Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absences were received from Councillor McNamara and Councillor Vanier.

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 26 below. New items of exempt business will be dealt with at Item 34 below).

There were no new items of late business. However, updated information in respect of agenda item 19 and 31, Information, Advice and Guidance contract award was tabled.

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.

In asking Members to declare any interests, the Leader, further referred to item 16[Tottenham Hotspur Football Club Stadium and Associated Development, Land Appropriation and Agreement] and asked Cabinet Members to consider, in the interests of openness and transparency and to avoid any allegations of bias or predetermination, to declare personal interests which were not prejudicial. This would cover for example season ticket holders or Cabinet Members who were a regular attender or supporter of either the football club or another ‘Premiership’ football club.    

In response:

• Councillor Demirci declared a personal interest in item 16 as a lifelong Tottenham Hotspur supporter.

• Councillor Arthur declared a personal interest in item 16 as a red Membership card holder of Arsenal Football Club.

Councillor Morton declared a separate prejudicial interest in items 18, 19, 30 and 31 by virtue of his membership of the Bridge Renewal Trust  Board and also because his partner worked for  the Law Centre.

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 [28,29,30,31,32,33,] : 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.

No representations were received.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 10 November 2015  as a correct record.

The minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on the 10^th November were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting.

Cabinet to  consider the following Overview and Scrutiny Reviews separately  followed by the Cabinet Member response to  the recommendation:

1.    The Scrutiny Review of  Finsbury Park Events

2.    The Scrutiny Review of  Council led  Housing Development

3.    The Scrutiny Review of Haringey Job Support Market

Cabinet would be noting the following Scrutiny Reviews:

1. The Scrutiny Review of  Finsbury Park Events

2. The Scrutiny Review of  Council led  Housing Development

3. The Scrutiny Review of Haringey Job Support Market

Cabinet to note the Scrutiny Review of Finsbury Park Events.

Councillor Wright, Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Chair of the Scrutiny Panel Review, considering the impact of the events policy in Finsbury Park, was invited by the Leader to introduce this report.

Councillor Wright outlined the thinking behind the terms of reference of the Scrutiny Review, the consideration given to the local concerns raised by residents following the recent Wireless Festival. This had further led the Scrutiny Panel to review the how the events policy was being implemented and exploring the mitigation measures in place to minimise the impact of the vents held in the Park on the local community. The Scrutiny Review Panel had spoken with a range of local residents, local stakeholders, partner’s Councillors; MP’s and received 700 hundred responses to an online questionnaire.

The Panel felt that there were further opportunities to mitigate impact of the events in the local community, especially around security and clear up of the events and put forward recommendations in accordance with this.

RESOLVED

1. To note the Finsbury Park Events Scrutiny Project final report, attached at Appendix 1; and

2. To note the recommendations contained in the final report set out at Appendix 2.

[To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Environment. Report of the Assistant Director for Environment and Community Safety] The report sets out the proposed Cabinet response to the recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Review of Finsbury Park Events, which was carried out over the summer of 2015.

The Leader introduced the Cabinet Response to the Scrutiny Review and welcomed the wide ranging set of recommendations which indicated a significant amount of work to be completed between now and the summer period, before events began.

In response to Councillor Engert’s question on the number of attendees that triggered an increase in security at events and whether this was appropriate, it was noted that the Parks Service along with partners were taking forward a lessons learned exercise following each large event to ensure that required actions were immediately applied to the next event i.e. the lessons learned from the Wireless event in August was applied to the September event at the Park.

In response to Councillor Engert’s question on the co-ordination between the Council and Islington Council to ensure that they did not have football matches or concerts at the Emirates stadium on the same day as events at Finsbury Park, it was noted that there were not major events in the Park during the summer holidays .There had been events on the same home match days at Arsenal but the start times had been organised to have less impact on the transport links and local area.

In response to Councillor Carter’s question about the sale of tobacco at a pavilion in Finsbury Park and whether this was appropriate given the Councils responsibility for health. It was noted that for future events there would be   smaller stalls. This would be a booth which was unmarked and without colourful advertising.

The Leader responded to Councillor Carter’s wider point on the Council’s responsibility for health with some good news that the Council would be leading and working with Islington Council on a government backed health devolution project which would be considering how local authorities can use existing and new policies to improve public health.

