Agenda and minutes

Please note that this meeting will be 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. 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, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

The Leader referred to the notice of filming at meetings and the meeting noted this information.

There were apologies for lateness from Cllr Mark Blake, Cabinet Member for Communities.

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 25 below).

The Leader advised that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had decided at its meeting of the 1st of December to refer the decision, taken by Cabinet, on 10th of November, on the Alterations Policy for Leaseholders back to Cabinet for reconsideration. The recommendations of Scrutiny will be dealt with as part of Agenda item 7.

According to the Call-in Procedure in the Council’s Constitution (Part 4 Section H), the Cabinet had five working days to reconsider the key decision before taking a final decision.

To meet this requirement, the Cabinet needed to re-consider the Key decision at this meeting before making a final decision. The Leader confirmed that he had accepted this matter as an item of late urgent business to be considered with item 7 of the agenda.

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.

On the basis of being a leaseholder in the borough, Councillor Chandwani declared an interest in relation to part of item 7[the report dealing with the reconsideration of the key decision on the Alterations Policy for Leaseholders] and Item 12 payments policy for leaseholder’s consultation. Cllr Chandwani clarified that she had no personal or beneficial interest in item 14 as she did not own a car.

Cllr Bull declared an interest in items 7, 8, 12 and 14 by virtue of being a leaseholder and also had an interest in item 13 as a garage license holder in the borough.

The Leader, Cllr Ejiofor, declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in item 13, as garage license holder.

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.

None

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

RESOLVED

To approve the minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on the 10^th of November  2020  as an accurate  record of the meeting.

Note from the Democratic Services and Scrutiny Manager

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered an update on the implementation of the recommendations of its review on Fire Safety in High Rise Blocks at its meeting on 15 October 2020.   It resolved to recommend to Cabinet that at least two apprentice Building Control Officers be recruited to the Council’s Building Control team.

The Chair of Overview and Scrutiny introduced the report on fire safety in high rise blocks. The Committee had met on the 15^th of October to consider an update on the implementations of the Fire Safety Review which had been ratified by Overview and Scrutiny in March 2019 and responses to the recommendations agreed by Cabinet in July 2019. The Committee noted that efforts to recruit additional fire safety officers had not been successful, and concern was raised at the speed of progress. Therefore, there was a recommendation made to recruit at least two apprentice building control officers.

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal responded and recommended that Cabinet accept the recommendation to recruit at least two apprentices in the Building Control service who would be recruited to start working with the Council in the 2021/22 financial year. This course of action was also agreed with by Cabinet.

It was noted that an officer working group had been set up to act on new building and fire safety requirements and its remit specifically included staffing issues to do with recruitment, retention, expertise, and training.

[Councillor Bull and Cllr Chandwani left the meeting at 6.42pm]

The Leader invited Cllr Ahmet to introduce the Scrutiny call in report on the Alterations Policy for Leaseholders and to outline the recommendations.

Cllr Ahmet outlined the outcome of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s consideration of the Cabinet’s decision at a special meeting on 1st of December. The Committee heard representations from Michael Hardy and Barbara Tierney from the Haringey Leaseholders Association and the call in signatories as well as the Cabinet Member and senior housing officers.

The Chair of Overview and Scrutiny highlighted the key themes of the representations considered, the resulting concerns which were listed at the report at paragraph 3, informing the recommendations at paragraphs 3.1 to 3.5.

The Leader thanked the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny for her presentation and invited the Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal to respond.

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal thanked the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee for presenting the concerns of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and referred to the detailed call - in meeting which had helped address a lot of the issues that had been raised in the report.

Responding to the concerns and subsequent recommendations raised by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the following information was provided:

• The recommended policy was based on the fundamental fact that the Council, as freeholder, was liable for resident safety and for the structure of the building, which under the terms of the lease included windows and external doors. The findings of the Hackitt Review, the first phase of the Grenfell Tower Public Inquiry and the Government’s proposed Building Safety Bill, all provided firm evidence that the existing Alterations Policy was out of step with the direction of building safety regulations whereas the proposed policy reduced risk and clarified the Council’s primary accountability for building safety.
• Both the Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 379.

[Councillor Bull left the meeting for the duration of the item]

Deputation in relation to item 14

Mr Paul Burnham and Mr Jacob Secker addressed the Cabinet in relation to item 14 on the agenda –Council Housing Parking Estate Charges.

Mr Burnham felt that parking on Council estates would become worse if the charges were implemented. He referred to the 2000 garages within Council estates and questioned why these were not integrated within the strategy. Mr Burnham also referred to a previous consultation, where less than 30% of consultees supported charging for parking on Council estates.

Mr Burnham considered that there was no economic need for the charges and that the Council could run estates without implementing charges.

Mr Burnham also questioned the transfer of funds received from parking charges between the Housing Revenue Account and the General Fund.

Mr Burnham advised that he was opposed to applying parking charges to carers, and to the transfer of funds from the HRA to the General Fund.

