Agenda and minutes

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

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

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

The Chair referred Members present to item one on the agenda in respect of filming at the meeting and Members noted the information contained therein.

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Anita Jakhu, Kanupriya Jhunjhunwala and Lourdes Keever.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business. (Late items will be considered under the agenda item where they appear. New items will be dealt with at item 14 below).

There were no items of urgent business

None

None

To agree the minutes of the meeting on 25^th July as a correct record.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting on 25^th July were agreed as a correct record.

To receive and note the minutes of the following Scrutiny Panels and to approve any recommendations contained within:

·         Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel – 21 July 2022

·         Children and Young People’s Scrutiny Panel – 4 July 2022

·         Environment and Community Safety Scrutiny Panel – 30 June 2022

·         Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel – 28 June 2022

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the following Scrutiny Panels were noted and any recommendations contained within them were approved:

·         Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel – 21 July 2022

·         Children and Young People’s Scrutiny Panel – 4 July 2022

·         Environment and Community Safety Scrutiny Panel – 30 June 2022

·         Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel – 28 June 2022

To provide the Committee with an update on the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review into Fire Safety, which was carried out in 2019. The Committee previously received an update on the recommendations in October 2020.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee approved recommendations on Fire

Safety in High Rise blocks at its meeting on 25 March 2019 and Cabinet

provided a response at its meeting on 9 July 2019. A further update was

provided to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 5th October 2020. The Committee received a report which provided a further update on these recommendations. The report was introduced by Judith Page, Assistant Director of Housing Property Services. The Cabinet Member for Housing  Services, Private Renters and Planning was also present for this item. The following arose during the discussion of this report:

a.    The Committee sought reassurances about residents being able to report problems and the fact that the link on the Council’s website did not seem to work properly. Members noted that one of the main learning points from Grenfell was around residents being able to report concerns. The Committee questioned whether the Council had made it easy to report problems and how this was monitored. In response, officers acknowledged that there was a degree of development required within the IT processes. It was suggested that there had likely been some teething problems as different systems had been transferred over from HfH to the Council. Officers agreed to work with the relevant admin team to ensure that an email inbox was in place for residents to report issues. Members requested that reporting mechanisms also be advertised on the Council’s website. (Action: Judith Page).

b.    Officers advised that, as part of the relevant legislation, the pilot building safety case was being developed in Kenneth Rollins House and this pilot would be used for the development of building safety cases for other housing blocks. The Council was also required to develop a resident engagement plan for each block. In addition, the Council had approved funding for the recruitment of five building safety managers who would be responsible for specific high rise blocks. Officers acknowledged that this had not progressed as quickly as they would have liked, but to some extent this had been down to HfH coming back in house and the challenges faced from switching over. Officers advised that they were developing pipelines for residents to report issues and that site visits and walkabouts of estates were ongoing.

c.    In response to a follow-up question on timescales, officers advised that all high rise safety blocks under qualifying categories would need a building safety case in place by September 2023. The pilot in KR House would be completed in November. The Committee requested that officers come back to the Committee with a follow-up report on how the consultation pilot went and how this was being programmed into ensure that residents were able to report problems the wider programme of developing building safety cases. (Action: Judith Page).

d.    Members sought an update on the programme of intrusive fire risk assessments. In response, officers advised that they had reported these to elsewhere and that they could provide this to the Committee. The Committee requested that officers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

Verbal Update

The Committee undertook a verbal question and answer session with Cllr Carlin, Cabinet Member for Housing Services, Private Renters and Planning. The following arose as part of the discussion:

a.    The Committee questioned what the Council was doing to prosecute rogue landlords. In response, the Cabinet Member advised that the introduction of the additional licensing scheme would mean that the Council would be actively going into tenanted properties and carrying out inspections, rather than relying on tenants to make complaints. The Cabinet Member advised that in terms of process, once an enforcement notice was issued, the landlord would have  a specific amount of time to comply with that notice or the Council would then prosecute. The Cabinet Member highlighted the importance of proposed legislative changes to ban no-fault evictions.

b.    The Committee highlighted that it had previously requested that ward councillors be given access to fire safety risk assessments. It was noted that some of the smaller blocks did not have a risk assessment and the Committee sought clarification as to whether these blocks should have a risk assessment carried out. In response, officers agreed that they would undertake a manual exercise to check this and then come back to the Committee with a response. (Action: Judith Page).

