Agenda and minutes

Please note that this meeting may be filmed or recorded by the Council for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site or by anyone attending the meeting using any communication method. Although we ask members of the public recording, filming or reporting on the meeting not to include the public seating areas, members of the public attending the meeting should be aware that we cannot guarantee that they will not be filmed or recorded by others attending the meeting. Members of the public participating in the meeting (e.g. making deputations, asking questions, making oral protests) should be aware that they are likely to be filmed, recorded or reported on. 

By entering the meeting room and using the public seating area, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

The chair of the meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming or recording, if in his or her opinion continuation of the filming, recording or reporting would disrupt or prejudice the proceedings, infringe the rights of any individual or may lead to the breach of a legal obligation by the Council.

The Leader referred to agenda item 1, as shown on the agenda in respect of filming at the meeting and Members noted this information.

There were no apologies for absence.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of Urgent Business. (Late items of Urgent Business will be considered under the agenda item where they appear. New items of Urgent Business will be dealt with under Item 21 below. New items of exempt business will be dealt with at Item 24 below).

There were no items of urgent business.

A Member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a prejudicial interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered:

(i) must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest becomes apparent, and

(ii) may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must withdraw from the meeting room.

A Member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Register of Members’ Interests or the subject of a pending notification must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.

Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interests are defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

There were no declarations of interest put forward.

On occasions part of the Cabinet meeting will be held in private and will not be open to the public if an item is being considered that is likely to lead to the disclosure of exempt or confidential information. In accordance with the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 (the “Regulations”), members of the public can make representations about why that part of the meeting should be open to the public.

This agenda contains exempt items as set out at Item [22] : Exclusion of the Press and Public.  No representations with regard to these have been received.

This is the formal 5 clear day notice under the Regulations to confirm that this Cabinet meeting will be partly held in private for the reasons set out in this Agenda.

There were no representations received at the agenda publication stage in relation to the exempt items on the agenda.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on the 9^th of October 2018 as a correct record.

The minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on the 9th of October 2018 were agreed as an accurate record.

There are currently no matters to report form Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

There were no Overview and Scrutiny matters for consideration by Cabinet.

A deputation had been received from the Broadwater Farm Resident’s Association, in relation to item 9 of the Agenda – Broadwater Farm.

Mr Jacob Secker, Secretary for the Broadwater Farm Resident’s Association, was invited by the Leader to put forward his deputation to Cabinet.

Mr Secker was speaking as the representative of the Association, and Tangmere block resident with right of return, and introduced fellow deputation party members, Archbishop Frimpong who was a previous tenant at Tangmere with right of return, and Alan Goodall who was a resident at Northolt block.

Mr Secker began his representation by reiterating that the Association was demanding a ballot under Greater London Authority (GLA) rules for Tangmere and Northolt residents. He contended that this ballot should be on the question of whether the estate blocks should be strengthened or demolished and rebuilt. The Association felt that without the ballot, there could be no guarantee that the Council would abide by its commitment to re-provide the same number of Council homes at Council rent.

Mr Secker had observed in the consultation forms, a clearly stated commitment to residents of an equal number of Council homes at Council rent with more family sized accommodation for Northolt Block. However, Mr Secker argued this commitment for provision of an equal number of homes was not included in the report presented to Cabinet. The report advised at paragraph 6.61 that ‘any ’Council homes demolished would be re-provided, and the deputation felt that the term ‘any’ could be open to interpretation and called for the report be amended. There was a need make clear that the number of homes demolished would be equally re-provided otherwise this would make the consultation null and void.

With regard to Northolt, Mr Secker claimed that residents had been informed, in the consultation documentation, that when they were moved into a new home, if they did not like it then they would be allowed to request a move to another home. This commitment was also not included in the report and Mr Secker argued that if this commitment was also not adhered to, then the consultation would be deemed invalid.

