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 agenda Item 1 as shown on the agenda in respect of filming at this meeting, and Members noted the information contained therein’.

There were no apologies for absence.

The Chair advised that there was one new item of Urgent Business, around the revised Statement of Gambling Policy, which would be taken at Item 14. The Committee was required to consider the Statement of Gambling Policy as a Budget and Policy Framework document, as per Part 4 Section E Paragraph 2.1 of the Council’s Constitution. Consideration of the report at this meeting was required in order to fit in with the wider decision making timetable for Cabinet and Full Council.

None.

None.

To agree the minutes of the meeting on 2^nd October.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting on 2^nd October be agreed as a correct record of the meeting.

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

Adults and Health – 9^th September 2018

Children and Young People – 6^th September 2018

Environment and Community Safety – 13^th September 2018

Housing and Regeneration Panel – 17^th September 2018

The Chair requested that the Panel Chairs pick up any outstanding actions arising from minutes. (Action: Panel Chairs).

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the following Scrutiny Panel meetings were noted:

Adults and Health – 9^th September 2018

Children and Young Peoples – 6^th September 2018

Environment and Community Safety – 13^th September 2018

Housing and Regeneration Panel – 17^th September 2018

The Committee received a presentation for noting on Local Business, Employment and Growth from Steve Carr, the Assistant Director for Economic Development and Growth. The following arose from the discussion of the presentation:

a.    The Committee commented that two-thirds of businesses were in Tottenham and enquired what was being done to ensure that there were similar opportunities and support mechanisms in other parts of the Borough. In response, officers acknowledged these concerns and suggested that major inward investment in a particular location was determined by a multiplicity of factors; including the availability of large sites and existing land use.

b.    In response to a question around the activities being undertaken, officers outlined a proposal for a joint undertaking between Haringey’s library service and the British Library to provide enterprise support across all of the Borough’s libraries. Officers agreed to provide more details on this proposal as it progressed. (Action: Steve Carr).

c.    In response to a question around micro-businesses and what was being done to encourage young people and women to set up businesses, officers advised that there was an entrepreneurship bursary scheme being run in conjunction with the University of Westminster to encourage minority ethnic businesses to come forward. Similarly, there were also mentoring opportunities available.

d.    The Committee raised concerns with the fact that the economic strategy was from 2015 and therefore out of date in some respects. In particular the Committee suggested that the new strategy needed to incorporate some form of worst case scenario planning in relation to Brexit.

e.    The Committee expressed a view that the Council should be doing everything it could through its role as a landlord in attracting small businesses and providing ongoing to support them. Officers acknowledged the key role that the Council could play and the levers available to it, including as part of its ongoing regeneration programme. Officers agreed to come back to the Committee with a briefing on how the Council supported local businesses. (Action: Steve Carr).

f.     In relation to question around the town centre strategy and the potential for different town centres to be in competition with one another, officers advised that they were pulling together information on capacity studies for town centres. Officers also advised that a number of training and development sessions were being pulled together for Members on how to make town centres more resilient.

g.    The Committee enquired about the role of town centre managers in bringing in expertise and networking opportunities. The Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning agreed to bring back a paper on town centre managers to a future Committee meeting. (Action: Helen Fisher).

h.    The Committee sought reassurance around what the Council could do to reduce red-tape around apprenticeships, particularly in terms of supporting the transition into a permanent role. Similarly, the Committee enquired what could be done to support pop-up businesses such as those at Blue House Yard. In response, officers advised that there were a number of pots of money available that the Council could apply  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

*Clerk’s note – The Chair advised that the agenda would be amended so that the performance report would be taken before the Budget Scrutiny Timetable report. The minutes follow the order in which items were taken at the meeting, rather than the order they were published on the agenda.*

The Committee received a performance report which set out performance against the outcomes and strategic priorities in the Corporate Plan 2015-18. Updates reflected the latest data available as at September 2018. The report was introduced by Charlotte Pomery, AD for Commissioning. The Chair suggested that Panel Chairs could pick up items specific to their area outside of the meeting. The following arose from the discussion of the presentation:

a.    The new Borough Plan was being developed and as part of that process there would be a new performance framework developed.

b.    The Committee raised concerns with the target for the number of affordable homes built and suggested that the vast majority related to shared ownership.

c.    The Committee also expressed concern with the number of young people supported into apprenticeships. The Committee commented that the reasons for underperformance seemed to suggest the young people were at fault and should instead reflect why the Council were unable to support them. In response, officers acknowledged these concerns and advised that the definitions were set in 2015 but would be revised as part of the new Borough Plan.

d.    The AD for Commissioning agreed to come back to the Committee with what constituted an acceptable level of litter. (Action: Charlotte Pomery).

e.    The Committee expressed concerns that the performance figures seemed to suggest that 20% of Council tenants lived in non-decent homes. The AD for Commissioning agreed to come back to the Committee with further details on this. (Action: Charlotte Pomery).

f.     In response to a question about how the numbers for rough sleepers were compiled, officers advised that surveys were undertaken of the number of people sleeping rough on a designated day. There was a count day scheduled for 28^th November.

g.    The Committee sought reassurance about how joined up services were, in relation to rough sleepers, on a pan-London basis. In response, officers advised that Haringey worked closely with Islington and the Police in and around Finsbury Park. In addition, Finsbury Park and Stroud Green was the first place chosen to host a ‘floating hub’ from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. This involved a two-week focused piece of work around rough sleepers. Officers commented that rough sleepers often had complex needs and that a significant number also had No Recourse to Public Funds, which made interventions more difficult.

h.    The Committee sought further information about the age of the first interaction of young people with the youth justice system and the reasons for this. The AD for Commissioning agreed to share the information from the recent Haringey Stat meeting around serious youth violence. (Action: Charlotte Pomery).

i.      The AD Commissioning advised that there was a Member briefing on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

The Committee received a report for noting which set out the timetable for review and agreement of budget/MTFS proposals for 2019/20 – 2023/24. The report was introduced by Jon Warlow, Director of Finance. The Director of Finance advised that he would circulate an amended timetable following the meeting as he had spotted a couple of errors in the version included in the agenda pack. (Action: Jon Warlow).