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Estates Renewal responded to the points raised by Mr Burnham and provided a copy of her response for the minutes.

·           “Resident charges were rejected in a full Statutory Consultation last year and also rejected by a resident focus Group earlier this year”

The proposals outlined represent the only workable option identified which achieves the aims of the estate parking review approved by Cabinet in July 2019 and presented to residents in the consultation on the “Future of Estate Parking”. The proposals are designed to mitigate financial impact on residents be ensuring every household can apply for one free permit for any vehicle at or below the average emissions level.

The views of respondents to the “Future of Estate parking” consultation are detailed on page 3 of Appendix C (Resident and stakeholder consultation and engagement).

·           50.5% disagreed with introducing permit charges and 29.9% agreed.

·           36% agreed only service users should pay for it (i.e. by buying permits)

·           40.6% agreed to subsidising costs from rent and service charges.

As outlined at section 5.2 of the report (page 3-4), resident views on Permit charges were recognised and alternatives considered. In all instances the alternative options have had to be discounted for the following reasons.

1.      A Free scheme would not generate enough income to pay for itself.

2.      Service Charges could not be collected from all Leaseholders, Businesses and Freeholders

3.      Permit charges for some (i.e. Leaseholders) and Service Charges for others (i.e. Tenants) would make the scheme financially unviable due to the additional administrative and fraud prevention costs.

·           “There is no business case for charges to residents and carers. The proposed scheme would generate an annual surplus of £245,000 while the income from residents and carers parking fees would be £55,350”

Appendix B (Financial Assessment including permitting and permissions to park proposal) outlines the business case for levying some charges to ensure the proposed scheme is both financially viable and financed fairly.

Until end 2024/25 the Housing Revenue Account will be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 380.

[Report of the Director for Housing, Regeneration and Planning. This report describes the issues with the current out-sourced Estate Controlled Parking Scheme and seeks permission to replace the scheme with a new more effective in-sourced solution based on consultation with effected residents.]

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal introduced the report which sought approval to introduce a new estate parking management scheme which would meet both residents’ needs and the objectives of the estate parking review which Cabinet approved in July 2019. The current system for controlling estate parking was ineffective and it was not fair for residents to subsidise a poor service which they may not even be using. The new improved service would provide the best value for money offer. In the short term, the new scheme would deliver an improved service to over 280 estates across the borough. In the medium to long term it was hoped that the scheme would provide improved service to all Haringey estates.

Gethin Segel, Parking and Project Manager, responded to questions from Councillor Dennison:

-           The charge for carers would be set at £12 annually, which was the admin cost to process a permit and no income would be generated from these applications.

-           To comply with all relevant legislation there would be two schemes implemented. The Estate Parking Scheme would be managed by Homes for Haringey on behalf of Haringey Council and charges would be collected by the Housing Revenue Account. An enforcement scheme to administer parking rules would be managed by Haringey Council via Traffic Management Orders and income would be collected by the Parking Account.

RESOLVED

1)    To approve the estate parking management scheme based on a Traffic Management Order (TMO) based scheme using powers provided to Local Authorities under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

2)    To approve the proposal to in-source enforcement of estate parking to Haringey Council’s own In-House Parking Service with income derived from enforcement collected by the Parking Account of the General Fund; and

3)    To Delegate the service design and service level agreement for the in-sourced service to the Director of Environment and Neighbourhoods, and the Managing Director of Homes for Haringey in consultation with the Cabinet Member(s) responsible for Housing & Estate Renewal and Parking.

Reasons for decision

The current ECPS is redundant because the Protection of Freedoms Act makes it

hard to enforce and lack of DVLA support means it cannot collect enough income to cover costs. A Traffic Management Order (TMO) based scheme is the preferred solution because it is the only option, meets the aims of the estate parking review to deliver a financially viable scheme with the powers to effectively control parking and meets residents’ needs as well as assisting in tackling the climate change emergency. In addition, a TMO scheme is the Department of Transport’s recommended solution operated successfully by neighbouring boroughs including Enfield and Islington.

In-sourcing the delivery of estate parking enforcement to Haringey Council’s own Parking Service meets the objectives of the estate parking review established by Cabinet. This will allow Haringey Council to share resources and expertise in a sustainable way to generate efficiencies and savings. In addition, estate parking management will benefit from the improvements delivered by the Parking Transformational programme including new  ...  view the full minutes text for item 381.

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

There is a need to introduce an enhanced payment options policy for leaseholders. Authority is being sought for consultation to be carried out with leaseholders on the policy and for delegated authority to the Director of Housing Regeneration and Planning to approve the consultation materials. Following conclusion of the consultation, a further report will be presented to Cabinet to approve the enhanced payment options policy for leaseholders.

Councillors Bull and Chandwani left the meeting for the consideration of this item.

