme should be
changed. A summary of the results of the consultation are provided together with this Equality Impact
Assessment. The corporate management team in consultation with Cabinet members is minded to
make changes to the working age scheme to meet the need to change the scheme, not only to align
with proposed changes to Housing Benefit, but also to deal with the main issues from the introduction
of full-service Universal Credits for working age applicants and the need for simplification of the
scheme.
Each of the above are examined in detail below.
Council Tax Reduction and the Full Service Roll Out of Universal Credit
The introduction of Universal Credit within the area has, as experienced in all other Local Authority
areas, brought a number of significant challenges to both the administration of Council Tax Reduction,
confusion for the customer because of changing council tax bills and therefore the collection of
Council Tax generally. All sites within full-service areas have experienced the following:
A high number of changes to Universal Credit cases are received from the Department for Work and
Pensions requiring a change to Council Tax Reduction entitlement. On average 40% of Universal
Credit claimants have between eight and twelve changes in entitlement per annum. These changes
result in amendments to Council Tax liability, the re-calculation of instalments, delays and the
demonstrable loss in collection; and
Confusion for the customer as a result of the number of changes being made following the number of
changes to their Universal Credit case and;
The reluctance of Universal Credit claimants to make a prompt claim for Council Tax Reduction
leading to loss of entitlement.
It is clear that the existing means tested Council Tax Support scheme, which is too reactive to change,
will not be viable in the longer term now that Universal Credit has been rolled out fully within the area.
The move to a new more efficient scheme from 2020 is now imperative
It should be noted that the changes, if made, would only apply to the working age scheme although
the consultation was open to all Council Taxpayers.
The main changes proposed that were consulted upon are listed below. Any changes if adopted will
be effective from 1st April 2020:
Should the council continue to retain a CTS reduction scheme for working age council tax

C - 35

 payers that is deemed affordable
Should the Council Tax Reduction Scheme (CTR) adopt a proposed grid model from April
2020 and implement option 2 as the preferred income grid scheme
Should the council disregard Carers Allowance which is currently taken into account as an
income in the calculation
Should the three current earnings disregards be replaced with a standard £25 disregard,
irrespective of the person circumstances
Should the five current non-dependant deduction rates be replaced with a standard deduction
of £2 per week for each non-dependant in a household
Should the council mirror the amendment to the Housing Benefit national scheme (Infected
blood payments where payments are disregarded)
Should the council continue to provide an exceptional hardship fund that would require
individual applications and take into account individual circumstances including the claimant’s
income and essential outgoings to assist those that are deemed to be in ‘genuine hardship’
and receive additional assistance based on need.

Please delete as appropriate:
•

This is a proposed review and change to an existing policy/scheme

C - 36

 Key Questions to Consider in Assessing Potential Impact

Will the policy, strategy, service or council function proposal have a negative impact
on any of the protected characteristics or other reasons that are relevant issues for
the local community and/or staff?

Yes

Has previous consultation identified this issue as important or highlighted negative
impact and/or we have created a “legitimate expectation” for consultation to take
place? A legitimate expectation may be created when we have consulted on similar
issues in the past or if we have ever given an indication that we would consult in
such situations

Yes

Do different groups of people within the local community have different needs or
experiences in the area this issue relates to?

Yes

Could the aims of these proposals be in conflict with the council’s general duty to
pay due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of
opportunity and to foster good relations between people who share a protected
characteristic and people who do not?

No

Will the proposal have a significant effect on how services or a council function/s
is/are delivered?

Yes

Will the proposal have a significant effect on how other organisations operate?

Yes

Does the proposal involve a significant commitment of resources?

Yes

Does the proposal relate to an area where there are known inequalities?

Yes

If you answer Yes to any of these questions, it will be necessary for you to proceed to a full Equality
Impact Assessment after you have completed the rest of this initial screening form.

Negative

Positive

Protected
Characteristics

No impact

If you answer No to all of these questions, please provide appropriate evidence using the table below
and complete the evidence considerations box and obtain sign off from your Head of Service.

Reasons

C - 37

 Age

Disability

Gender Reassignment
Marriage & Civil
Partnership
Pregnancy & Maternity
Race
Religion / Belief
Sex (male / female)
Sexual Orientation

Working age claimants of Council Tax support may
receive a reduced level of assistance as compared with
the former Council Tax Benefit Scheme. the new scheme
will redistribute support and be more generous to those
applicants on the lowest incomes;
In addition, it will assist those who are disabled and those
who have caring responsibilities
Those in receipt of a disability benefit are being protected
to the same level as they currently are and will continue
to receive maximum support of 70%.
No specific impact other than for working age
No specific impact other than for working age
No specific impact other than for working age
No specific impact other than for working age
No specific impact other than for working age
No specific impact other than for working age
No specific impact other than for working age

Are there aspects of the proposal that contribute to or improve the
opportunity for equality?

Yes

If answered Yes, describe what these are and how they may be promoted or enhanced
Due to the nature of the reductions in the level of support, all working age claimants have the potential
to have reductions in their support, however, they can be considered for further assistance under a
targeted protection scheme based on exceptional hardship.
The scheme will continue to protect disabled claimants through the continued granting of additional
disabled premiums and disregard as income of certain benefits such as Disability Living Allowance
and Personal Independence Payments in appropriate cases and in line with Housing Benefit
provisions.

Evidence Considered During Screening

A full modelling exercise has been undertaken using specialised modelling software to establish the
effects of the changes on claimants.
The government has stated that council tax support for older people will not be reduced as a result of
the introduction of the council tax reduction scheme reform. This is because the government wants to
ensure that low income pensioners, who would struggle to pay council tax without additional support,
and whom the government does not expect to work to increase their income, will continue to receive
support for their council tax.
Pensioner protection will be achieved by keeping in place national rules which broadly replicate the
former council tax benefit scheme.

C - 38

 As part of the changes the Council must give consideration to the effects on working age claimants
only and in particular any vulnerable groups in the design of a new system.
Central Government has not been prescriptive in how it expects the Council to do this but points to the
Council’s existing responsibilities including the Child Poverty Act 2010, and the Housing Act 1996 as
well as the public sector equality duty in section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.
A full analysis of the existing caseload of those in receipt of Council Tax Support has been undertaken
and the expected effects of the proposed changes have been completed in the stage 2 EIA
assessment.