c.    The Committee raised concerns about a lack of responses to residents when repairs were reported and suggested that, either housing manger posts were vacant following HfH coming in-house, or that residents did not know how to contact their housing managers. In response, the Cabinet Member acknowdged that each block should have a named housing manager and that she was happy to follow up with officers on the concerns raised. Yvonne agreed to email Cllr Bevan with the specifics (Action: Yvonne Denny). Cllr Carlin agreed to chase up the names of housing managers for each block.  (Action: Cllr Carlin).

d.    The Committee sought clarification about what support the Council offered to those who had been evicted, specifically in terms of the earlier point made around ending no-fault evictions. In response, the Cabinet Member advised that if tenants were evicted against their wishes, then there was specific legal process involved which would require a court order to be obtained. In most cases, residents could contact the Council’s housing needs team, The Cabinet Member advised that if it was a family, the Council could help to pay some of its rent arrears and that in the past the Council had been able to help families secure a tenancy elsewhere in the private sector. If someone was unlawfully evicted, then this would be an enforcement issue and the Council would look to put people in contact with organisations who could support them to take legal action. In relation to single adults, the Cabinet Member acknowledged that the help on offer was limited due to a shortage of temporary accommodation places and the fact that the private rents were very expensive.

e.    The Committee sought an update about where the Council had got to with the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

To provide the Committee with the Provisional Financial Outturn report for 2021/22, as was presented to Cabinet on 19 July 2022 (attached as Appendix 1).

The Committee received the 2021-22 Provisional Financial Outturn report, as presented to Cabinet on 19 July 2022. This set out the provisional outturn for 2021/22 for the General Fund, HRA, DSG and the Capital Programme compared to budget. It provided explanations of significant under/overspends and also included proposed transfers to/from reserves, revenue and capital carry forward requests, as well as details of any budget virements or adjustments. The report was introduced by Toyin Bamidele, Assistant Director of Finance as set out in the agenda pack at pages 91-130. The following arose during the discussion of the report:

a.    The Committee sought assurances around the £16m budget pressures within Adults and Childrens. Whilst acknowledging that these had been mitigated at year end, the Committee queried whether these pressures would continue into future years and how this would be mitigated in future years. The Panel questioned whether future savings would be required? In response, officers advised that the key pressure in these services was around Covid and the complexity of care needs. Officers set out that the MTFS budget planning process was underway and that they would be working with directors and services to ensure the true costs were captured, along with an agreed way forward on how these could be mitigated.

b.    In relation to the Dedicated Support Grant, the Committee sought clarification around how the overspend was reduced from £6.7m down to £3.7m and whether this involved  a reduction in services. In response, officers advised that this did not involve a reduction in services, instead it was mitigated through finding additional funding streams, such as grants. Officers agreed to provide a written response to this question. (Action: Toyin Bamidele).

c.    The Committee queried the slippage in demand mitigation projects within Adults and questioned whether this would require further savings to be made. In response, officers set out that Covid was the primary factor in the slippages, but that they were looking at this as part of the MTFS setting process. Officers confirmed alternative savings of the same value would need to be found for any undeliverable demand mitigation projects.

d.    The Committee sought clarification around the reasons for a £3.6m realignment of Parking and Highways budgets (virement), as set out on page 129 of the pack. Officers agreed to come back with a written response. (Action: Toyin Bamidele).

RESOLVED

That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee:

1. Noted that the figures in the 2021-22 Provisional Financial Outturn remain provisional until the conclusion of the statutory audit process which has been extended due to the C19 pandemic and other challenges faced by our external auditors mainly due to the impact of government delays in enacting legislation to restructure the NHS.
2. Noted that the C19 financial impact on the 2021-22 General Fund was offset by Government support.
3. Noted that non-C19 related pressures forecast during the year were mitigated by year end.
4. Noted that statutory comments are included in the original report to Cabinet.

The 2022-23 Quarter 1 Finance Update report was presented to Cabinet on 13 September 2022 and is provided to OSC to update the Committee on the forecast financial position for the Council as at Quarter 1.

The Committee received the 2022-23 Quarter One Finance Update report, as presented to Cabinet on 13 September 2022. This report set out the forecast financial position for the Council as at Quarter one. It focused on the significant budget variances including those arising as a result of the forecast non-achievement of approved MTFS savings and the impact on the Council’s agreed financial plans. The report underlines the impact that the wider economic conditions have had on the agreed budget. This was a key factor in the forecast overspend of £15.7m at Quarter One. The report was introduced by Toyin Bamidele, Assistant Director of Finance as set out in the agenda pack at pages 91-130. The following arose during the discussion of the report: The following arose during the discussion on this item:

a.       The Committee requested clarification about the overall forecasted overspend at Q1 and whether the report was saying that there were £10.1m of savings that could not be mitigated. In response, officers advised that not all of the undeliverable savings would require new savings, some would be slipped to future years but some would require alternative savings to be found. Finance officers were working with the services to maximise opportunities and to minimise risks. Officers were going through savings line by line to see if they were deliverable and to identify alternative savings if required. The Committee was advised that a future challenge would likely be around mooted spending cuts by central government.