Mr Secker continued to reiterate the importance of the ballot as the deputation party felt without this process there was no guarantee for residents that promises about re- provision of homes at Council rents would not be kept to.

Mr Secker conceded that, in the context of tower block safety across London, the safety issues with the blocks at Broadwater Farm was a relatively serious safety issue. He re-iterated that GLA rules stipulated that where there were reasonable alternative solutions to demolition, then there had to be a ballot. Mr Secker noted the Council’s own surveyors stated the blocks could be strengthened, demonstrating there was a reasonable alternative to demolition, in his view, cheaper than the demolition, therefore, meeting the requirements of a ballot.

Mr Secker concluded his deputation by asserting that the reason the Council were not balloting residents was because there was not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

[Report of the Director for  Housing Growth. To be introduced by the  Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal.]

Cabinet will consider decisions on the future of the Tangmere and Northolt blocks on the Broadwater Farm Estate following consultation on the Council’s preferred option. Also to seek approval for a Rehousing and Payments Policy and a Local Lettings Policy following resident consultation.

Following the deputation, the Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal formally introduced the report on Broadwater Farm. The Cabinet Member informed the meeting that once the structural issues became known, substantial work had been done across the estate to ensure the safety of residents. The nine medium rise blocks had had their individual gas supplies removed with heating and hot water provided initially by temporary oil fired boilers.

The Cabinet Member continued to outline that all these blocks would be connected to a modern district energy network by summer 2019, at a cost of £13m. In addition, strengthening and refurbishment works were being designed for the medium-rise blocks on Broadwater Farm. Kenley Tower, which passed the required safety tests, would also receive upgrade works, including new heating and hot water systems and associated works.

The Cabinet Member reminded the meeting of the purpose of the attached report, arising from the fact that two of the blocks on Broadwater Farm – Tangmere and Northolt - had failed the lower of the safety tests for buildings of their type. In June Cabinet had taken a number of difficult decisions about the future of these two blocks. At that meeting Cabinet had considered the options available to address the structural issues affecting Tangmere and Northolt. All the options would have required residents to be rehoused from the two blocks so there had been no option for the residents to remain in their homes.

The rehousing of Tangmere residents had been more urgent due to the deadline for gas to be removed from all the blocks on Broadwater Farm. The process of rehousing Northolt residents has not started as this block did not have piped gas.

At its meeting in June Cabinet assessed that the strengthening works required to make the blocks safe were prohibitively expensive and did not represent value for money when compared to the other options. Consideration was also given to the type of building in question and its likely life span even if strengthening works were carried out.

Having considered the options in June, Cabinet decided that its preferred option was to demolish Tangmere and Northolt and then to build new, high quality replacement Council homes on Broadwater Farm. Consequently, residents had been consulted on this preferred option, and the results of the consultation for both blocks was that a very clear majority of residents agreed with the Council’s proposal. This was 90% of residents in Tangmere and 80% of residents in Northolt in favour of this preferred option.

The Cabinet Member further informed Cabinet of the need to approve a rehousing policy setting out its commitment to the residents of these two blocks. This included a guaranteed right to return for Tangmere and Northolt tenants to the new homes when they were built. If Cabinet agreed the recommendations in the attached report, more detailed work would start on the proposals for the new homes and this would be done in consultation with residents of the estate.

The Cabinet  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

[Report of the Director for  Housing Growth. To be introduced by the  Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal.]

To consider Revisions to Haringey's Housing Strategy, including proposed amendments to appendices.

The Leader invited Mr Nicolson to put forward his deputation to the Cabinet.

Mr Nicolson was representing the TAG[Temporary Accommodation Group] Love Lane resident’s group and putting forward their concerns about: the future demolition of the Love Lane estate, their rights as residents in temporary accommodation, the need for permanent housing with affordable rent and how the development of the estate was taking place around them, causing distress.