Head of Service Sign off:

Claire Shand/Sharon Betts

Advice sought from Legal
Services (Name)

Justin Thorne

Date

3 October 2019

C - 39

 Isle of Wight Council
Second Stage Equality Impact Assessment
Council Tax Reduction Scheme 2020/21

C - 40

 Table of Contents
Name of Policy/Strategy/Service/Function Proposal .............................................. 3
The Aims, Objectives and Expected Outcomes: .................................................... 3
Changes made from 1 April 2013 (from the original Council Tax Benefit scheme) ............ 3
Changes made from 1 April 2014. ..................................................................... 4
Changes made from 1 April 2016...................................................................... 4
Changes made from 1 April 2017...................................................................... 4
Changes made from 1 April 2018...................................................................... 5
Changes made from 1st April 2019 .................................................................... 5
Council Tax Reduction and the Full Service Roll Out of Universal Credit ....................... 6
The need for a simplified approach to the Council Tax Reduction Scheme. ................... 7
The proposed approach for the 2020/21 Council Tax Reduction Scheme....................... 7
Transition to the new scheme and the Exceptional Hardship Scheme ......................... 10
Scope of the Equality Impact Assessment .......................................................... 11
Method of Consultation ................................................................................ 11
Responses to the Consultation ....................................................................... 13
Analysis and Assessment .............................................................................. 13
Action and Improvement Plan ........................................................................ 13
Appendix 1 .............................................................................................. 14
Recommendations ...................................................................................... 14
Appendix 2 .............................................................................................. 16
Action / Improvement Plan ........................................................................... 16
Appendix 3 .............................................................................................. 19
Consultation Responses................................................................................ 19

C - 41

 Name of Policy/Strategy/Service/Function Proposal
The Council Tax Reduction Scheme for 2020/21
The Aims, Objectives and Expected Outcomes:
1.

Council Tax Reduction (CTR) was introduced by central government in April 2013 as a
replacement for the Council Tax Benefit scheme administered on behalf of the
Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). As part of its introduction, the government
in transferring the responsibility to individual councils set requirements namely:
• the duty to create a local scheme for Working Age applicants with billing
authorities.
• funding was initially reduced by the equivalent of ten per cent from the levels paid
through benefit subsidy to authorities under the previous Council Tax Benefit
scheme; and
• persons of Pension age, although allowed to apply for Council Tax Reduction,
would be dealt with under regulations prescribed by central government and not
the authorities’ local scheme.

2.

The current support scheme created by the council is divided into two schemes, with
pension age applicants receiving support under the rules prescribed by central
government, and the scheme for working age applicants being determined solely by
the local authority.

3.

Pensioners, subject to their income, can receive up to 100 per cent support towards
their council tax. The council has no powers to change the level of support provided
to pensioners and therefore any changes to the level of CTR can only be made to the
working age scheme.

4.

When CTR was introduced in 2013, the Council broadly adopted the previous means
tested Council Tax Benefit scheme as the basis of awarding support. However, due to
the reduction in funding, a number of changes have been made over the years to the
working age scheme. These are as follows:

Changes made from 1 April 2013 (from the original Council Tax Benefit scheme)
5.

A decision was made to reduce maximum entitlement for working age non-vulnerable
claimants to 80 per cent of their council tax liability. The reduction in support was
deferred for one year as central government offered additional payments if councils’
limited their reduction and maintained a scheme that didn’t reduce maximum
entitlement to less than 91.5 per cent;

6.

To safeguard those applicants, their partner, or disabled dependent child who were
deemed working age ‘vulnerable’, the CTR scheme provided the same level of
assistance as the previous Council Tax Benefit Scheme (100 per cent); and

C - 42

 7.

The Second Adult Rebate scheme for working age was removed, this provided a level
of discount based on the income and circumstances of any ‘second adult’ (not the
applicant or partner).

Changes made from 1 April 2014.
8.

From 1 April 2014, CTR was restricted to a maximum of 80 per cent entitlement for
working age. Vulnerable applicants continued to be granted protection at 100 per cent
on a ‘blanket’ policy;

Changes made from 1 April 2016
9.

10.

11.

12.

From 1 April 2016, the Family Premium was removed and backdating limited to one
calendar month in line with the national changes to the Housing Benefit scheme. The
family premium of £17.45 was previously awarded to households with children within
the calculation of CTR and was withdrawn from Housing Benefit from May 2016. This
change was approved to bring CTR in line with Housing Benefit regulations.
The blanket protection for certain claimants was removed and replaced by an
exceptional hardship fund which gives a tailored approach to those cases suffering
exceptional hardship. A blanket protection was previously provided to those working
age claimants, their partners or dependent children who received certain (disability)
benefits to a maximum of 100 per cent of their council tax liability applied. The
introduction of a targeted protection scheme (Exceptional Hardship Fund) rather than
a blanket protection was to take into account individual circumstances, including the
claimant’s income and essential outgoings.
For self-employed applicants, the minimum income floor was introduced into the
scheme. This sets a minimum level of income that is used in the calculation of CTR
for certain cases where they have been in business for more than 12 months. These
changes align with the approach taken in Universal Credits.
The capital limit was reduced from £16,000 to £6,000. The maximum level of capital
a claimant could own before they no longer qualified for CTR was previously £16,000,
and this was reduced to £6,000 in 2016.

Changes made from 1 April 2017
13.

From 1 April 2017, the following changes were made to align CTR with changes made
to housing benefit:
• Reduction in the period for which a person can be absent from Great Britain and
still receive CTR from thirteen weeks to four weeks. A Change introduced in
housing benefit which excluded a person from housing benefit if they were out of
the country for 4 weeks or more. This change was approved to bring CTR in line
with Housing Benefit regulations;

C - 43

 From the 1 April 2017 new Employment Support Allowance (ESA) claimants who go
into the work related activity group will not receive additional monies in their ESA.
This component was £29.05 per week in the calculation. This change was approved
to bring CTR in line with Housing Benefit regulations;
• To limit the number of dependent children within the calculation of CTR to a
maximum of two for any new children born on or after 1 April 2017 This change
was approved to bring CTR in line with Housing Benefit regulations;
To remove entitlement to the Severe Disability Premium in line with changes made
to housing benefit where another person is paid Universal Credit (Carers Element).
This change was approved to bring CTR in line with Housing Benefit regulations.
•

14.