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal introduced the report which contained recommendations to improve the leaseholders’ payment options for major works previously approved by Cabinet on 12 November 2013. Recent Section 20 notices outlining major works with a potential cost to 76 leaseholders of £60-£117k had resulted in them raising concerns around their ability to pay. It was recognised that leaseholders would require more support to pay these invoices and so it was proposed that flexible options be introduced to provide support and minimise the risk of leaseholders defaulting on their payments.

In response to Councillor Dennison, the Cabinet Member confirmed that all residents would receive a formal notice of consultation and follow up contact.

Tracie Downie, Executive Director of Housing Management, advised that Homes for Haringey had improved on contacting non-resident leaseholders and would be able to inform them of the consultation by letter.

RESOLVED

To approve consultation on the following payment terms for new major works invoices as follows: -

a.      For leaseholders living in their property (resident leaseholders): -

The payment period for invoices between £30k and up to £40k is set at 15 years, with the first 10 years being interest free and the remaining 5 years charged at the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) rate.

b.      The payment period for invoices between £40k and £60k is set at 20 years, with the first 12 years being interest-free and the remaining 8 years charged at the PWLB rate.

c.       The payment period available for invoices above £60k is set at 25 years with the first 15 years being interest-free and the remaining 10 years charged at the PWLB rate.

2.      For resident leaseholders that are facing severe hardship, are unable to secure funding from a High Street Bank/Building Society, the Council will offer them an interest-only payment option. This will be secured by a charge on the property, for the actual amount of the invoice.

3.      For leaseholders who are not living in their leasehold property (non-resident leaseholders): -

a.      The payment period available for invoices between £30k and £60k is set at 10 years with interest charged at the PWLB rate with the Assistant Director for Housing in consultation with the Council’s Finance Service, having discretion to approve an offer for the first 5 years to be interest-free, following a recommendation from Homes for Haringey. (That is, if the non-resident landlord has no other tenanted properties and an illness/disability or caring responsibility that is preventing their occupation of their Haringey Council home).

b.      The payment period available for invoices above £60k is set at 15 years with the first 5 years being interest-free and the remaining 10 years charged at the PWLB rate.

c.       An extended interest free period to be approved by the Assistant Director for Housing in consultation with the Council’s Finance Service, following a recommendation from Homes for Haringey, if there will be a benefit to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 382.

[ Report of the Chief Executive. To be introduced by the Leader of the Council]

This report provides an overview of the outcomes of the Council’s Recovery and Renewal process and is intended to inform the refresh of Haringey’s Borough Plan, 2019-23, in light of the impact of Covid-19 on both the borough’s residents and on the council, including the impact on council finances.

[Clerks note: The Leader noted at 7.52pm] that Councillor Mark Blake joined the meeting during the consideration of this item]

[Councillor Bull and Chandwani joined the meeting]

The Leader introduced the report which provided an overview of the outcomes of the Council’s Recovery and Renewal process and was intended to inform the refresh of Haringey’s Borough Plan, 2019-23, in light of the impact of Covid-19 on both the borough’s residents and on the Council, including the impact on Council finances.

The report was commended for being well written and containing an in-depth analysis of the issues.

In response to questions from Cllr Amin, and Dennison the following was noted:

• The pandemic had brought into sharp focus the issues that were already there, and some issues significantly exacerbated such as food poverty.
• The same process for publishing the Borough Plan was being followed as in previous years. The Council would be publishing the outcome of the refresh of the Borough Plan and delivery plan in time for the new financial year.
• Page 79 indicated that the borough had the 4^th highest COVID-19  related death rates  in London, this was  per 100,000, but the number of confirmed cases had been lower and information on the reason for this mismatch was sought. Agreed that a written response be provided by the Director for Public Health.
• With regards to the residents in most need of mental health support outlined in the report, BAME, LGBT plus and trans people, and what the borough was doing to specifically support these people, it was noted that the level of support provided to LPA and LGBT+ community was quite specific and a response would be provided in writing on this.
• The Deputy Leader suggested that when the Borough Plan is refreshed, there could be additional 2 pages outlining the administration’s delivery of services and reducing inequality over the last two years. This could be set out before outlining the forthcoming challenges.
• The Cabinet Member for Public Realm and Transformation emphasised that people had been suffering food poverty a long time before COVID-19 and although the scale of the issue had changed, there was a need to recognise that there was level of individual poverty in Tottenham and Wood Green.

The Leader commented on the research undertaken after the first lockdown and the amount of hidden poverty and food poverty which was being addressed as part of anti-poverty strategy. It was important to ensure prevention of people slipping into poverty by understanding how they can access benefits when needed and helping to improve their life opportunities to get to better jobs.

RESOLVED

1.    To approve the Recovery and Renewal report which is attached as Appendix 1.

2.    To agree that the context and principles set out in the report be used as the basis for the refresh of the Borough Plan 2019 – 2023.

