Issue - meetings

Ceri Williams put a deputation forward in relation to this report.

Ms Williams spoke against the recommendations contained in the report and with continuing the partnership with OnSide to provide a Youth Zone. In summary, the following issues were put forward to the Leader to consider:

• There was an abuse of process and misuse of a General Exception Notice (GEN). OnSide had been courting Haringey for years and in Ms Williams view, the Council could wait a further three weeks.

• The previous OnSide proposal was delayed and now an entirely new 3-way arrangement had been introduced at breakneck speed, giving nearly half the available borough-wide money to just one school in a single location, which was inaccessible in every way for most young people in the borough.

• No updated draft contract with OnSide was attached to the report to take into account the new 3-way arrangement. Nor draft to vary the current Woodside lease to allow them to lease to OnSide.  

• Reference was made to recommendations 3.1f - 3.1G. In Ms William’s view, if before the 3rd May, any Council officer attempted to actually pass over the £3m capital cash, or draw up a binding contract to promise the revenue money to Woodside/OnSide, based on the inadequate supporting papers presented to date, they would be on very uncertain ground because so many key documents were missing.

• The deputation contended that Paragraphs 4.3 and 4.4 made extravagant claims that the new local Chair, Alderman King and OnSide itself would be able to lever in “unique” funds once the LBH match was confirmed. However, this was for the first 3 years as after that they could walk away. Ms Williams had spoken personally with local OnSide Board members in other towns, and with those involved in the voluntary sector in boroughs where the OnSide had been allowed in. They advised that the OnSide model brings huge problems. The vast buildings end up having to hoover up all available local trust and private funding to cover their costs. After the initial 3 years, they were only competing for funding from the same pot. Most have to commercialise, and so you ended up with a publicly funded building operating as a semi-private sports hall.

·         Ms Williams contended that the Council had been approached by Onside and questioned whether due consideration had been given to their governance profile and whether their expertise and experience was best placed to provide services for young people.

·         Ms Williams concluded by stating that there were no credible strategic outcomes listed, no consultations with youth practioners and young people in the borough to support the recommendations and this was the wrong location. This was not an emergency decision and not part of a council strategy.

·         Ms Williams also claimed that both MP’s were calling on the Council to pause the proposed development.

·         She believed no Council working with Onside had yet agreed site on school land apart from Haringey.

In response to a question from the Leader,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44