Changes made from 1 April 2018
15.

From 1 April 2018, further changes were made to CTR to provide additional funding
to the council, namely:
• reducing the maximum entitlement for working age claimants to 70 per cent of
their council tax liability;
• restricting Council Tax Reduction to a maximum Band C valuation - this affects
all applicants whose dwellings have a band D or higher; and
• disregarding the new Bereavement Support Payments in line with changes made
to Housing Benefit.

16.

The working age scheme for 2018/19 required all working age applicants to pay a
minimum of 30 per cent of their council tax (a maximum level of CTR of 70 per cent)
and CTR is calculated up to a maximum of band C for council tax valuation purposes.
Any applicants living in premises which have a council tax band of D, E, F, G or H have
their entitlement calculated on band C levels.

Changes made from 1st April 2019
17.
Two minor changes were made to the scheme with effect from 1st April 2019
namely:
•

To disregard the new Infected Blood Scheme payments in line with changes made
by government to the housing benefit scheme rules. Five payment schemes have
provided financial support to people infected with HIV and/or hepatitis C as a
result of contaminated National Health Service blood or blood products. These
schemes are run by: The Eileen Trust, The Macfarlane Trust, MFET Ltd, The Skipton
Fund and The Caxton Foundation. Payments from these schemes are fully
disregarded in housing benefit and can be achieved without consultation in CTR
using the Exceptional Hardship Fund policy. Any applicants receiving the new
Infected Blood Scheme Payments will be given additional support, if required,
through the exceptional hardship facility that already exists within the Council Tax
Reduction; and

C - 44

 •

To maintain the CTR scheme but allowing for any minor adjustments to applicable
amounts and non-dependant charges in line with housing benefit and the local
council tax reduction scheme for pension age applicants.

18.

In addition, management was tasked to develop options for an alternative council tax
reduction banded scheme for consideration and potential implementation with effect
from 1 April 2020 to reduce the administrative burden placed on the council as a result
of the introduction of Universal Credit.

19.

Work has been ongoing over the past year and the following results have been
identified

The main issues with the current scheme
20.
There are a number of issues with the current scheme that will need addressing if the
system is to continue to provide effective support to low income taxpayers and also if the
Council is able to provide the service in an efficient manner. The main issues are as follows:
•

The introduction of full-service Universal Credit for working age applicants; and

•

The need for a simplification of the scheme;

21.

Each of the above are examined in detail below.

Council Tax Reduction and the Full Service Roll Out of Universal Credit
22.

The introduction of Universal Credit within the area has, as experienced in all other
areas, brought a number of significant challenges to both the administration of Council
Tax Reduction and also the collection of Council Tax generally. All sites within fullservice areas have experienced the following:
a. The reluctance of Universal Credit claimants to make a prompt claim for Council
Tax Reduction leading to loss of entitlement;
b. A high number of changes to Universal Credit cases are received from the
Department for Work and Pensions requiring a change to Council Tax Reduction
entitlement. On average 40% of Universal Credit claimants have between eight and
twelve changes in entitlement per annum. These changes result in amendments to
Council Tax liability, the re-calculation of instalments, delays and the
demonstrable loss in collection; and
c. The increased costs of administration through multiple changes with significant
additional staff and staff time being needed.

23.

It is clear that the existing means tested Council Tax Reduction scheme, which is too
reactive to change, will not be viable in the longer term now that Universal Credit has
been rolled out fully within the area. The move to a new more efficient scheme from
2020 is now imperative.

C - 45

 The need for a simplified approach to the Council Tax Reduction Scheme.
24.

Notwithstanding the introduction of Universal Credit, the existing scheme is based on
an ‘old fashioned;’ means tested benefit scheme. It has major defects namely:
• It is complex for customers to understand and is based on a complex calculation of
entitlement;
• The administration for staff is complex, with staff having to request significant
amounts of information from applicants;
• Staff have to undergo significant training to be proficient in processing claims;
• The timescales for processing applications is lengthy mainly due to the complexity
and evidence required to support the applications; and
• The administration of the scheme is costly when compared to other discounts for
Council Tax.

25.

Clearly there is a need now to simplify the scheme, not only to mitigate the effects
of Universal Credit, but also make it easier for customers to make a claim and to
significantly reduce the costs of administration.

The proposed approach for the 2020/21 Council Tax Reduction Scheme
26.

In view of the problems being experienced with the current scheme, it is proposed
that an alternative approach be taken from 2020/21. The approach has been to
fundamentally redesign the scheme to address all of the issues with the current
scheme and in particular;
a. The problems with the introduction of full-service Universal Credit; and
b. The significant increase in administration costs due to the high level of changes
received in respect of Universal Credit;

27.

Work has been ongoing since April 2019 on a new scheme which is now nearing
completion. Consultation has been undertaken with the public and the precepting
authorities. If accepted by the Council, the new scheme would take effect from 1st
April 2020. The consultation considered two approaches and the following proposed
scheme is the one most popular with both the public and preceptors and also is the
one recommended for implementation.

28.