3.    That stakeholders including residents, businesses, partner organisations and voluntary sector be consulted on the refreshed Borough Plan; and

4.    That officers prepare a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 383.

[Report of the Director of Finance. To be introduced by Cabinet Member for Finance and Strategic Regeneration]

The report will provide an update on the Quarter 2 budget monitoring and will seek approval for any revenue or capital budget changes required to respond to the changing financial scenario and the delivery of the MTFS.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Strategic Regeneration provided an update on Medium Term Financial plan for 2020/21.The budget monitoring report covered the position at Quarter 2 (Period 6) of the 2020/21 financial year including General Fund (GF) Revenue, Capital, Housing Revenue Account (HRA) and Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) budgets. The report focused on significant budget variances, including those arising as a result of the forecast non-achievement of Cabinet approved MTFS savings but more significantly, the impact that Covid-19 was forecast to have on the Council’s financial plans.

In response to questions from Councillor Dennison

• With regards to the waiver of parking restrictions in the lock down and resulting loss of income, this was not a mistake and was done with residents’ safety in mind. The Cabinet Member for Public Realm and Transformation added that this action was a government direction, supported by London Councils and the British Parking Association, and all London boroughs had followed this instruction. The local government compensation scheme recognised the connection of parking losses and the deterioration of Council budgets because of the lockdown 1. This was likely to be the reason that this instruction was not received for lockdown 2

• The levels of the Council’s reserves was information that was readily available, online, and the location of the published accounts could be provided.

RESOLVED

1. To note the forecast revenue outturn for the General Fund (GF), including the impact of COVID-19, and known and estimated levels of announcedCOVID-19 funding, is a net overspend of £9.8m (Q1 £23.1m). This is before any further emergency grant support (Section 6, Tables 1a and 1b, and Appendix 1). This excludes the DSG forecast.

2. To note that Directors have been asked to focus on actions to bring the forecast overspend down before the end of the year.

3. To note the net Housing Revenue Account (HRA) forecast of £4.2m (Q1 £9.6m) overspend (Section 6, Table 2, and Appendix 2).

4. To note the net DSG forecast of £5.3m (Q1 £4.6m) overspend, the actions being taken to seek to address this and the potential implications for the GF (Section 7 and Table 3).

5. To note the forecast budget savings position in 2020/21 which indicates that £7.3m (45%) (Q1 £8.3m (50%)) may not be achieved. (Section 8, Table 4 and Appendix 3). This is incorporated in the GF budget pressures addressed in recommendation 3.1 above;

6. To approve the proposed budget adjustments and virements to the capital programme as set out in Table 5 and Appendix 5 and note the forecast expenditure of £218m (£251m Qtr1) in 2020/21 which equates to 40% (43% Qtr1) of the revised capital budget (Section 9, Table 5 and Appendix 4);

7. To approve the budget virements as set out in Appendix 5; and

8. To note the debt write-offs approved in Quarter 2 2020/21 (Appendix 6).

Reason for Decision

A strong financial management framework, including oversight by Members and senior management, is an essential part of delivering the Council’s priorities and statutory duties. This is made more critically important than  ...  view the full minutes text for item 384.

[Report of the Director of Finance. To be introduced by Cabinet Member for Finance and Strategic Regeneration]

The report sets out details of proposed budget for 2021/22 and MTFS to 2025/26, including savings, growth and capital proposals. The report will also set out details of provisional funding for 2021/22 and if available the remainder of the planning period and highlight areas of risk. The report recommends that the budget proposals be released for public consultation and Scrutiny consideration.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Strategic Regeneration introduced the report, setting out the details of the draft Budget for 2021/22 and Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2021/26, including budget reductions, growth and capital proposals. This included details of estimated funding for 2021/22 and the remainder of the planning period and highlighted areas of risk. The report recommended that budget proposals were released for public consultation and Scrutiny consideration.

The Cabinet Member outlined that the report addressed the impact that the Covid-19 pandemic had had on the financial planning process over the year and the steps that the Council had taken to respond to this challenge. It also incorporated the Council’s present best estimate of the implications of the Spending Review 2020 (SR20). The implications of expected further details from Government  were yet to be received, including the Local Government Funding Settlement,  which would  be taken into consideration before the Final Budget for 2021/22 and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2021/26 were considered by Cabinet – to include its response to the consultation - and Full Council for ratification in February 2021.

The Cabinet Member expressed that this was a progressive budget in a time of hardship where the Council needed to support the most vulnerable people in the community. COVID-19 19 had an impact on the Council finances, for this financial year, of £40m. However, the past and present sound management of finances provided confidence to provide this support despite the lack of clarity from Government about whether they would fulfil meeting the full cost of COVID-19 on Council budgets.

The budget savings set out in the report focused on delivering efficiencies, service redesign which was broader than departmental boundaries, involving and increasing income instead of service level costs. The Council would be reviewing all projects risks and savings programme whilst considering the budget issues that arise through demographic growth.