RESOLVED

To agree the responses to the Overview and Scrutiny report recommendations (attached as Appendix 1).

Cabinet to note the  Scrutiny Review of Housing Led Development.

Councillor Bevan introduced the Scrutiny Review, in the absence of Councillor Adje, and thanked Scrutiny Officers for their hard work in producing this report and recommendations. Councillor Bevan was also pleased, on behalf of the Panel, to see that most of the recommendations had been put forward for agreement by Cabinet. The Panel had particularly felt that the GLA could support the regeneration of the housing estates in the borough with funding but were realistic with their expectations around this. Councillor Bevan also referred to the following:

• recommendation 6, which advocated the Council joining the Local Government Development scheme
• the repatriation of the £380m for local government development
• and the importance of involving agencies that will eventually manage the new builds, in their design so they can ensure the new builds meet the principles of sound housing management.

RESOLVED

1. To note  the Council Led Development final report, attached at Appendix 1;

2. To note the recommendations contained in the final report.

[To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration. Report of the  Assistant Director for Regeneration.]The report sets out sets out the conclusions and recommendations of the  Scrutiny panel  and presents the Cabinet Member’s response to them.

Councillor Strickland introduced the Cabinet Response and thanked the Scrutiny Panel for their work on this Review. All the recommendations were put forward for agreement which was a sign of the appropriateness of the findings.

Councillor Strickland remarked on the Panel’s recommendation on the management of assets and highlighted that the Development Vehicle will allow for this.

Councillor Strickland felt it was also a fair challenge to ask officers to further explore seeking EU funding for the refurbishment of Housing Estates and commended the Panel for their recommendations on specialist provision.

RESOLVED

To approve the responses to the recommendations set out in Appendix 1.

Cabinet to note the Scrutiny Review of the Job Support Market.

Councillor Wright introduced this Scrutiny Review in the absence of the Scrutiny Review Chair, Councillor Bull. This Review had been undertaken in 2014 and had investigated the barriers into work.

The Panel’s objectives for this Review had been twofold:

• firstly to assess what barriers the long term unemployed faced in getting back in to work and how these could be overcome;
•  And secondly, to see how those agencies that support unemployed people could work more effectively to support long term unemployed. 

During the course of this work the Review met representatives from agencies working to support local unemployed people back in to work.

But it was clear that there is significant potential for these services to work together better for example: 

• In the training that they offer to local people;
• The way that they support particular groups of long term unemployed (e.g. those with a criminal record, mental health problems)

The Panel undertook some in depth qualitative interviews and focus groups with local unemployed people and from this it was clear that many have multiple and complex needs which cannot be resolved through any one agency.

It was noted that qualitative data obtained from local long term unemployed was very informative and gave the Panel  a real insight in to the challenges that they face in looking for work. 

Analysis of this data revealed three priorities to help long term unemployed people back into work:

• The need to develop and expand work experience opportunities (to build confidence, benchmark their skills);
• The need to improve access to IT facilities and IT support (to help with job search activities);
• A more coordinated, coherent and accessible presentation of local job, skills and training opportunities which are available.

Collaboration was the key to responding to these priorities, to those local skills, expertise and resources are clearly aligned to help prioritise and tackle these and other issues. 

The Panel made some important recommendations to help improve the coordination of support available to local unemployed people.

RESOLVED

To note the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review.

[To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Economic Development, Social Inclusion and Sustainability]. This report sets out the proposed Cabinet response to the recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel Project on the Haringey Job Support Market which commenced work in January 2015.

Councillor Goldberg welcomed the Scrutiny Review which read very well and spoke of the challenges faced by the borough in supporting employment. Some of the recommendations would be challenging to deliver and may be beyond the influence of the Council and its partners, but the Cabinet Member was fully committed to implementing them as fully as possible.

Councillor Goldberg also referred to the following: the new Siemens depot facility in Hornsey, the importance of supporting people with mental health issues back into work; having a good procurement strategy; supporting more people to get jobs in the care sector; ensuring fair conditions for people volunteering and undertaking work experience; themovement of HESP to Wood Green Library which put it appropriately with the Adult Learning Centre; and tackling youth unemployment.

RESOLVED

To approve the responses to the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review into the Job Support Market.