The proposed new scheme has a number of features as follows:
a. The overall expenditure (cost) of the scheme will remain broadly as at present;
b. The changes can only be made to the working age schemes as the current
schemes for pensioners is prescribed by Central Government;
c. The current means – tested schemes will be replaced by a simple income grid model
as shown below:

C - 46

 Band

Level of
CTR

Couple with no
children

Couple with
children

Single parent with
Single parent with
two or more
one child
children

Single person

1

70%

in receipt of a disability benefit

2

70%

in receipt of a passported benefit

3

70%

£0.00 - £115.00

£0.00 - £250.00

£0.00 - £210.00

£0.00 - £140.00

£0.00 - £75.00

4

60%

£115.01 - £165.00

£250.01 - £300.00

£210.01 - £260.00

£140.01 - £190.00

£75.01 - £125.00

5

40%

£165.01 - £215.00

£300.01 - £350.00 £260.01 - £310.00

£190.01 - £240.00

£125.01 - £175.00

6

20%

£215.01 - £265.00

£240.01 - £290.00

£175.01 - £225.00

£350.01 - £400.00

£310.01 - £360.00

d. It is proposed that the highest level of discount will be set at a maximum level of
liability (70%) and all current applicants that are in receipt of a ‘passported
benefit’ such as Income Support, Jobseeker’s Allowance (Income Based) and
Employment and Support Allowance (Income Related) receive maximum discount;
e. It is proposed that the highest level of discount will be set at a maximum level of
liability (70%) and all current applicants that are in receipt of a ‘disability benefit’
such as Disability Living Allowance or Personal Independence Payments receive
maximum discount;
f. As with the current scheme, the payment of CTR will be limited to Council Tax
Band C level. This means any applicants living in premises which have a council tax
band of D, E, F, G or H have their entitlement calculated on band C levels
g. All other discount levels are based on the applicant’s (and partner’s, where they
have one) net income;
h. The scheme allows for variation in household size with the levels of income per
band increasing where an applicant has a partner, and / or dependants
i. Where an applicant had non-dependants living with them, a standard deduction of
£2 per week will be made. This is a significant change and means that the
administration of the scheme will be more straightforward whilst also protecting
low income families where adult sons and daughters for example remain at home;

C - 47

 j. To encourage work, a standard £25 per week disregard will be provided against all
earnings for all applicant types. This will take the place of the current standard
disregards and additional earnings disregards. Where a family also receives a
childcare disregard (for childcare costs not paid for by Central Government
schemes), the income levels in the ‘grid scheme’ are set at a higher rate;
k. Mirror the amendment to the Housing Benefit national scheme to disregard
Infected blood payments as income and capital. These schemes are run by the
Eileen Trust, The McFarlane Trust, MMEF Limited, the Skipton Fund and the Caxton
Foundation.
l. Disability benefits such as Disability Living Allowance and Personal Independence
Allowance will continue to be disregarded and, in addition, the Support Component
of Employment and Support Allowance and Carer’s Allowance will also be
disregarded, again providing additional protection with the scheme. The disregard
of Carer’s Allowance is a significant change in that currently the income is taken
into account within the scheme;
m. Child benefit and Child Maintenance will continue to be disregarded;
n. The total disregard on war pensions and war disablement pensions will continue;
o. There will be a one-month limit to backdating;
p. The capital limit under the new scheme will be the same as at present namely
£6,000 but there will be no calculation of tariff or ‘assumed’ income from any
capital held:
q. The current approach to for Self Employed applicants and directors will be
maintained with the use of a minimum income floor.
How the new scheme will address the problems with the current Council Tax Reduction
29.

Due to the simplicity of the proposed new scheme and by taking a more ‘Council Tax
discount approach’, it will address the problems associated with the increased
administration caused by failings in the current scheme and Universal Credit as
follows:

30.

The scheme will require a simplified claiming process. All applicants will see a
significant reduction in the claiming process and where possible Council Tax Reduction
will be awarded automatically. These changes will have the following distinct
advantages namely:
•

Speed of processing – all claims will be able to be calculated promptly and largely
automatically without the need to request further information which inevitably
leads to delays;

•

Maintenance of collection rates – the new scheme will avoid constant changes in
discount, the need for multiple changes in instalments and therefore assist in
maintaining the high collection rates currently achieved. The increased level of
C - 48

 discount will assist all those applicants on the lowest levels of income, again
improving the overall collection rate;
31.

The income bands are sufficiently wide to avoid constant changes in discount. The
current Council Tax Reduction scheme is very reactive and will alter even if the overall
change to the person’s liability is small. This is leading to constant changes in Council
Tax liability, the need to recalculate monthly instalments and the requirement to
issue a large number of Council Tax demands. The effect of this is that Council Tax
collection is reduced. The new scheme, with its simplified income banding approach
will have the following advantages:
•

Only significant changes in income will affect the level of discount awarded;

•

Council Taxpayers who receive Council Tax Reduction will not receive multiple
Council Tax demands and adjustments to their instalments; and

•

The new scheme is designed to reflect a more modern approach, where any
discount changes it will be effective from the day of the change rather than the
Monday of the following week;

Transition to the new scheme and the Exceptional Hardship Scheme
32.

The Council must be mindful that any change in scheme or a transition to a new
scheme may have result in a change to the entitlement of certain applicants.

33.

Inevitably, with any change in scheme, there will be both winners and losers although
the proposed scheme has been designed to protect the most vulnerable. Whilst the
new scheme has been designed to protect vulnerable groups and to, where possible,
minimise any reductions in entitlement, it is proposed that the new scheme will
contain additional provisions to protect individuals who experience exceptional
hardship. Where any applicant is likely to experience exceptional hardship, they will
be encouraged to apply for an exceptional hardship payment. The Council will consider
all applications for exceptional hardship on an individual basis, taking into account
available income and essential outgoings. Where appropriate further support will be
given to the applicant.

34.

This approach will enable individual applicants to be dealt with in a fair and equitable
manner. The Exceptional Hardship Scheme will form part of the Council Tax Reduction
scheme and fall to be paid through the Collection Fund.

C - 49

 Scope of the Equality Impact Assessment
35.

This Equality Impact Assessment examines the potential effects of each of the changes and
particularly the effects where any of the options were to be adopted. This stage 2 EIA
particularly deals with the propose changes to Council Tax Reduction Scheme.

36.

Please note that Pensioner protection will be achieved by keeping in place national rules,
which broadly replicate the council tax benefit scheme, which existed prior to 1st April 2013.

37.

As part of the changes, the Council needs to give consideration to the effects on working age
claimants only and in particular any vulnerable groups in the design of a new system.

38.

Central Government has not been prescriptive in how it does this but points to the Council’s
existing responsibilities including the Child Poverty Act 2010, the Disabled Person Act 1986
and the Housing Act 1996 as well as the public sector equality duty in section 149 of the
Equality Act 2010.