The Councils’ reserves would be utilised to bridge the budget gap for 2020/21 of £5.4m. It was important to note that COVID-19 and likely recession would have a continuing impact on finances and the Council would continue to call on the government to fund local authorities so that they can continue to serve communities.

The Cabinet Member continued to outline how the budget would continue to support the most vulnerable and set out:

• The investment in welfare assistance, the community voluntary sector, youth services, employment support, and university bursary scheme.

• Capital projects investment for improving school buildings, roads, pavements, empty properties, and Civic Centre.

• Continuing previous schemes such as the Council Tax reduction scheme, 1.99% Council tax precept for Adult Social Care.

• The Housing Revenue Plan supporting delivery of new Council homes at Council rents.

• Creating opportunities for young people and a cleaner and greener Haringey.

The Leader commended the budget and highlighted that the Council had managed its finances prudently and efficiently to allow this progressive budget to be put forward.

The Cabinet Member for Adults and Health commented, with regards to the support for Adults services, and commended  ...  view the full minutes text for item 385.

[Report of the Director of Finance. To be introduced by Cabinet Member for Finance and Strategic Regeneration]

The Council's income policy requires an annual review of the level of the fees and charges levied upon service users .This report considers the relevant factors affecting the review of fees and charges, identifies those services where an increase is being proposed and seeks: Approval to increase the fee or charge rate to those services where an increase is proposed in line with inflation. Member's agreement where an alternative approach is being proposed.

The meeting paused whilst Cllr Ejiofor, Leader of the Council recused himself from the meeting as he had a disclosable pecuniary interest, as a licensed garage holder in the report. Cllr Bull, Cabinet Member for Local Investment and Economic Growth also recused himself for his item as a licensed garage holder – 9.07pm

Cllr Amin, Deputy Leader, and Cabinet Member for Children, Education and Families continued to chair the meeting for this item.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Strategic Regeneration introduced the report which sought approval to the Fees and Charges to be applied to services at the start of 2021/22.

The Cabinet Member outlined that the Council’s income policy required, as a minimum, an annual review of the level of the fees and charges levied upon service users with a view to ensuring that income is maximised commensurate with the full recovery of costs.

This report considered the relevant factors affecting the review of fees and charges, identified those services where an increase was being proposed and sought approval to increase the fee or charge rate to those services where an increase is proposed in line with inflation. Member’s agreement where an alternative approach is being proposed.

The Cabinet Member outlined that it was important that, as part of the Council’s on-going financial planning, there was compliance with the Council’s policy to review fees and charges, as a minimum annually, taking account of issues such as the general economic climate, the Council’s overall financial position and delivery of the objectives of the Borough Plan.

In response to questions from Cllr Dennison the following was noted:

• There would be no charging for use of tennis courts in the 2021/22 financial year.

• Residents would be able opt out of using changing rooms and therefore not need to pay the prescribed charge.

• The Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Equalities and Leisure, would be exploring with officers how overall Parks were financed and in particular consider fees and charges, also making sure that people on low incomes were not disadvantaged.

RESOLVED

1. To agree the proposed non-statutory fees and charges to be levied by the Council with effect from 1 April 2021, unless otherwise stated, and as detailed in Section 8 and Appendices I – XIII taking into account the findings of equalities assessments as set out in section 10 of the report.
2. To note the statutory fees and charges to be levied by the Council with effect from 1 April 2021.
3. To note that the Council’s draft 2021/22 Budget and Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2021/22-2025/26 assumes that the changes to Fees & Charges set out in this report are agreed.

Reasons for Decision

It is a requirement to review fees and charges as a minimum annually. The financial position of the Council supports the view that levels of fees and charges should be maximised where possible, taking into account all relevant factors including the effect on service users and any consequent demand for services.

Alternative options considered

This report summarises the conclusions after  ...  view the full minutes text for item 386.

[Report of the Director for Housing, Regeneration and Planning. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Planning and Corporate Services]

Cabinet approval to spend Strategic CIL (SCIL) monies on certain infrastructure projects.

[ Cllr Ejiofor and Cllr Bull returned to the meeting 9.17pm]

The Cabinet Member for Planning and Corporate Services introduced the report which recommended projects to be allocated Strategic Community Infrastructure Levy (SCIL) monies, in accordance with national legislation and guidance, and Haringey policy. The Cabinet Member highlighted some of the areas where it was proposed to allocate the money:

-           £5.1m on street space projects

-           £1.5m on School Streets

-           £3.5m on District Energy Networks

-           c.£1m on temporary Youth Space in Wood Green

-           £0.5m on parks

RESOLVED

To approve £14.6m of Strategic CIL (SCIL) monies being spent on the projects set out in section 6 of the report.

Reasons for decision

The Council must spend 70-80% of CIL on Strategic CIL (SCIL) projects. As of the end of October 2020, there is £14.6m of SCIL available to spend.

The requirements, process, and criteria for spending SCIL are set out in national legislation and guidance, and also in adopted Haringey policy, summarised in this report.