To consider any requests received in accordance with Standing Orders.

Mr Kevin Duffy was invited to put forward his public question to the Cabinet which had been received in advance of the meeting and was in relation to the Scrutiny Review of Finsbury Park events.

Mr Duffy asked: Even in these straitened times, when council’s have to make difficult decisions on cuts, can it ever be justifiable to promote and authorise events which cause harm to children, lead to increased crime levels and cause major upheaval and dislocation to local communities.

The Leader questioned Mr Duffy’s comment about the harm to children caused by the Park events and asked for a specific expansion of this point via email and she would respond accordingly. In terms of the use of the Parks for events, the Council had chosen to raise income from use of the Parks to finance the upkeep and maintenance of the Parks instead of relinquishing management of parks. The choice by Members in Haringey was to have a policy which enables events at Parks whilst working hard to mitigate the impact on the community when events are held.

Mr Duffy was further invited to put forward the representations of Friends of Finsbury Park in a separate deputation. Mr Duffy welcomed the Scrutiny Review which had become necessary following the events held in the Park in the summer of 2015. He raised the following concerns:

• The Friends of Finsbury Park had not been consulted on the terms of reference of the Scrutiny Review.
• No consideration was given as to whether the events at Finsbury Park were viable or could be scaled down.
• The actions proposed to mitigate the impact of events at Finsbury Park would fail to be effective.
• Not enough consideration was being given to physical and environmental impact on the community, in particular vulnerable communities.
• Some residents did not have use of their gardens after the events
• Local residents were deprived of the Park use during the build up and aftermath of events.
• Controls in place to mitigate impact were being breached.
• Mr Duffy asked Cabinet to reconsider their ambitions for events at Finsbury Park.

The Leader asked the deputation party whether they were unhappy with the level of mitigation proposed to limit the impact on the local community when events take place or if their priority was for events at the park to desist.

In response the deputation party highlighted their understanding of the meaning behind the word ‘mitigation’, which had been frequently referred to by the Scrutiny Panel and questioned whether it was being appropriately applied by the Council to limit impact on communities. They questioned whether any course of mitigation could be successful given the scale of people attending large events that would reach 50,000 and their perceived occupation of the Finsbury Park for events. They felt that no amount of mitigation would mean Finsbury Park, was accessible to the local community when events were being held.

The deputation party asked the Council to work together with the group on a three year plan  ...  view the full minutes text for item 142.

[To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Resources and Culture. Report of the  Chief Operating Officer.] The report will seek approval to the Council’s Capital Strategy and ask  Cabinet to note the process for agreeing the detailed schemes to be included for approval as part of the Council’s Capital Programme.

The Cabinet Member for Resources and Culture introduced the strategy which set out the basis which will underpin the Council’s discussions about the need for assets and direct the approach for acquiring and maintaining operational assets. The strategy also set out the key role that the Council’s assets would play in delivering the Council’s key priorities of regeneration, business growth, and growth in employment and housing growth.

It was noted that the strategy aligns with the Cabinet decision to seek a development partner to deliver investment and regeneration to the borough.

It was noted that the more detailed capital schemes will still come forward to Cabinet for approval.

In response to Councillor Engert’s question on Member oversight of the Capital programme, it was noted that there would be strong oversight of the programme by the Cabinet and also through the Cabinet Member. Corporate Committee would also have a monitoring role through their responsibility for Treasury Management Strategy.

Agreed Councillor Engert is supplied with a written response to her questions on the viability of using capital receipts to fund a swimming pool in the Wood Green area and what the reduction will be in capital receipts if the council has to hand back  to the treasury unused RTB receipts.

RESOLVED

1. To approve the Council’s Capital Strategy (Appendix 1).
2. To note the process for agreeing the detailed schemes to be included for approval as part of the Council’s Capital Programme (Paragraph 6.8).

Reasons for decision

In order to guide its capital investment priorities and provide the basis for investing in its assets the Council has developed a Capital Strategy. The strategy considers the external environment and the financial context within which the Council is operating in order to ensure that long term investment is based on a firm understanding of its priorities, needs and constraints.

Alternative options considered

The Council could continue to determine and approve an annual capital programme based on its immediate needs; however this approach has been discounted as it will tend to prioritise those projects which can be developed quickly rather than those that support a more strategic view of the Council’s needs. It will also potentially be limited by short term decisions on funding options which may not be the most effective approach.