The Sedley principles were referred to and the deputation were seeking an assurance that any consultation on the ‘Landlord Offer’ on Love Lane estate would follow these principles and that all families in temporary accommodation on Love Lane estate would be allowed to respond to the consultation, and to vote in any related ballot and would be moved into permanent accommodation.

The TAG Love Lane group was seeking accommodation that was both permanent and affordable. The group was concerned that Councillors had not given due consideration to:

• The circumstances of the 172 homeless families whom the Council had moved into temporary accommodation in the Love Lane estate, after the permanent tenants were moved out, and who were likely to be moved on yet again before demolition. It was not felt right for one family to already have been moved three times in the past nine months or for children to be moving homes, schools and friends six or seven times throughout ten years of their education. The deputation party felt that one move into decent temporary accommodation ought to be enough. Being moved into a noisy building site only to be moved off it again was compulsory move too many.

• The damage to the health and well-being of low-income families caused by significant increased rents as these families would likely need to move out of £90 a week for two bed Council rented accommodation to take private rented permanent accommodation at a minimum of £300 a week in N17 or £400 in N6. This was being done under the threat of "intentional homelessness". The deputation asserted that the Council paying the difference to landlords for four years did not result in permanent secure affordable accommodation for a career teacher or nurse or anyone else seeking to move to a community

The deputation further contended that none of the definitions of affordable housing in Appendix C was truly affordable. It was not only the rent that mattered but consideration should also be given to the health and wellbeing of low-income families and the minimum household income must be enough to buy a healthy diet, water, fuel, clothes, transport, participation in the community and other necessities, after the rent, Council and income taxes are paid.

The deputation referred to the new London Living rent policy being developed by the Mayor of London, which was one third of local rents, in which Council tax must be included if it is not abolished. The deputation spoke about the remaining two thirds of income being equally important and considered in the development of this policy. The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

[Report of the Director for  Housing Growth. To be introduced by the  Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal.]

To note the progress of the establishment of a wholly owned company and to make decisions to facilitate the Council’s housing delivery programme, namely the agreement of HRA capital, the acceptance of the GLA’s grant offer and right to buy receipt ring-fencing offer, the reversal of a previous Cabinet Member decision to dispose of HRA sites to Sanctuary Housing and consequential financial decisions  The report will further be identifying the first sites to enter the housing delivery programme.

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal introduced the report and reiterated the Labour administration’s manifesto commitment to deliver at least 1,000 new Council homes at Council rents by 2022. This was the latest report putting in place the programme to deliver these homes.

The Cabinet Member outlined the Labour Administration’s stated preference in the Manifesto to build Council housing directly through a company it fully owned. However, this was at a time when the GLA funding was not available and was before the announcement, in the October budget, of the scrapping of the HRA borrowing cap. Time was now needed to consider what those changes meant for housing delivery in the borough, the role that the proposed Company could best play in making that delivery happen and the extent to which the HRA could now support the house building programme, before Cabinet finalised any decisions on forming the Company. Proposals on the Company would be presented in the 2019 but, in the meantime, the Council sought to continue with work on the Company.

This report sought Cabinet to make some key decisions to get started on the Council housing development programme. It identified the first sites to come forward with the GLA funding, including bringing back sites that the last administration had passed over to a Housing Association to build shared ownership and Affordable Rent homes, on which instead would be built Council homes at Council rents. It also provided the initial funding necessary to start work on those first sites and asked Cabinet to agree to accept over £62m of GLA housing grant to help the Council deliver 848 affordable homes over the next four years.

The Cabinet Member concluded her introduction by stating the GLA funding was a major vote of confidence in the Council and its capacity to deliver its housing programme and would be key to funding the bulk of the 1,000 new Council homes that were pledged.

Following questions from Cllr Barnes, the following information was noted:

• In relation to whether paragraph 4.4 of the report meant that right to buy receipts would only be spent on affordable housing and not rebuilding replacement Council homes, Officers advised that the point of that paragraph was to identify that this would stop the Council losing receipts back to the government. It would be up to the Council to determine how it spent the money generated from those right to buy receipts.