Method of Consultation

The following methods have been used to obtain the views of taxpayers

Stakeholders
1.Existing applicants
(both working age and
pensionable age)

Methodology
Online survey via questionnaire explaining proposals
and likely impact
Paper survey if requested

2.Council taxpayers and
service users generally

Online Survey via questionnaire explaining
proposals and likely impact
Paper survey if requested

3. Interested
organisations and groups.

Email sent to Anti-Poverty Working Group and
Members to raise awareness and for them to
circulate to their customers
Focus groups held for service users and council
sections to attend
Email to all Parish and Town Council Clerks to raise
awareness and seek their response
Letter sent to the Police & Crime Commissioner
seeking views.

General Awareness
Provision of information
and awareness raising of
changes and proposals

www.iwight.com
Post Cards sent to all existing Local Council Tax
Support customer (10,500 sent)
Press releases
Face to face communication at customer service
points
Information in libraries,
The Council’s Facebook and Twitter sites (weekly
promotions)

C - 50

  

 

Stakeholders

Methodology

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Responses to the Consultation
The Council received 199 responses to the consultation, the number is in line with previous
consultations and represents a confidence level of 84.2%. Full details of the responses are
given within Appendix 3.
Analysis and Assessment
Recommendations, having regard to the potential changes are given within Appendix 1 as
well as the likely effect on applicants generally.
Action and Improvement Plan
An action and improvement plan is included within Appendix 2.

C - 52

  

 

Appendix 1
Recommendations

 

 

It is recommended, based on the original intentions of the Council and also on the outcomes of the
consultation that the following actions are taken:
1.

Should the Council maintain a scheme for working age applicants?
Recommendation – to move to the full income banded scheme as proposed in the
consultation;
• Recommendation – that all the changes proposed in the new scheme be implemented as
per the Council’s original proposal;
• Recommendation – that the Council’s Exceptional Hardship scheme be maintained and
offered to all Council Taxpayers suffering exceptional hardship.
•

C - 54

  

 

Appendix 2
Action Improvement Plan

 

 

Area of
impact

Age

Is there
evidence of
negative
positive or no
impact?

Could this lead to
adverse impact and if
so why?

Negative
Impact

Working age claimants
of Council Tax support
may receive a reduced
level of assistance as
compared with the
former Council Tax

Can this adverse impact
be justified on the
grounds of promoting
equality of opportunity
for one group or any
other reason?
Yes – the new scheme will
redistribute support and
be more generous to
those applicants on the
lowest incomes;
In addition, it will assist
those who are disabled
and those who have
caring responsibilities

Please detail what measures or
changes you will put in place to
remedy any identified impact
(NB: please make sure that you
include actions to improve all
areas of impact whether
negative, neutral or positive)
The existing means tested
scheme will be replaced by an
income-based scheme.
An exceptional hardship fund will
be available for those claimants
in most severe financial need.

Benefit Scheme.
Disability

Positive
impact

N/A

Gender
Reassignment

No impact

Marriage &
Civil
Partnership
Pregnancy &
Maternity

No impact

Race

No impact

Religion /
Belief

No impact

Sex
(male or
female)
Sexual
Orientation

No impact

HR &
workforce
issues

Not known at
this stage

No issue relating to this
protected
characteristic
No issue relating to this
protected
characteristic
No issue relating to this
protected
characteristic
No issue relating to this
protected
characteristic
No issue relating to this
protected
characteristic
No issue relating to this
protected
characteristic
No issue relating to this
protected
characteristic
Potential
loss
of
resourcing in the future

No impact

No impact

N/A

All disabled persons receiving a
qualifying benefit will receive
maximum discount under the
scheme as they were identified
during the analysis work as being
the group of people who are
struggling to pay their council
tax. Therefore, the changes to
the scheme will either not change
their current level of support, or
provide additional support if they
are not already receiving the
maximum level of 70%. In
addition,
the
Exceptional
Hardship Fund is available to
assist
any
customers
with
additional support required.

The Council will monitor
the overall impact of
work
and
resource

C - 56

 Area of
impact

Human Rights
implications if
relevant

Is there
evidence of
negative
positive or no
impact?

No impact

Could this lead to
adverse impact and if
so why?

N/A

Can this adverse impact
be justified on the
grounds of promoting
equality of opportunity
for one group or any
other reason?

Please detail what measures or
changes you will put in place to
remedy any identified impact
(NB: please make sure that you
include actions to improve all
areas of impact whether
negative, neutral or positive)

accordingly
if
the
preferred
scheme
is
adopted and undertake
an initial EIA screening on
the
impact
of
HR
workforce issues.

C - 57

  

 

Appendix 3
Consultation Responses

 

 

Results from the IWC Local Council Tax Support Scheme Consultation 2020/21
The above consultation was undertaken between 10 June 2019 and 5 August 2019. On
completion, a total of 199 responses had been received. The charts below detail the
responses received for each question asked of the participants.

I have read the background information about the Local Council Tax Support scheme.
183 respondents indicated that they had read the background information about the Local
Council Tax Support scheme, which equates to 92% of participants. 16 participants (8%)
either did not read the background information before completing the survey or left this
question blank.
I have read the background information

0%
8%

92%

Yes

No

Blank

Question 1: Do you agree with Option 1?
54 of the consultation participants (27%) indicated that they agreed with Option 1 – the
introduction of an ‘income grid’ scheme to replace the current scheme for all working age
applicants, as proposed by the Isle of Wight Council. 43 participants (22%) did not agree
with this option and 102 (51%) of participants responded that they ‘Don’t know’ or skipped
this question.
Question 1: Do you agree with Option 1?

31% 27%
20%

Yes

No

22%

Unsure

Skipped

C - 59

 Question 2: Do you agree with Option 2?
Of the 199 participants, 51 agreed with Option 2 - the introduction of an ‘income grid’
scheme with additional factors to replace the current scheme for working age claimants,
which equates to 26% of the total number of participants. 35 participants (18%) indicated
that they did not agree with Option 2, and 21 did not know whether they agreed, which
represents 10%. 92 participants (46%) skipped this question.
Question 2: Do you agree with Option 2?

26%

46%

18%
10%

Yes

No

Don't know

Skipped

Question 3: Do you agree with Option 2a?
64 participants indicated that they agreed with Option 2a - to disregard Carer’s Allowance
which is currently taken into account as income, which was 32% of the total. 38
respondents (19%) did not agree with Option 2a, and 9 respondents (5%) did not know
whether they agreed. 88 participants skipped this question which represents 44% of the
total participants.
Question 3: Do you agree with Option 2a?