There are a number of funding approaches that have also been considered ranging from restricting expenditure to the extent to which capital receipts can continue to be generated, to a longer term view based on leveraging additional external resources and anticipating revenue streams in support of borrowing. There is a need to keep under Review the balance between the Council’s ambition and the risks associated with borrowing in an uncertain financial climate, but by taking a longer term view these risks can be smoothed over time. The Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy will continue to be updated with the on-going revenue effects of capital decisions.

[To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration. Report of the Director for Planning, Regeneration and Development.] The report details the progress made with the High Road West Regeneration Scheme since the December 2014 Cabinet decision. It will also present a business case for the preferred delivery structure for High Road West and seek approval to commence a procurement process to secure a development partner using the Competitive Dialogue procedure under the Public Contract Regulations 2015.

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration introduced the report which proposed securing a development partner to work in partnership with the Council to deliver regeneration aspirations for the High Road West area. This was a milestone, in terms of the regeneration of the borough and the Cabinet Member thanked the lead officer for her hard work and dedication in bringing together the report and recommendations which had involved detailed and close consultation with residents and businesses. The vision and aspiration for High Road West was now being put into plans and actions.

The key objectives of the procurement process would be finding a partner with a strong emphasis on: place making, high quality housing, providing public spaces and improving lives for residents. Cllr Strickland advised that, residents would continue to be heavily involved at the heart of the regeneration process going forward.

In response to Councillor Engert’s question about potential business movement from High Road West area and loss of semi skilled jobs, it was noted that not every business would be relocated to a different area, there had already been discussions with businesses and some were happy to relocate, and some were using the opportunity to retire. The Council were ensuring that there would be a range of employment spaces at High Road West together with a wide range of job opportunities.

Cllr Strickland further advised that the types of jobs in this area will change and there will be larger jobs mix and lots of employment space.

Councillor Morton also welcomed the consideration being given to wellbeing in the place shaping criteria of the area.

RESOLVED

1.    To approve the High Road West objectives (para 6.18) which will inform the High Road West delivery and procurement objectives.

2.    To note the business case (Appendix 1) setting out the preferred delivery approach for High Road West and gives delegated authority to the Director of Regeneration, Planning and Development, after consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration to refine and finalise the delivery structure following the conclusion of the soft market testing exercise.

3.    To agree to the commencement of a Competitive Dialogue Procedure under the Public Contracts Regulations to procure a commercial partner, to deliver the High Road West Regeneration Scheme.

4.    To provide delegated Authority to the Director of Regeneration, Planning and Development, after consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration to agree all documentation required to support the procurement process.

5.    To provide delegated Authority to the Director of Regeneration, Planning and Development, after consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration, to deselect bidders, in line with the evaluation criteria, throughout the procurement process and to return to Cabinet for approval of the preferred bidder following the conclusion of the procurement process.

6.    To note the indicative phasing plan, which can be found at Appendix 2, and to agree to commence the re-housing process for phase 2 of the Love Lane Estate. This will require all secure Council tenants  ...  view the full minutes text for item 144.

[To be introduced  by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration. Report of the Director for Planning, Regeneration and Development.]This report will seek approval to appropriate land to progress the THFC stadium and associated development.

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration introduced the report which  set out what will happen to properties which  will be affected by ‘Right to Light’ if the planning application for the development of the  Spurs Stadium is agreed by the Planning Sub-Committee on the 16^th December 2015. The report included the consultation undertaken with affected properties and the reasons why the recommendations were coming forward which were to progress the development and also, in turn, the regeneration of this area.

Councillor Strickland referred to a letter received late in the afternoon of the 15^th December from surveyors representing the owners of a number of high street properties.  This was tabled for Cabinet Members to consider. In the letter they asserted that the Council was premature in its approach to this issue the effect of which, it was claimed, was to intervene in a commercial dispute and to reduce the amount of compensation payable where rights may be interfered with.

Councillor Strickland explained that officers had considered the letter which did not raise any new issues not already considered in the report before Members. Members were asked to appreciate that section 237 was a legal mechanism to protect the often competing interests of the various parties involved.