• With regards to the size of the sites in the report and the query on whether the Council under the Company scheme would build large housing sites, Officers informed the meeting that the Company would have small to medium sized sites with between 20 and 150 units. It was not within the capacity of the Council to develop larger housing sites. However, overall programme could provide a total of 848 homes.
• Officers responded that they were on course to put forward a further report with decisions on housing development sites to instigate the delivery  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

[Report of the Assistant Director for Planning. To be introduced by the Leader of the Council.]

The report seeks Cabinet's approval for the publication of the Authority Monitoring Report 2017/18. Publication of the AMR is a statutory requirement. The AMR assesses the effectiveness of Haringey's planning policies and reports on milestones in the Local Development Scheme.

The Leader introduced the Authority Monitoring Report (AMR) which covered the monitoring period 1st April 2017 to 31st March 2018 and was used to assess the effectiveness of Haringey’s planning policies and to inform any future revisions to policies or their implementation. The report set out the Council’s current performance to date and was for noting and publication on the Council’s website.

RESOLVED

1. To note that there were no comments that the Regulatory Committee asked to be put forward to Cabinet.

2. To note the findings of the Authority’s Monitoring Report (AMR) for the monitoring period 2017/18.

3. To note the Authority’s Monitoring Report (AMR) 2017/18 will be made available for public inspection, on the Council’s website, in line with the statutory requirements.

Reasons for decision

The publication of the Authority Monitoring Report is a requirement of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended) (“the Act”). Approval of the AMR 2017/18 for publication will ensure that the Council meets its statutory obligations for planning performance monitoring.

Alternative options considered

The Act 2011 requires local planning authorities to produce monitoring reports. The Council considers that Haringey’s existing procedure of annual monitoring is an effective way for presenting the effectiveness of planning policies, within existing resources. As such, no other options were considered.

[Report of the Director for Housing and Growth. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Environment.]

The Council committed to developing this as part of the adopted Haringey Transport Strategy.  This document will set the vision and action plan for enabling Haringey's vehicles to move towards ultra low emission engines.    Agreement is sought to consult on the draft Strategy and Action Plan.

 The Cabinet Member for Environment introduced this report, highlighting that poor air quality and pollution affected us all, and approximately 50% of all pollution came from transport. This draft action plan explored how the Council would enable and encourage residents to move towards Ultra Low Emission Vehicles which would reduce the main source of pollution in the borough. In 2017, it was estimated that there were 225 electronic vehicles in Haringey, by 2020, Transport for London estimated this would rise to 1,000.

This action plan aimed to ensure that the Council raised public awareness of ultra low emission zones and charging technology through campaigns and education. The plan sought to create accessible vehicle charging points throughout the borough so that it could operate a fully lower emissions zone vehicle fleet by 2030. Work was being done with partners to ensure all commercial fleets that operated within the borough also had low emissions and were electric by 2040. The Cabinet Member informed the aspiration was for Haringey to be the leader in carbon friendly and cost efficient charging systems, which would benefit the environment and generations to come. 

Cllr Barnes sought a commitment from the Cabinet Member that, of the proposed 150-500 electronic charging points across the borough by 2020, none would be installed on pavements. The Cabinet Member responded there were two types of electronic charging points. The larger was not practical for pavements but would be included in car parks. The smaller charging point was practical for pavements, would be no larger than street lamps, and positioned on the edge of pavements.

The Cabinet Member would provide a written response to Cllr Barnes on how much the Council was planning on spending between now and the introduction of the Ultra Low Emission Vehicle Strategy. With regard to increasing public awareness through campaigns and education, a written response would also be provided on how many vehicles within the Council fleet were currently ultra low emission, compared to how many that were not. 