b.       In response to a question around the Capital budget and £650k being removed from the libraries budget, officers agreed to come back with a written response on whether this would impact the existing library refurbishments programme. (Action: Toyin).

c.       Officers agreed to provide a written briefing around the safety valve programme. (Action: Toyin).

d.       The Committee questioned whether, in light of a forecast overspend of £1.2m in Housing Demand Temporary Accommodation, whether additional funding was being sought for this service. In response, officers advised that this would be looked at as part of the MTFS process. Officers set out that some additional funding may be required but that it would also be necessary to examine whether the service could be made more efficient.

RESOLVED

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee:

1. Noted the financial forecasts provided at Quarter One and the assumptions surrounding them.
2. Noted that Directors were seeking mitigating actions to bring down the current forecast overspends.
3. Noted that statutory comments are included in the original report to Cabinet.

Verbal update

The Committee received a verbal update from Cllr Chandwani, Cabinet Member for Tackling Inequality & Resident Services on the recommendations from the Fairness Commission. Jean Taylor, Head of Policy was also present for this agenda item. The key points of the verbal update were noted as:

• The Cabinet Member noted that the Fairness Commission was part of the 2018 manifesto, a dedicated panel was established and 32 recommendations were agreed as part of this.
• The Cabinet Member commented that she felt that the Fairness Commission did not tell the Council anything it did not already know. The system is unfair and the Council has some influence to tackle some of the drivers that manifest at a local level. The Cabinet Member commented that she did not feel it was possible to tackle the big systemic issues by doing what the Council would usually do, with a series of RAG rated spreadsheets.
• It was suggested that within the recommendations, key themes stood out, such as the need to change the way we engage with residents; a change in the attitude of the Council to its residents; and to essentially change the genes of the Council. The Fairness Commission highlighted a number of excluded groups and the organisation to change how it reached out to these groups and involved them in changes to their community.
• The Cabinet Member was concerned that one service became responsible for implementing the Fairness Commission, when it should be the responsibility of the whole Council.
• The Committee was advised that the Haringey Deal was the next step and that this would seek to take the key principles derived from the Commission forward, such as the need for co-production. It was suggested that in that sense, the Fairness Commission has served its purpose. The task now was to ensure that the Council made the system fairer, as far as it could within a local government context.

The following arose during the discussion of this item:

1. The Committee welcomed the drive for co-production but cautioned that there was probably a short window in which to embed this and to bring residents along on the journey. With that in mind, it was suggested that the Council needed to be clearer about what co-production meant and what support we were giving staff to implement this approach. In response, the Cabinet Member acknowledged these concerns and set out that she would like to move away from adopting the usual procedural approach. Rather, it was suggested, the Council should be getting the basics right of listening to people and of letting them know when their ideas were taken on board. It was suggested that letting residents know about the status of repairs was a basic expectation and shouldn’t require a terms of reference or policy document. The Committee commented that some form of process was still required to capture the Council’s approach to co-production and reassure residents of the approach being taken.
2. The Cabinet Member welcomed that the Haringey Deal was being driven by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

The Committee received a draft work plan for the OSC and the four scrutiny panels, along with the feedback from the Scrutiny Café event in September.

The Committee also received a tabled draft scoping document for its scrutiny review on violence against women and girls. Officers advised that the Chair and Vice-Chair had met with the Director of Public Health to agree how to take the review forwards and that it would focus on schools based provision and community based provision. The review would also be seeking to hear from relevant VCS organisations in Haringey.

The Chair of the Housing Panel put forward a motion, that the name of the Panel should be changed to the Housing, Planning and Development Scrutiny Panel to reflect the current service structure and Council’s changed priorities around Placemaking over regeneration. The motion was seconded by the Chair of the Adults Panel.

RESOLVED

     I.        That the draft work plans for OSC and the four scrutiny panels were agreed.

    II.        That the Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel’s name be changed to Housing, Planning and Development, with immediate effect.

N/A

·         28th November 2022

·         12th January 2023 (Your Council – budget proposals)

·         19th January 2023 (budget scrutiny)

·         30th March 2023

·

·         28th November 2022

·         12th January 2023 (Your Council – budget proposals)

·         19th January 2023 (budget scrutiny)

·         30th March 2023