Councillor Strickland advised that, in the first instance, it preserves the entitlement to compensation which if not agreed is determined by an independent Tribunal. In the second instance it protects a developer’s ability to carry out consented development. Finally it helps secure the Council’s legitimate policy aspirations and growth agenda arising out of the London Plan targets.

In response to a question from Councillor Engert on the availability of affordable housing in the stadium development, it was noted that there were no affordable homes planned. There had been independent advice received from KPMG and viability advice by planning on this issue. This stadium development was not fundamentally a housing scheme.

In response to a second question, the Cabinet Member agreed that a fair and proportionate consideration had been given to human rights, in respect of properties right of light, and actions undertaken to meet this right were considered fair, hence a report coming forward to Cabinet.

It was noted that the cost of the surveyor set out in delegated actions report had been indemnified by Spurs.

The Director for Planning, Regeneration and Development also drew Councillor Engert's attention to paragraph 6.2.8 which referred to the development as a ‘catalyst’ for a set of wider regeneration initiatives which would deliver the mix and balance across North Tottenham area.

Further to considering the report and tabled letter Cabinet:

RESOLVED

To agree the following, subject to the THFC’s revised planning application for the NDP (HGY/2015/3000) securing a positive resolution to grant planning approval on the 16^th December 2015:

1. To acquire the freehold interest in the THFC Site, pursuant to Section 227 of the Act  for planning purposes;

2. To dispose of the THFC Site to Meldene Limited (a THFC company) pursuant to Section  ...  view the full minutes text for item 145.

[To be introduced by the Cabinet Member  for Planning. Report  of the Assistant Director for  Planning.]The report considers the applications for the designation of the Crouch End Neighbourhood Area and Neighbourhood Forum under the provision of the Localism Act 2011 and supporting Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 (as amended).

The Cabinet Member for Planning introduced the report which set out the application for the designation of the Crouch End Neighbourhood Area and Neighbourhood Forum under the provision of the Localism Act 2011 and supporting Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 (as amended).

The Cabinet Member welcomed the report and noted the considerable work to achieve this designation undertaken by the Forum. The designation of the area had been carefully scrutinised to make sure it met the requirements of the Localism Act 2011 and the application had been subject to a 6 week consultation process.

The Cabinet Member for Planning was looking forward to working with the Forum in future.

RESOLVED

1.    To note and agree the responses to the consultation on the applications for the Crouch End Neighbourhood Area and Neighbourhood Forum, as set out in Appendix A.

2.    To note and agree that pursuant to Section 61G and 61I of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to designate the Crouch End Neighbourhood Area, as set out in Appendices B and C.

3.    To agree that pursuant to section 61F of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to designate the Crouch End Neighbourhood Forum, as set out in the Appendices D and E.

Reasons for decision

Local authorities have a ‘Duty to support’ the neighbourhood planning process and the decision to designate or to not designate the Neighbourhood Area and Neighbourhood Forum is a requirement under the legislation.

Alternative options considered

No alternative options. Local authorities are required to facilitate the Neighbourhood Planning process.

[To be introduced by the Leader of the Council. Report of the Deputy Chief Executive.]This report details the outcome of an open tender process for the award of a contract to be the Council’s Strategic Partner for the Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS).

Councillor Morton exited the meeting at this item.

The Leader introduced the report which set out the outcome of an open tender process for the award of a contract to be the Council’s Strategic Partner for the Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS).

This tender was a reflection both of the Borough’s commitment to enabling and working alongside a vibrant, inclusive and self sufficient VCS and of its changing relationship with the sector in Haringey.

The Council had not commissioned a strategic partner before and the partnership between the Council and the successful bidder would have a strong role to play in delivering the Council’s strategic priorities as set out in the Corporate Plan 2015-18 - Building a Stronger Haringey Together.   It was also key to delivering the VCS commissioning framework, agreed by Cabinet in July 2015.

RESOLVED

1.    That Cabinet, in accordance with CSO 9.06.1(d). approves the award of a contract for Strategic Partner services to the preferred bidder - The Bridge Renewal Trust and Moracle Foundation

2.    That the contract is awarded for a period of three years for a value of £450,000 with the option to extend for a further one year for an additional value of £150,000.

Reasons for decision

This decision was important in terms of ensuring development and continuity of the VCS in Haringey.