RESOLVED

1.    To approve the Draft Action Plan;

2.    To agree that the Draft Action Plan be published for public consultation; and

3.    Following public consultation, to give delegated authority to the Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning to sign off the Final Action Plan, which will be amended based on public consultation.

Reasons for decision

By developing an Action Plan, the borough can have a co-ordinated approach to future proofing the borough ahead of a growth in electric vehicles. In light of the Ultra-Low Emission Zone expanding to inner London in 2021, residents and businesses with the most polluting vehicles will incur a daily charge. The Council needs to steer the transition to ultra-low emission vehicles to be ahead of technology developments and regional/national policy developments on air pollution and climate change.

The Draft Action Plan sets out the following objectives:

a)    Increase public awareness of ultra-low emission vehicles and charging technology through campaigns and education

As ultra-low emission vehicles are not yet widespread, there are many  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

[Report of the Assistant Director for Schools and Learning. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Children, Education and Families.]

To agree the proposed arrangements for admission to community nursery classes, primary, junior and secondary schools and to St Aidan’s Voluntary Controlled School and for sixth form admission for the year 2020/21 can go out for consultation.

The Cabinet Member for Children, Education and Families introduced this report which sought approval to commence a six week period of statutory consultation on proposed admission arrangements for 2020/21.The Cabinet Member clarified that paragraph 4.5 required a correction of ‘60’ to ‘30’ when describing the number of places available at Tiverton. Also at paragraph 7.14, points 3 and 4, the Cabinet noted that this should read 2019 instead of 2018.

In response to a question from Cllr Brabazon, about the reduction on planned admission numbers in Tiverton and Welbourne schools, and if this was connected with a reduction in family housing in the area, it was noted that , generally, primary school numbers have been falling in Haringey and London. This PAN reduction was at the proposal stage but if there was a future increase in housing then consideration could be given to increasing the PAN for these two schools. The impact of housing development on local areas was a longer term consideration but it was important to take the steps now and consider this issue. The Cabinet Member was happy to convene an internal meeting to explore this.

RESOLVED

1. To agree to consult on the proposed admission arrangements, including the proposed in-year admissions scheme for the academic year 2020/21;

2. To agree to consult on the proposed IYFAP which, if agreed at Cabinet in February 2019, would be come into force from 1 March 2019;

3. To agree that the co-ordinated scheme for the admission of children to maintained primary and secondary schools as set out in Appendices 2 and 3 of this report can be published on the Haringey website on 1 January 2019.

4. To note the proposal to reduce the PAN for Welbourne and Tiverton Primary Schools by one form of entry (1FE) – 30 Reception pupils each from September 2020 as part of the community and voluntary controlled (VC) schools? published admission arrangements.

5. To note that consultation on the proposed admission arrangements is scheduled to take place between 26 November 2018 and 7 January 2019;

6. To note that following the consultation, a report will be prepared summarising the representations received from the consultation and a decision on the final admission arrangements and the In-Year Fair Access Protocol will be taken by Cabinet in February 2019.

Reasons for decision

Why do we consult?–

This report and the consultation that will flow from it if the report’s recommendations are agreed will ensure that our proposed admission arrangements for 2020/21 are consulted upon and the co-ordinated scheme is set in accordance with the mandatory provisions of the School Admissions Code 2014.

The School Admissions Code (2014) requires all admission authorities to publicly consult on their admission arrangements where changes are being proposed. The Code stipulates that if no changes are made to admission arrangements, they must be consulted on at least once every 7 years.

We consult on our admission arrangements annually irrespective of whether or not there is a proposed change to the arrangements. This is to ensure transparency  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

[Report of the Assistant Director for Planning. To be introduced by the Leader of the Council.]

This report seeks approval to publish the following documents for a six week public consultation: draft Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plans for Bruce Castle, Tottenham Cemetery, Peabody Cottages and Tower Gardens conservation areas, and the draft Local Heritage List. The documents include proposals for minor changes to the boundaries of conservation areas, and recommendations for buildings to be added to or removed from the Council's current Local List.