32%

44%

5%

Yes

No

19%

Unsure

Skipped

Question 4: Do you agree with Option 2b?
Of the 199 participants, 51 agreed with Option 2b which represents 26%, and 39 (19%) did
not agree with this option - to remove the current earnings disregards and replace them
C - 60

 with a standard £25 disregard irrespective of a person’s circumstances. 22 respondents
stated they did not know whether they agreed with Option 2b, which equates to 11%, 87
participants (44%) skipped this question.
Question 4: Do you agree with Option 2(b)?

26%

44%

19%

11%

Yes

No

Don't know

Skipped

Question 5: Do you agree with Option 2c?
Option 2c proposes to remove the current Non-Dependant Deduction rates and replace
them with a standard deduction of £2 per week for each non-dependant living in the
household. 45 participants (23%) agreed with this option and 40 indicated they did not
agree which represents 20% of the total respondents. 23 participants (11%) did not know
whether they agreed with this option, and 91 respondents (46%) skipped this question.
Question 5: Do you agree with Option 2(c)?

23%

46%

20%
11%

Yes

No

Unsure

Skipped

Question 6: Of the two ‘income grid’ schemes provided, which is your preferred
option?
Of the 199 participants, 23 respondents indicated that they preferred Option 1 which
corresponds to 12%. Option 2 was the preferred option for 52 participants which amounts

C - 61

 to 26% of the total, and 34 respondents (17%) did not know which their preferred option
was. 90 participants (45%) skipped this question.
Question 6: Of the two Income Grid Schemes provided, which is your
preferred option?

45%

12%

26%
17%

Option 1

Option 2

Don't know

Skipped

Question 7: Do you agree with Option 3?
60 contributors (30%) agreed with Option 3 which proposed to disregard any payment made
under Infected Blood and Thalidomide Regulations in full, whereas 30 participants did not
agree with this option which equates to 15% of the total number. There were 18
respondents (9%) who did not know whether they agreed with Option 3, and 91 participants
skipped this question which totalled 46%.
Question 7: Do you agree with Option 3?

30%

46%

9%

Yes

No

Unsure

15%

Skipped

Question 8: Do you agree with Alternative 1?
Alternative 1 proposed to keep the scheme as it is currently. Of the 199 participants, 38
agreed with Alternative 1 which represented 19% of the total number of respondents. 42
(21%) stated that they disagreed with Alternative 1, and 23 respondents (12%) indicated
that they did not know whether they agreed with this alternative. 96 contributors skipped
this question, which equates to 48% of the total number of participants.

C - 62

 Question 8: Do you agree with Alternative 1?

19%

48%

21%
12%

Yes

No

Don't know

Skipped

Question 9: Do you agree with Alternative 2?
33 respondents (17%) indicated that they agreed with Alternative 2 – reducing the
maximum level of support to 60 per cent or 65 per cent, whereas 60 contributors (30%)
disagreed. 11 participants (5%) did not know whether they agreed with this alternative,
and 95 participants skipped this question which relates to 48% of the total.
Question 9: Do you agree with Alternative 2?

17%

48%

30%
5%

Yes

No

Unsure

Skipped

Question 10: Do you agree with Alternative 3?
Alternative 3 detailed increasing the level of Council Tax. Of the 199 respondents, 15
stated that they agreed with this alternative which represents 8% of the total participants.
78 participants (39%) did not agree with Alternative 3, 11 (5%) did not know whether they
agreed, and 95 respondents (48%) skipped this question.

C - 63

 Question 10: Do you agree with Alternative 3?

8%

48%

39%
5%

Yes

No

Don't know

Skipped

Question 11: Do you agree with Alternative 4?
29 contributors stated that they agreed with Alternative 4, to find savings from reducing or
cutting other council services, which equates to 15% of the total participants. 60
participants (30%) indicated that they did not agree with this alternative and 15 (7%) did
not know if they agreed. 95 participants skipped this question which represents 48% of the
total.
Question 11: Do you agree with Alternative 4?

15%

48%

30%
7%

Yes

No

Unsure

Skipped

Question 12: Should the Council keep the current Local Council Tax Support scheme?
(Should it continue to reduce council tax for eligible claimants in the way and to the
extent that it does at the moment?)
Of the 199 participants, 40 replied ‘Yes’ to this question which represents 20% of the total
respondents. 33 participants (17%) replied ‘No’ to this question, and 21 did not know
whether the Council should keep the current Local Council Tax Support scheme, which
equates to 10% of the total. 105 contributors (53%) did not respond to this question.

C - 64

 Question 12: Should the Council keep the current Local Council Tax
Support Scheme? (Should it continue to reduce Council Tax for eligible
claimants in the way and to the extent that it does at the moment?)

20%
53%

17%
10%

Yes

No

Don't know

Skipped

Question 13: If ‘Yes’, how would we meet the administration costs this would create as
a result?
There were then 36 comments submitted:
Become more efficient throughout your organisation.
Chain ferry removal and sold on to someone else. Or sell it off as a franchise.
Cut the expenses allowance to councillors
Get rid of at least half of the councillors cut the amount of money they are paid reduce expense
claims by at least 75% And all the so called experts paid for by the council as consultants
GET RID OF USLESS COUNCILORS
Higher earners take a pay cut. Reduce- hospitality and expenses eg. trips to Jersey! Invest in an
auto calculating system for Universal Credit recovers who work and month by month their Council
Tax amount changes.
I am sure you can cut the few services that are left and ran by the council ,a cut the wages of the
current Councillors that have proved not good value ,Send the floating bridge back and demand a
refund ,and charge a tourist tax as they do in Spain and elsewhere to pay for the toilets ,beach
clean ,rubbish and bring back some services ,any more advice please ask,I do not currently charge a
Consultation fee
I don't have access to the figures so those that do can sort it out without penalising vulnerable
residents.
Ideally provide full employment so that LCTS is not required.
Increase Council Tax
Look at all options again first
Make savings elsewhere
Make the savings some where else as not every one has or will be moved onto Universal Credit at
this time.