The recommendations as outlined above in 3.1 and 3.2 are based on the provider whoscored the highest on a most economically advantageous (MEAT) basis and therefore would offer the best value to the Council in terms of quality and price.

Alternative options considered

The option of extending the existing contract was not considered as there is a need for a new contract to reflect a changing relationship with the sector and not available as the contract has previously been extended.

Four further suppliers were considered as part of the procurement process.  The scores for these bidders are presented later in this report (Section 6.6).

The option to ‘do nothing’ was explored and evaluated as not viable.  This option would not have provided a suitable or sustainable platform which will continue to deliver the support needed by the VCS for the foreseeable future.

In addition to the above, failure to provide the interventions would have an adverse impact on delivery of the Corporate Plan and efficiency savings in the longer term.

[To be Introduced by the Leader of the Council. Report of the Deputy Chief Executive.] This report details the outcome of an open tender process for the award of contracts to provide Information, Advice and Guidance (IAG) Services.  New contracts will be awarded in 4 lots.

Councillor Morton remained absent for this item following his earlier declaration of interest.

The Leader introduced the report which detailed the outcome of an open tender process for the award of contracts to provide Information, Advice and Guidance (IAG) Services. New contracts would be awarded in 4 lots.

Cabinet noted that effective IAG plays a vital role in prevention and early intervention and the reduction of health inequalities, as well as promoting self-help and empowerment, with a number of other benefits to residents of Haringey.

The Leader further referred to an addendum which had been tabled and set out the amended titles of the four lots of contracts which were being put forward. Cabinet were also asked to note at page 487, section 6.11, the Total scores out of 1000 points for Haringey Citizen’s Advice Bureau should read 883 instead of 888.

The Leader referred to a question from Councillor Vanier which had been put forward prior to the meeting. Cabinet noted that as part of this contract award, the Haringey Law Centre would no longer be commissioned by the Council to provide legal advice and representation to Haringey residents and Councillor Vanier was asking how these needs will be met under the new contract.

The Leader advised that the proposed new service, Haringey Citizens Advice Bureau had arrangements with legal firms to provide pro bono legal advice on a range of matters including education, housing, employment, litigation, immigration and family law.  This was an integral part of the new service which will ensure Haringey residents continue to receive high quality legal advice and support when they need it.

RESOLVED

1.    That, in accordance with CSO 9.06.1(d), to approve the award of contracts covering all 4 lots for Information, Advice and Guidance (IAG) Services to Haringey Citizen’s Advice Bureau.

2.    That for each of the 4 lots, the contract be awarded for a  period of three years for a total value of £2,364,000 with the option to extend for a further one year for an additional value of £788,000.

Reasons for decision

The specification for the new IAG service has been significantly reshaped in order to ensure that it meets the Council’s strategic objectives, fits with other resident focused services and strengthens individual and community capacity to access information, advice and guidance directly. This decision is important to ensure continuity of the delivery of information, advice and guidance, albeit through a redesigned service, in Haringey and to ensure compliance with statutory requirements placed on the Council.

The recommendations as outlined above in 3.1 and 3.2 are based on the provider who scored the highest on a most economically advantageous (MEAT) basis and therefore would offer the best value to the Council in terms of quality and price.

As a result of the procurement exercise, which was carried out in accordance with the Procurement Code of Practice, it is now recommended that the successful tenderer be awarded a contract as outlined in 3.1 – 3.2 in accordance with CSO 9.06.1(d).

Alternative  ...  view the full minutes text for item 148.

[To be introduced by the Cabinet  Member for Health and Wellbeing. Report of the Director for Public Health] The report will seek agreement for the Council  to be part of the London wide procurement process. The report will seek approval of  the London Procurement Strategy and request delegation of the decisions  for awarding contracts to the Leader of the Council.

Councillor Morton returned to the meeting.

The Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing introduced the report which set out the re commissioning of a modernised network of sexual health services able to meet London’s challenging sexual health issues.

RESOLVED

1.    To approve the Council’s participation in a London wide procurement for a web-based system to include a ‘front-end’ portal joined up partner notification and home/self-sampling, to be led by one Council on behalf of the Councils in the LSHTP.