Following consideration of the requirements, process and criteria, a shortlist of projects is recommended for SCIL spend. These projects are important to support the delivery of local infrastructure and development for the benefit of residents and businesses in the borough.

Alternative options considered

The alternative options considered to the recommended approach are as follows:

·Option 1 – Do not spend SCIL at this time. This is not considered appropriate as there are significant SCIL funds available to support residents and businesses through the development of the borough by capital expenditure on infrastructure which will also help address infrastructure impacts from Covid-19.

·Option 2 – Spend SCIL on projects which are not infrastructure, or do not support development of the borough. This is not an option as it would not comply with the legal requirements for spending SCIL.

·Option 3 – Spend SCIL on projects through an approach different to that in the CIL Governance document. This is not considered appropriate as it would not be in accordance with Haringey’s adopted CIL Governance document. As the CIL Governance document has been shaped by previous public consultation, any further changes to the CIL Governance document would likely require further public consultation.

·Option 4 – Spend SCIL to different projects within the Capital Programme. This is not considered appropriate as the recommended projects have been selected as they best meet the relevant requirements and criteria for SCIL spend and support the Council’s priorities.

[Report of the Director of Adults and Health. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Adults and Health]

The proposal to change the model of delivering day opportunities for adults with learning disabilities requires a formal public consultation process before consideration by Cabinet as to whether the Council will adopt the new model.

The Cabinet Member for Adults and Health introduced the report which sought approval to carry out a formal consultation over a period of 42 days on proposals for changes to the delivery of day opportunities for adults with learning disabilities and or autism in Haringey.

The Cabinet Member welcomed the consultation process recommended which built on the co-production work with users and carers which had led to the proposals for change. These proposals have been developed as part of a strategy to create more buildings-based care in Haringey and better-quality support. If accepted, these plans aimed to provide greater support to families now and in the future.

The cabinet member  expressed that, as the Council continued to provide more services in-borough so people with complex needs are able to stay living in their communities, there was a need to ensure that the  day opportunities offer met the needs of people with a range of learning disabilities.

Responding to a comment on the change in approach to building based care from the Cabinet Member for Local Investment & Economic Growth , there had been significant co- production and the Council had listened to local people, families , carers and service users, recognising that there was a demand for this service.

In response to a question from Cllr Dennison, it was noted that the proposals had been considered at the Adult Re -Design Group and had also been discussed at the Day Opportunities working sub - group. There had been engagement already with the Partnership Board and there were many kinds of interconnection between the groups.

The consultation information, to be distributed, had been co- designed with the group as well. The Cabinet Member felt that the Council had done it best to propose changes with services users and other interested stakeholders’ involvement. There was already a lot of awareness of the plans to be consulted on during December and January.

RESOLVED

1. To approve a 42 - day consultation on the proposals for a new model for delivering day opportunities for adults with learning disabilities in Haringey.

2. That the outcome of the consultation will be reported back to Cabinet in Spring 2021 for a decision on the proposals for a new model for delivering day opportunities for adults with learning disabilities in Haringey.

Reasons for decision

These service change proposals enable Haringey Council to increase the in-borough capacity of day opportunities for people with a learning disability and/ or autism, particularly for those with very high needs who often have to travel out of borough to receive a similar service.

All these proposals will provide person-centred support that it is believed will better meet an individual’s needs, but which also make best use of the Council’s resources and public money.

It is not anticipated that people who currently receive and require support in the day to lose an offer of day support. All changes will follow a strengths-based review by a social worker involving the individual and their circle of support wherever possible.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 388.

[Report of the Director for Housing, Regeneration and Planning. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Finance and Strategic Regeneration]

Cabinet are being asked to approve receipt of funding from MHCLG.  Haringey has been shortlisted to receive circa £850,000, as a ‘Good Growth 3 Accelerator fund’ from the MHCLG. This will be awarded in addition to the £972,500 granted by the GLA in March. The accelerator funding will support the GGF3 funding to unlock much-needed town centre and public realm improvement projects for Wood Green.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Strategic Regeneration introduced the report which sought approval for the receipt of additional grant funding to the Good Growth Funding round 3 (GGF3) and to agree to the variation of the existing GGF3 Grant Agreement by way of a Deed of Variation of the GGF3 Grant Agreement for the receipt of the accelerator grant.

Haringey had submitted a bid for GGF3 in September 2019 for a project called ‘Adaptive Wood Green’. This bid had been successful, and Haringey received a grant of £972,500 in March 2020. Subsequently, the Wood Green Regeneration team submitted a bid for funding from the Mayor of London’s ‘Getting Building Fund’, which was also successful, and the Council would receive £850,000 as a ‘Good Growth Fund 3 Accelerator’.

The GGF3 accelerator would fund three new projects in Wood Green, alongside the original six GGF3 funded projects to unlock much needed town centre and public realm improvement projects for Wood Green.