C - 65

 Perhaps you could cut those new management jobs that you created last year.
https://www.countypress.co.uk/news/16312258.400000-bill-for-new-managers-at-county-hallbranded-an-insult-to-isle-of-wight-tax-payers/
Put more information on the council website instead of leaflets and booklets, to make savings on
administration costs as most people now have access to a computer.
Reduce councillors pay
Reduce councillors salaries and expense accounts.
Reduce finacial waste in the council. Reduce expense budgets. Cut / reduce the highest rates of pay
in the council. Sell art investments and use the to invest in revenue generating projects. Sell prime
council owned office buildings and move council offices to functional cheaper rented industrial
area complexes.
Reduce the extortionate pay of consultants and executives. More qualified employees would do
the work at a much lesser cost per annum. Anyone would join a gravy train if given the
opportunity. The council is one of those. Any private company would be bankrupt without a
bottomless pit. Budgets are totally misspent including. I do not know how they can sleep at but
ripping off the tax payer with irresponsible decision making.
Reduce the pay of the top earners( you know who you are) in the council. The disparity of wages in
county hall is a disgrace.
reduce the payroll of higher paid salaries
Reduction in councillors wages
Scheme 2 sounds fairer, and fits in with the new Universal Credit.
Stop giving pay rises to those at the top i.e. councillors and stop wasting taxpayers money on
frivolities
Stop people having to hand in uc details every month
Stop spending endless amounts on the stupid floating bridge and high allowances to senior
councillors!
STOP USING COMPOTERS AND USE PEN & PAPER INSTEAD ALL YOU THINK IS EVERYONE CAN USE
COMPEUTERS I'M 60ISH I CAN'T BRING BACK HANDS ON STOP WASTEING INK TREES THIS FORM
FOR YES/NO 2 SHEETS REASONS NO MORE THAN 6 INSTEAD 21 PAGES MEERKAT SIMPLY USE BOTH
SIDES OF THE PAGE AND REDUCE GAP ON PRINTING SIMPLE
______
Stop using our money to chauffeur the councillors about & cut costs in other areas
Take a pay cut
Tax second home owners if they can afford a second home they can pay double Council Tax.
That is entirely up to the Council. That is why they are being paid. Managers must manage.
That's your job to decide, no one elses. How about spending less on plants to make the place look
nice for tourists? You seem to spend more on that than much needed services.
The link to the consultation document is not working
Tory councillors should take a 75% pay cut.
You are asking the most vulnerable and those on low incomes, or the many that WORK and do not
meet thresholds to pay more....but still exist on the lowest level of incomes. You cannot stretch
people any further... I would be more than happy to take more time to think about this and speak
in person. We need to address our ageing population and lack of investment in post secondary
education, to find ways to enable families to support their children without continually working
extra hours for nothing. It is an absolute tragedy that working people are barely better off than on
benefits....trying to show a decent example to the (very near) next tax payers ( your
C - 66

 children)....although many will probably have to leave the island to achieve their success. It is
unrealistic to ask people who have no actual knowledge of budgets, policy, and all the costs that
contribute to our council tax, or indeed where it needs to be distributed.
You employ people to answer this question. If they can't then perhaps save costs by firing them.
Question 14: If the Council were to choose these alternative options to make savings,
what would be your order of preference? (please rank in order of preference, where 1
is the option that you would most prefer and 4 is the least, please enter a number in
each box.)
The table and graph below detail the alternative options which the participants of the
consultation found the most and least favourable, ranking from 1-4 where 1 is the
alternative most preferred.
The table shows that 48 out of 199 participants (24%) stated their most preferred
alternative was to keep the scheme as it is currently, and 37 respondents (19%) stated their
least preferred alternative was to increase the level of Council Tax.

Order of
preference
1.
2.
3.
4.
Skipped

Keep the
scheme
the same
as it is
currently
48
20
16
5
110

Reduce the
maximum
level of
support to
60/65%
29
25
14
17
114

Increase the
level of
Council Tax
5
19
27
37
111

Reduce funding
available for other
Council Services
11
22
28
29
109

C - 67

 Question 15: If you have any further comments to make regarding the Local Council
Tax Support scheme that you haven’t had the opportunity to raise elsewhere, please
use the space below.
Of the 199 participants, 35 provided further comments to Question 15:
Any scheme should encourage self sufficiency and discourage relying on benefits for anyone who is
capable of working.
apply as much of an individuals income as possible, including all universal credit - income is
income, irrespective of what it is called and why or how it is obtained. total income -relates to
ability to pay for council services, such as refuse collection - we all generate rubbish - elderly,
disabled and unemployed as well as employed workers.
As above, I believe the council spends far too much money on administration.
As an OAP this document is far to complexed for me to fully understand. To save money decrease
to payments made to councillors whom I think are paid far too much for their services, and stand
for election for the money
As I have said before in previous comments, you can not keep on reducing the support to those
people who are living on the breadline especially single adults who really struggle, pensioners have
double the income & if on pension credit guarantee pay nothing, how is this fair!!!!
BE MORE HAND'S ON MULITY TASK AND IF YOU CAN LIKE MOST OF POPULLATION CUT OUT THE
MDS n COE'S BRING BACK MATRONS
central gov. needs to live up to it's promises and ensure a fairer society. There are far too many tax
avoidance loopholes and company shenanaigans
Easy to save us council tax payers money by taking actions I have listed above and claim back all
the money wasted on the floating bridge
Everyone should pay council tax, 25% for single occupancy, discounts for pensioners, discounts for
those with disabilities, everyone of working age that could work should pay the same as those that
do.
Have you any idea how much people are struggling , Seriously you want to put even more strain on
low income families ,I see first-hand how hard up families are . Rents have rocketed under private
landlords and some housing is not fit for purpose . You need to start building real affordable
housing ,low income families are in low paid job usually 16 hr contracts or zero hours ,this council
has encouraged low priced supermarkets to open,thus providing these low paid low hours jobs
,fuelling the situation
I am disabled, I have no way of increasing my income to pay for a decrease in support. Where do
you think I am going to find the money to pay for the shortfall? We don't get extra money in our
Income Support to pay for Council Tax, we have to go without. When you reduced support down
to 70% (and CT increased as well) our payments went up 56% from what we had been paying, as
everyone elses CT went up by only 6% that means that those who had been getting the support
were penalised for being disabled, vulnerable and poor. Meanwhile, the council increase the pay
of their councillors, rewarding themselves for the fiasco that is the floating bridge! I am telling you
now, we cannot afford to have any more support removed. If our CT bill goes up by more than
working people because of this, you will end up having to take my disabled son into care because
his parents will be in prison through non-payment. We have NO OPPORTUNITY to increase our
income through work, so any proposal to decrease the support that we get now WILL BE