2.    To approve the Council’s participation in a sub-regional procurement strategy for re-procurement of a contract for GUM and CaSH services. Participating Councils in the sub region include Barnet, Camden, City of London, Haringey, Hackney, Enfield and Islington.

3.    To note that the Leader has agreed to take responsibility for approving the awards of the contract for the web-based system to be procured in accordance with paragraph 3.1 and of the contract for GUM and CaSH services to be procured in accordance with paragraph 3.2.

4.    To note that the Leader has agreed to take responsibility for approving the new collaborative commissioning model for the Council to participate in London-wide cross charging once this has been developed in accordance with the proposals in paragraphs 4.11 of this report.

5.    To note the progress made in developing options for the future commissioning and procurement of GUM and CaSH services and the named inclusion of the Council in the Prior Indicative Notice (PIN) and Official Journal of European Union Notice (OJEU) for procurement of these services at the sub regional level as part of the strategy referred to in paragraph 3.2.

6.    To approve an extension of the Council’s current contract with Whittington Health NHS Trust for provision of an integrated GUM and CaSH service to residents of the borough for a further 18 months from 1st April 2016 until 30th September 2017 subject to an option for the Council to terminate the contract after 31^st March 2017 on 1 month’s notice.  The contract value for the period of extension will be pro rated based on a full year rate of £2,582,000. 

Reasons for decision  

Approval was being sought on the recommendations outlined in 3.1-3.5 across all 28 LAs participating in the LSHTP. They have been agreed by both the LSHTP board chaired by Mike Cooke, Chief Executive of Camden Council and the London Association of Directors of Public Health.

Haringey residents have high rates of sexually transmitted infections and although now reducing have had high rates of teenage pregnancy. This suggests that, although costly, sexual health services for Haringey residents need to be more effective.  The Council wants to support residents to make healthy choices and to have better sexual and reproductive health.

The LSHTP recommendations are underpinned by a business case, which demonstrates the imperative to transform the commissioning of sexual health services in London, rather than just gradual transformation or making no change. The business case is based on a detailed needs assessment, a survey completed by 24 provider  ...  view the full minutes text for item 149.

[To be introduced  by the Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing. Report of the Director of Public Health.]This report details the outcome of an open tender process for the award of a contract to provide an adult peer support service to residents with a substance misuse problem  The report recommends the award of a new contract in line with Contract Standing Order (CSO) 9.06.1(d) following a robust tendering process.

The Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing introduced the report which detailed the outcome of an open tender process for the award of a contract to provide an adult peer support service to residents with a substance misuse problem .The recommended organisation was based in Tottenham and had significant experience in delivering this support.

RESOLVED

To approve the award of contract to Bringing Unity Back Into the Community (BUBIC) in accordance with Contract Standing Order (CSO) 9.06.1(d), for an initial term of 3 years for a value of £498, 489.00 with an option to extend for a period of up to a further 2 years for an additional value making a total of £838,950.00 over the maximum 5 years.

Reasons for decision

The recommendations as outlined in 3.1 are based on those providers who scored the highest MEAT scores and therefore would offer the best value to the Council in terms of quality and price. The quality component of this tender was 55% and the price 45%.

As a result of the procurement exercise, which was carried out in accordance with the Procurement Code of Practice, it is now recommended that the successful tenderer be awarded a contract as outlined in 3.1 in accordance with CSO 9.06.1(d).

Alternative options considered

The option to not have a substance misuse peer led service in Haringey was considered and not found to be feasible for the following reasons; 

The need for substance misuse services is high, the Haringey Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) highlights that drug use in Haringey is more prevalent and problematic than the national average. 

Getting prevention messages and help to the right people in Haringey is challenging, crack and heroin use is illegal and often linked to criminal activity. Drug use is stigmatised and drug users often do not know about services, this is particularly true of crack cocaine users. A peer led service has been able to reach into the community in a way that traditional services don’t.

This service was set up to specifically target Haringey’s black and ethnic minority (BME) crack using residents living in more deprived areas of Haringey; this has been successful with 69% of those currently using being BME crack users.

Service Review from service users and local providers suggests that not having a peer led service would impact on the current success of Haringey’s treatment system, currently it performs in the top quartile nationally. 

Consultation with Community Safety partners demonstrated that there was no other service in Haringey able to access drug dealing hotspots to try to disrupt dealing through a community engagement approach.   