The Leader introduced this report which sought approval for four draft Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan documents, and the draft Local Heritage List for a six week public consultation. The conservation area appraisals related to four adjoining Conservation Areas in the Bruce Grove/Lordship Lane area; Bruce Castle, Tottenham Cemetery, Tower Gardens and Peabody Cottages. Each document included a comprehensive appraisal of the Conservation Area, and set out the Council’s strategy for managing the area going forward in order to protect its special character, including design guidelines.

The Local Heritage List identified locally significant buildings and structures across the borough that were not included on the statutory list, or covered by other statutory designations. The consultation document included new selection criteria for identifying locally significant assets, guidance on the management of local heritage assets through the planning process, and a list of buildings and structures recommended for inclusion on the list with short descriptions of each. Following the consultation, the draft documents may be amended having regard to representations received. They would be referred back to Cabinet for adoption by the Council in early 2019.

The Leader further drew the Cabinet’s attention to the informal recommendations proposed by the Regulatory Committee on the 18^th October 2018 at paragraph 7.1.1.

Cllr Brabazon questioned officers on the Bruce Castle conservation plan, specifically how the conservation area related to the park as well as the Grade 1 listed building within it. Officers noted the Bruce Castle conservation area included the park and the historic Grade 1 listed building. A statutory listing designation applied to the historic Bruce Castle building which was a separate designation from the conservation area and there would be no change to this.

The Leader requested officers to provide a written response as to whether or not the Bruce Castle conservation plan had any direct impact on the Park itself.

RESOLVED

1. To note the comments of the Regulatory Committee and notes the officer response set out at paragraph 7.1.1.

2. To approve the draft Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan documents and draft Local Heritage List, attached at Appendices 1-5, for a six-week public consultation and authority is delegated to the Assistant Director for Planning to make any applicable amendments to these documents arising out of Cabinet meetings prior to consultation.

3. That the documents will be amended having regard to representations received at consultation, and will be referred back to Cabinet for adoption in early 2019.

Reasons for decision

The Council’s adopted Statement of Community Involvement sets out our commitment to involving residents, local communities and other interested parties in the plan-making process through consultation. There is a statutory requirement that the Council’s proposals for the preservation and enhancement of conservation areas be submitted for consideration at a public meeting (Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 section 71). It is considered good practice to engage with local communities on heritage issues.

Conservation Area Appraisals

The Council has a statutory duty to ensure that conservation areas are preserved or  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

[Report of the Director for Environment and Neighbourhoods. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Civic Services.]

The Gambling Act 2005 requires the Licensing authority to review and adopt its policy every 3 years under section 349 of the legislation. The report will seek agreement to consult on the policy  which will be for adoption by full Council in March 2019.

The Cabinet Member for Civic Services introduced this report which sought authorisation to take the draft Council’s Statement of Gambling Policy to public consultation. It was a requirement by law to review this policy every three years. The current policy was adopted in January 2016 and was therefore due for review, to be published in March 2019. Following consultation, a further report would be presented to the Cabinet on 22^nd January 2019 with the results of that consultation and would be seeking approval to the draft Statement of Gambling Policy at Full Council in March 2019. The Cabinet Member noted that officers were not able to deviate from the national position on gambling, where laws were imposed at a national level. The Cabinet Member welcomed the consultation which requested gambling operators to consider carefully where they were located, and to ensure they were consistent with the licensing objectives.

Questions were asked by Cllr Barnes and Cllr Ibrahim and the following was noted:

·         The Cabinet Member confirmed that she had not personally had discussions with the gambling operators. Officers confirmed they would individually contact betting shops if there were particular issues with fixed odd betting terminals.

• Officers advised that, within the report, there was a local area profile which stated the crime figures for 2017, broken down by ward and betting shops. It also showed the high risk areas, which were situated in the east of the borough. 