RESOLVED

1. To approve the receipt of additional grant funding to the Good Growth Funding round three (GGF3) via the Good Growth Fund Accelerator and agree to the variation of the existing GGF3 Grant Agreement by way of a Deed of Variation of the GGF3 Grant Agreement for the receipt of the accelerator grant.

2. To receive the total value of the additional grant funding from the GLA which is £850,000.

Reasons for decision

Haringey was awarded £972,500 from the Good Growth Fund in March 2020.

In June 2020, the Wood Green Regeneration Team applied for the Mayor of London ‘Getting London Building Fund’, and in August 2020 were shortlisted to receive £850,000 in the form of the ‘GGF Accelerator Fund’.

In March Cabinet approved the decision to enter into a grant agreement for the initial grant of £972,500. Haringey entered into this grant agreement with the GLA in October 2020.

In November 2020, the GLA confirmed that LBH had been awarded £850,000 GGF Accelerator Funding.

As the accelerator fund is also above £500,000, the decision to enter into the grant funding agreement is a Key Decision.

We therefore require Cabinet to approve the additional funding, and approve its inclusion into the pre-existing GGF3 grant agreement via a Deed of variation.

Alternative options considered

Do not accept additional Accelerator Funding - If Cabinet does not agree to allow the accelerator fund to be accepted, then the three identified projects will be unlikely to progress. This would also fail to make best use of available external funding to support limited Council budgets.

[Report of the Director for Housing, Regeneration and Planning. Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal.]

To seek  delegation for the Assistant Director of Housing & S151 officer to sign off and agree payments to Capital Letters, a pan-London scheme to procure temporary accommodation.

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal introduced the report which provided an update on Capital Letters and sought authority to make on-going payments to cover the incentives and staffing costs.

The Cabinet Member outlined the administration’s commitment to end homelessness through new generation of Council homes, helping people sleeping rough in Haringey with accommodation, and providing accommodation to 3,098 homeless households currently provided with temporary accommodation.

The Cabinet Member added that the Council had bought 200 good, local homes and let them to homeless Haringey families through the Community Benefit Society that it had established.

It was noted that since October 2019 when the Council joined Capital Letters as one of its founder members, the scheme had provided good, local homes for 132 homeless Haringey households.

The Cabinet Member outlined that, instead of boroughs competing with each other for accommodation across the capital, driving up prices and sending families to distant parts of London, Capital Letters sourced accommodation on behalf of all its member boroughs and then allocates it on a geographical basis. As a result, 132 Haringey households been able to stay within their communities and the Council had also saved £140,000.

The Capital Letters scheme showed what can be done when London boroughs cooperated. This report recommended that the Council allocate the necessary resources to remain part of that initiative.

RESOLVED

1. To approve the payment of a sum of up to [EXEMPT] to Capital Letters to fund a member of staff, for the financial year period 2020/21 in line with the service level agreement and Borough Service Plan.

2. To approve the payment of a sum of up to the maximum total of [EXEMPT] to Capital Letters for Private Sector Landlord Incentives, including related insurance and void period payments for the financial year period 2020/21 in line with the service level agreement and Borough Service Plan.

3. To approve future payments to Capital Letters for Private Sector Landlord incentives, to fund one member of staff, and to cover void and insurance cost annually for the financial year 2021/2022; and gives delegated authority to the Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning, after consultation with the Director of Finance, to approve all such future payments to Capital Letters from 2021/22 financial year onwards in accordance with the Service Level Agreement, Borough Service Plan; and subject to continued part funding of incentives by MHCLG and government allocation of future Flexible Homelessness Support Grant (FHSG).

To notes that all these payments would be made from the Council’s FHSG allocation from Government; and that these payments will only continue as long as there is allocation of FHSG to cover the cost, and on condition that the part-funding of Capital Letters from MHCLG continues.

Reasons for decision

Recommendation 3.1 is proposed as it is a membership requirement of the Capital Letters scheme to provide four members of staff, and to date only three have been seconded from Homes for Haringey. Payment will be made on a pro-rata basis dependent on the date of appointment  ...  view the full minutes text for item 390.

[Report of the Director for Housing, Regeneration and Planning. To be introduced by the Finance and Strategic Regeneration]

The Civic Centre has substantial investment needs but also offers an opportunity to meet some of the councils medium and long term accommodation needs. This report sets out options and a recommendation for investment.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Strategic Regeneration introduced the report which sought approval to support investment in a project to repair, restore, refurbish, and extend the Civic Centre. The project would bring the Civic Centre back into use by the Council as its new civic headquarters, including a high-quality refurbishment of the democratic spaces and the provision of modern office space.

The Cabinet Member reminded Members that the Civic Centre had closed in March 2020 for safety reasons. There had been work completed on helping the Council decide the future use of the Civic Centre and necessary repairs included in the capital programme. However, it had become clear that the costs of the repair work were very high due to its nature as a listed building and the Cabinet Member stressed that the Council had no other alternative but to spend money on the building due to its listed status.