C - 68

 DEVASTATING! I cannot stress this enough, WE CANNOT AFFORD IT! Why don't you start chasing
those who can afford it, like 2nd home owners, let them pay more for a change!
Sick/disabled/vulnerable people in this country cannot take much more of this punishment, I am
begging you, please don't hurt us anymore.
I 'live' in the work/UC/lcts process each month. UC payment & wages payments cause almost
monthly changes. Staff always helpful. As an original UC trial person. took part time work. Pre UC
part time work it could barley afford to live. UC/lcts & working does help. Its exhausting & constant
worry. Reduce pension age and above moving here would help! Alternative holiday lets/second
home/ctax payment options to increase income.
I think a £2 a week deduction for non-dependants isn't very much, and I think this could be
increased. If a non-dependant is at home looking after children, then that family doesn't have to
pay for childcare like working families do. And most of them will probably have access to the 2/3
year funding grants, enabling them to go out and work.
I think those that pay full council tax pay enough and should not be paying anymore to compensate
for those who pay very little. Pensioners should not be protected they should be means tested they have far too many benefits as it is.
Increase the council tax for people who can afford a second / holiday home. Any one who can
afford a second / holiday home can afford to contribute a little more to the well being of society.
Keep reducing support for vulnerable adults is not the answer
No
No
no comment
none
None.
People already severely struggle to pay. I have gone without food or paying utility’s numerous
times along with my child in order to pay as is classed as a priority along with others. Increasing or
reducing help will push people over the edge. There is already a growing contempt and movement
against the council seeing wages and services we see. History of uprisings should teach you
something when the poor have had enough.
People are struggling with cuts to services as it is so any further will have a severe detrimental
effect
People who claim Council Tax support are usually those in our society who are least able pay it. To
jiggle money from the least in our society is not the way to go about saving money. I would suggest
looking at the pay structure of those at the very top of the tree and start by reducing them to a
more fair level before you hit the poorest in society. Managers must learn to manage.
Services have been cut but my payment keeps going up. My esa has not increased therefore i am
worse of.
SOME PEOPLE ON THEIOW ,DUE TO ILLNESS CANNOT WORK AND CANNOT AFFORD TO PAY
COUNCIL TAX AND EAT ,KEEP WARM AND PAY OTHER BILLS CONSIDER THEM U HEARTLESS
BASTARDS
NB. Redacted for unsuitable language
Standard rate for non dep deductions. People can have large amounts of income and still pay a
nominal amoun towards council tax. We all use the same services.

C - 69

 Stop paying ridiculous amounts of Council Tax payers money to consultants. Stop paying vast
amounts of CT payers money to Councillors - let them have their meeting at the council offices and
not in the pub or restaurant so they can claim the cost of a meal etc.
Stop raising council tax and support people are struggling more than the council!
The link to the consultation document is not working
The priority must be to protect people with no income to pay council tax. Seriously ill people with
£20 a week universal credit a week (left after paying rent) should not be paying council tax at 20%,
30%, or any amount. Ultimately the enforcement possibilities combined with vulnerable people's
circumstances risk causing breaches of their Article 3 rights, and the council must do… more to
require centralised proper funding for its services from general taxation in addition to these
options.
There is a problem if people get less housing support because they may become homeless or
unable to meet other bills and be cold and hungry. So it is more important to prevent this
happening in the first place because it will increase the demands on other services.
This whole questionnaire is worded in a way that makes it clear that you've decided on what to do,
you just want us to agree. Either way, we end up paying more for less, don't we?
Use some of the reserves to reduce the amount of savings required. Reduce overheads like any
other business
You have made this survey complicated and hard to understand and many of the people affected
will not have access or understand much of it.
Question 16: Are you, or someone in your household, getting Local Council Tax Support
at this time?
Of the total 199 respondents, 44 answered ‘Yes’ to this question which represents 22%, and
46 participants (23%) answered ‘No’. 3 participants (2%) did not know whether they are
getting Local Council Tax Support at this time, and 106 respondents (53%) skipped this
question.
Question 16: Are you, or someone in your household, getting Local
Council Tax Support at this time?

22%
53%

23%

2%
Yes

No

Don't know

Skipped

C - 70

 Equality Monitoring Questions

Which of the following options best describes
how you think of yourself?
15%
23%

55%
6%

1%
Male

Female

Both M & F

Prefer not to say

Skipped

Are you currently pregnant or have recently given
birth?
0%

34%
56%

5%
5%
Yes

No

Not applicable

Prefer not to say

Skipped

C - 71

 Which of these age groups do you belong to?
1%

3% 7%

10%

14%

55%

6%

2%

2%

16 - 24

25 - 34

35 - 44

45 - 54

55 - 64

65 - 74

75+

Prefer not to say

Skipped

What is your marital status?
4%

15%
11%

56%
5%

5%
1%
2%

1%
Married

Divorced

Co-habiting

Separated

Single

Widowed

Other

Prefer not to say

Skipped

C - 72

 Please tell us if you consider yourself to have a disability, or a
long-term illness, physical or mental health conditions
18%
21%

56%

5%

Yes

No

Prefer not to say

Skipped

Which of the following options best describes how you think
of yourself?
33%
56%
8%
3%

0%
0%

Heterosexual

Bisexual

Homosexual

Other

Prefer not to say

Skipped

C - 73

 How would you describe your ethnic group?
37%
55%
0%
White British

6%
White European

Prefer not to say

Skipped

2%
Other

Do you have a religious belief?
8%
56%

Yes

No

24%
12%

Prefer not to say

Skipped

C - 74