• Officers informed there was an active Bet Watch group which was chaired by the Licensing Officer and Metropolitan Police. It was well attended by the main gambling operators and one of its purposes was to promote compliance with the licensing objectives.

• The government had previously  indicated there would be a 2 year delay in its implementation of the legislation on fixed odd betting terminals but once implemented this would further require the policy to be updated.

RESOLVED

To approve the draft Gambling Act 2005 Statement of Gambling Policy 2019-2022 for public consultation and instructs officers to carry out the consultation over a 10 week period.

Reasons for decision

To comply with the requirements of the Gambling Act 2005 the Council must prepare and consult on a statement of gambling policy for the period 2019-2022.

To obtain the views of interested parties on the proposed statement of gambling policy and use these views to formulate any changes to the policy.

Alternative options considered

No alternatives were considered. It is a statutory requirement that the policy be reviewed at least every three years, and that a public consultation is carried out. If the Council did not have a policy it would be acting ultra vires with regards to any decisions it makes when determining gambling premises licences.

The Gambling Commission has laid down requirements which the Council must follow with regards to the Gambling Policy. If they are not followed the Council could face risk of judicial challenge. The Gambling Commission guidance has been followed in drafting this revised policy.

[Report of the Assistant Director for Corporate Resources. To be introduced by the Cabinet member for Corporate Services and Insourcing.]

To agree that the Cabinet resolutions in respect of the revised Shared Digital Model made on 17 July are not progressed

To agree the complete ending of the Shared IT arrangements with Camden and Islington by 1 January 2019

To delegate authority to the Director of Customers, Transformation and Resources to manage the transition of IT services back to the Council.

The Cabinet Member for Corporate Services and Insourcing introduced this report which provided an update to Cabinet on the development of its Shared Digital Service (“Shared Digital”) with the London Boroughs of Camden and Islington. Since Cabinet’s approval of the project, it had become apparent the three Councils had different local priorities and approaches concerning ICT and digital services. This report set out the process to discontinue the arrangement with effect from 31 December 2018, ensuring a rapid process to ensure stability for the ICT and Digital services in Haringey.

The Cabinet Member explained, although Shared Digital Services was based on a worthwhile principle, that of gaining improvements by joint working with other local authorities, it was not possible to continue with the project. Nevertheless, there had been some benefits to Haringey from participation in Shared Digital thus far, with an estimated savings of approximately £800k from joint purchases. Furthermore, it was not anticipated that the Council would incur financial loses as a result of the cessation of the project. Although the cessation of the project was not something which was sought by the Council, it provided Haringey with more direct operational control of its ICT and digital services moving forward. The Cabinet Member had discussed the situation with the trade unions, who were happy with staff remaining in the direct employment of the London Borough of Haringey.

The Leader then invited questions from Councillors and the following was noted.

• Learning from this initiative when considering future shared service initiatives.

• Officers confirmed that there were differences but that these were not of a political nature. For example, Haringey had a priority to explore the technology processes that it used, such as the use of robotics, but the other two boroughs did not share this. The Cabinet Member reiterated that it was the intention of Haringey and its officers to continue with the project but the difference in priorities prevented this.

• Officers advised that the priorities of Camden were more closely linked to that of Haringey’ and, therefore, there was the possibility to explore future collaboration on projects between the two boroughs, such as in customer and digital platforms.

• Officers responded that, as all of Haringey’s ICT staff were still in place, the only significant changes to be made to the service were in line management. The Council was therefore confident that the local ICT service would be operational by that date.

RESOLVED

1. To agree that the Cabinet resolutions made on the 17th July 2018 are not progressed and that a local Haringey Council ICT service will become operational ahead of the ending of the shared service arrangement, anticipated by the 1st January 2019.