[To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing. Report of the Director of Public Health].This report details the outcome of an open tender process for the award of acontract to provide an integrated lifestyle behaviour change programme, ‘Live Well, Be Well’, for Haringey residents aged 18 and over. The new integrated programme brings together: Stop Smoking Services, community NHS Health Checks, Health Trainers & Health Champions, Weight Management and aspects of physical activity programmes. These services were formerly commissioned

separately. This report recommends the award of a new contract in line with

Contract Standing Order (CSO) 9.06.1 (d) following an open tender process.

The Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing introduced the report which set out the open tender process for the award of a contract to provide an integrated lifestyle behaviour change programme, ‘Live Well, Be Well’, for Haringey residents aged 18 and over. The new integrated programme brings together: Stop Smoking Services, community NHS Health Checks, Health Trainers & Health Champions, Weight Management and aspects of physical activity programmes. These services were formerly commissioned separately.

RESOLVED

1.    To approve the award of the contract for the integrated lifestyle behaviour change programme, ‘Live Well, Be Well’ for Haringey adults to Reed Momenta the successful tenderer in accordance with Contract Standing Order (CSO) 9.06.1(d).

2.    That the contract is awarded for a period of three years from 1 April 2016 for a value of £1,500,000, with an option to extend for a further period or periods of up to two years, for an additional value of up to £1,000,000 for the full two further years.

Reasons for Decision

This decision has been informed by the level of health need identified through the Haringey Joint Strategic Needs Assessment, evidence of what interventions work to address the need and recognition of the Council’s strategic aim to reduce inequalities, (see paragraphs 6.4 & 6.5 below and the attached Equalities Impact Assessment in appendix 4).

The recommendations as outlined above in 3.1 and 3.2 are based on the provider that scored the highest on a most economically advantageous (MEAT) basis and therefore would offer the best value to the Council in terms of quality and price.

As a result of the procurement exercise, which was carried out in accordance with the Procurement Code of Practice, it is now recommended that the successful tenderer be awarded a contract as outlined in 3.1 – 3.2 in accordance with CSO 9.06.1(d).

Alternative options considered

The option to continue with the existing model of commissioning and resourcing the four individual health improvement services was considered. However, given the reduction in the Council’s budget of approximately £70m over the next three years, this was not considered to be the most cost-effective approach.

Evidence from several local authorities across the UK demonstrates a move towards the commissioning of integrated behaviour change programmes, which

are also known as ‘wellness’ services. The main benefits of integration have been shown to include: a) easier access - an all-in-one service with a range of support available via one access point and one provider/consortium makes it easier for residents to access help and b) health gains can be maximised by addressing multiple risk factors together, either simultaneously or sequentially[1]^,[2]^,[3] c) more cost-effective. An economic case for prevention, with examples of smoking and physical activity, is illustrated in figure 1, Appendix 2.

In order to retain the good practice achieved to date we looked at evidence of effectiveness from integrated lifestyle behaviour change programmes across the UK. A model which would retain aspects of all four programmes into a new integrated model of delivery for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 151.

[To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for   Housing and Regeneration. Report of the Chief Operating Officer.]The report will seek  Cabinet approval the varying of the terms of the Framework Agreement by entering into a Deed of Variation with the Major Capital Works Framework Constructors with respect to Framework  Prices submitted as part of the Major Capital Work Framework mini competition. It will also seek Cabinet approval to  the award of call off contracts under the Major Capital Works  Framework Agreement to the two Constructor Partners in delivering the Housing Capital Programme Phase 9 ( 2016/2017) & Phase 10 (2017/2018).

To note the minutes of the following:

Cabinet Member Signing on 29 October 2015

Cabinet Member Signing on 2 November 2015

To note the delegated decisions taken by directors during November.

To consider any items admitted at Item 3 above.

Note from the Head of Democratic Services

Items 28,29,30,31,32,33, and 34  allow for the consideration of exempt information in relation to Items, 15,16,18,19,22,23 and 3 respectively.

RESOLVED:

That the press and public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting as the items below contain exempt information, as defined under paragraphs 1,2, 3, Part 1, schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

As per item 15.

As per item 16.

As per item 18.

As per item 19.

As per item 22.

As per item 23.

To consider any items admitted at Item 3 above.