The Cabinet Member put forward plans to spend additional funds to bring the Civic Centre up to a standard that reflected its listed English Heritage status. It was planned to modernise the services and continue to use it as a civic premise, not just for the Council but the community in the long term.

The Cabinet Member commended the report for approval and asked Cabinet to agree proposals to allow delivery of new Civic headquarters for use in 2024. The Cabinet Member would keep member informed of progress.

In view of the time, 9.40pm, the Leader moved to invoked Committee Standing order 63 to allow Committee Standing Order 18 to be suspended and allow the meeting to continue after 10pm. This was to complete the business on the agenda. Cabinet agreed this motion without dissent.

In response to the Leader, the Cabinet Member confirmed that it would cost more than £10m just to carry out basic repairs to the building.

In response to Councillor Dennison, the Cabinet Member stated that the decision to refurbish and improve the building was prudent and would be money well spent. It was more cost effective to spend money on the Civic Centre rather than to spend over £100m on building new Council premises. He added that he could not commit to a final cost, as it was always a risk when carrying out building work that extra costs may arise. He also advised that the car park was separate to these works and any decision on the future use of it would be a separate decision for the Cabinet to make.

The Leader reiterated that, if the Council did nothing with the building, apart from the absolute minimum it would cost £10m. It was further felt that this was not the right time to build a new civic centre which would cost more. Given the listed status and responsibility of the Council, it was prudent to invest in the asset, to allow development of a civic hub used by Council and community.

RESOLVED

1. To agree to the proposed use of the Haringey Civic  ...  view the full minutes text for item 391.

[Report of the Director for Housing, Regeneration and Planning. To be introduced  by the Cabinet Member for Adults and Health.]

The Housing Related Support contracts for supported accommodation services for homeless adults with mental health needs are due to end on 31/3/2021. An extension is being sought until 31/9/2021 to enable redesign and sourcing to take place.

The Cabinet Member for Adults and Health outlined that the Council and its statutory partners are committed to supporting people with mental health needs to live in the community and to achieve a sustainable recovery, preventing crisis interventions and the risk of homelessness. Housing Related Support services were a valuable provision delivered by specialist practitioners which enable and empower people to develop and rebuild the confidence and skills needed to achieve this.

It was noted that the Council currently commissioned a range of mental health supported accommodation and Housing First services and I believe it is appropriate that these should be extended as set out here, offering users continuity and the support which they need, while a new service model is co-designed and set in place.

RESOLVED

That, pursuant to Contract Standing Order 10.02.1(b) to approve the following:

1. To vary the contracts for the provision of short term specialist housing related support services for people with mental health needs awarded to St. Mungo’s and Sanctuary in order to provide for an option to extend the contracts for two further periods of up to one year each, in place of the current option to extend for two further periods of exactly one year each.

2. To extend the aforementioned contracts for up to twelve (12) months, as permitted under the terms of the varied contracts. The extension will be for an initial period of six (6) months, commencing from 1st April 2021 to 30th September 2021 and will be extended for further periods of up to six (6) months, if required. The breakdown of costs for each contract is as follows:

•           The contract for the provision of short-term supported housing specialist mental health services with 24-hour support and visiting support (Mental Health West) is delivered by St Mungo’s. The cost of the service for duration of initial period of six (6) months extension will be £265,816 and the total value over the full twelve (12) months, if used, would therefore be £531,631. The aggregated value of the contract over a period of 6 years will be £2,989,786, including the proposed extension.

•           The contract for the provision of short-term supported housing specialist mental health services with forensic provision is delivered by Sanctuary. The cost of the service for duration of initial period of six (6) months extension will be £194,859 and the total value over the full 12 months, if used, would therefore be £389,717.

The cost of the service (£194,858.50 for initial period of 6 months and £389,717 for full 12 months) includes a 6.5% uplift on the current contract price which amounts to £23,786 over a period of 12 months.

The aggregated value of the contract over a period of 6 years will be £2,019,387, including the proposed extension.

3. To vary the terms of the following contracts and to extend for further periods of up 12 months:

(I).        The contract for the Community Mental Health Floating Support Service delivered by Richmond Fellowship to be extended for further periods of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 392.

To consider any items admitted at Item 3 above.

None

Note from the Democratic Services and Scrutiny Manager

Items 23  to 25 allow for consideration of exempt information in relation to items 18  and 6 .

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:     

·         Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

·         Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings

RESOLVED

That the press and public  be excluded from the remainder of the meeting as the following items contained exempt information under paragraph 3 and 5, Part 1 Schedule 12a of the  Local Government Act 1972

As per item 17.

As per CAB 390 and the exempt minutes.

To agree the exempt minutes from the meeting held on the 10 November 2020.

RESOLVED

To approve the exempt minutes for the meeting held on the 10^th of November 2020.

To consider any items admitted at Item 3 above.

None.