2. To delegate authority to the Director of Customers, Transformation and Resources to put the above into effect, including: finalising dates for incremental transition of the service; the final date on which the shared service arrangements will end, and the agreeing of the financial implications of the cessation of the SDS delivery arrangements and their return to Haringey  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

[Report of the Assistant Director for Planning. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Environment]

Each London borough is required to develop a Local Implementation Plan (LIP). The LIP sets out how the borough will deliver the Mayor's Transport Strategy (MTS) at local level. Haringey will need to consult on the LIP before submitted to TFL. Agreement is sought to consult the public on the draft LIP.

The Cabinet Member for Environment introduced this report and highlighted how important transport was to Haringey. The Council was bidding for £7.5m from the Mayor’s Transport fund for development of a Local Implantation Plan (LIP) which would deliver a range of small and larger projects to support Haringey’s transport infrastructure, such as traffic schemes and accessible crossing. The objectives of the transport strategy was to discourage the use of cars and encouraging the uptake of cycling and walking. There was concern about the role transport played in contributing to high emissions and pollution within the borough. A draft plan had been created which was due to go out for consultation, meaning there was an opportunity to make changes. Following the consultation, the plan would be submitted in February.

The following information was noted in response to Cllr Barnes’ questions:

·         Officers advised that a report had been completed on Shepherds Hill which proposed recommendations. These were due to be discussed with the neighbourhood forum to identify any observations, following which, future projects could be created. Officers noted the LIP was a flexible 3 year plan and, whilst the first year was more definitive in terms of set projects proposed, there was scope to include new projects in years 2 and 3, if a project were to arise as a result of a safety audit or justified concerns from residents. The Highgate neighbourhood forum were also advised that they could apply for the Neighbourhood Portion of the Community Infrastructure Levy to fund projects such as traffic calming measures in Shepherds Hill.

• Officers informed that ward Councillors would be consulted on individual schemes following approval of the draft LIP by Cabinet.

·         Officers responded that this had been explored, such as dockless bike providers. Additionally, following the approval of the Ultra Low Emission Vehicle Action Plan previously, an income stream could be generated through charging points in the borough. There were also an opportunity to raise funds through the parking permit system for car clubs in the borough.

RESOLVED

1. To approve the draft LIP3 submission as set out in appendix 1 and agree to:
2. submit the draft LIP3 to Transport for London;
3. carry out statutory consultation (in accordance with the requirements of section 145 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999) and public consultation on the draft LIP3; and to
4. delegate authority to the Director of Housing, Regeneration, Planning and Development to sign off, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Environment and the Director of Environment and Neighbourhoods, the final LIP3 to be submitted to the Mayor of London following consideration of the consultation responses

Reasons for decision

The LIP submission provides a major source of funding over a three-year period to deliver the draft Haringey transport strategy projects and programmes.

Alternative options considered

The draft LIP3 submission supports the priorities in the Corporate Plan and 2018 Haringey Transport Strategy. There are no alternative sources of funding to deliver these important projects and programmes. It is, therefore, not considered necessary to consider other  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

To note the minutes of the following:

Corporate Parenting  Advisory Committee 2^nd of July 2018.

RESOLVED

To note the minutes of the Corporate Parenting Advisory Committee on the 2^nd of July 2018.

To note delegated and significant actions taken by Directors in October.

RESOLVED

To note the significant and delegated actions taken by Directors in October 2018.

To consider any items admitted at Item 3 above.

None.

TO RESOLVE

 That the press and public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting as the items below contain exempt information, as defined under paragraph 3 and 5, Part 1, schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

RESOLVED

That the press and public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting as the items below contain exempt information, as defined under paragraph, 3 and 5, Part 1, schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

To approve the exempt minutes of the 9^th of October  2018 Cabinet meeting and addendum  to the 11^th of September 2018  Cabinet minutes.

RESOLVED

1.    To agree the exempt minutes  of the 9^th October of 2018 meeting.

2.    To note the addendum to the 11^th of September exempt minutes.

To consider any items admitted at Item 3 above.

None.