The Committee raised concerns with a lack of detail on savings proposals during last year’s budget scrutiny process and requested that the information provided to the Panels and the Committee include information around risk modelling and the impact of proposed savings on service delivery.  (Action: Jon Warlow).

Verbal Update.

The Committee received a short verbal update from the Cabinet Member for Finance, followed by a question and answer session. The following key points arose during the discussion:

a.    In response to a question, the Cabinet Member acknowledged that it was early days for the new administration but characterised Haringey as being ‘open for business’. The Committee was advised that there was more work to be done to ensure that the Capital Strategy was delivered so that the Council could invest in its high streets and its open spaces. The Cabinet Member acknowledged that there was a balance to be had when setting fees and charges to ensure that it did not deter businesses investing in the borough.

b.    In response to a question around the political direction of the new administration, the Cabinet Member advised that they were looking to adopt an invest to save outlook where it was feasible. In doing so, they were hoping to invest in service areas that may have been overlooked in recent years, given the financial challenges faced by local government.

c.    In response to a query around the impact of the Council Tax Reduction Scheme, officers advised that Council Tax had been frozen for nine years and this obviously had an impact on income levels. Haringey was now roughly in the middle of all London Boroughs for its Council Tax rates. Given a political desire to invest in services, the Cabinet Member suggested that he was not in favour of reducing Council Tax to levels such as those in Wandsworth.

d.    In response to a question, the Cabinet Member acknowledged that it was probably not feasible to improve all services across the Council, certainly in the short term. In the longer term, perhaps services could be improved by bringing a number of them back in-house.

e.    In respect of demands on services from a growing population, the Cabinet Member stated that there had been a fall in demand for reception school places which suggested that the population had plateaued in the immediate term. In terms of additional demands on services stemming from redevelopment, it was acknowledged that the Council was working to increase school places and GP services in high development areas. The Committee considered that the impact of Brexit was unknown and that this could have a significant impact on the population.

f.     In response to a question, the Cabinet Member acknowledged that a significant number of budget cuts in previous years were around Priority 2, particularly as it was the largest budget area. The Cabinet Member suggested that that the cash savings in the upcoming budget may not be as large, but that demand growth in this area had continued and that this would have a significant impact on the deliverability of future savings. Work was ongoing with officers to ensure that a balanced budget was set and implemented.

g.    The Committee sought reassurance that the budget setting process was being undertaken in conjunction with CCG colleagues, to ensure that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

The Committee received a progress report on the Scrutiny Review into Fire Safety in High Rise Blocks and was asked to consider potential interim findings and recommendations. The report was introduced by Rob Mack, Principal Scrutiny Officer. The Committee was advised that Tower Hamlets and Islington had undertaken similar reviews and made recommendations in a number of areas that the Committee may want to consider:

1. An ageing building control workforce and the need for more staff in this area.
2. The retrofitting of sprinklers.
3. Leaseholder fitting of fire doors.
4. Fire safety and how best to support vulnerable residents.
5. Publishing fire safety assessments for high risk buildings.
6. How best to communicate with residents, especially over the ‘stay put’ policy.
7. Processes for advancing recommendations from residents.
8. HMO’s and the fire safety risks involved.

The Committee agreed to undertake some further evidence gathering work in December. The Committee would also consider the recommendations of the Hackitt Report when they came out in January. Officers would send round dates for further evidence gathering sessions outside of the meeting. (Action: Rob Mack).

RESOLVED

1. That the report on progress and evidence received to date be noted; and
2. That the Committee considered potential interim findings and recommendations.

Adults and Health Panel Scrutiny Review scoping document on Day Opportunities – To Follow.

The Committee considered a report which sought approval of the work plans for 2018-20 for the Committee and the Panels. The report was introduced by Rob Mack, Principal Scrutiny Officer. The Committee noted that there were minor amendments to be made to the published document.

RESOLVED

1. That the work plans for the Committee and panels for 2018-20, including the scopes and terms of references for the reviews on the Wards Corner Regeneration and Day Opportunities, be approved; and

2. That further reports on progress with the work plans be submitted to each future meeting of the Committee.

The Committee received a report which set out the draft revised Statement of Gambling Policy. The report was introduced by the Lead Licensing Officer, Daliah Barrett. The Committee was advised that there was a requirement to review the Council’s Statement of Gambling Policy every three years. The current policy was adopted in January 2016 and was therefore due for review. The report sought comments from the Committee on the draft policy that was currently under public consultation. The following arose in discussion of the report:

1. In response to a question around ASB and whether the Council could rescind a licence, officers advised that there was a formal process in place to review a licence if there was evidence that a premises was not upholding the objectives of the Gambling Act 2005. The Lead Licencing Officer advised that the operators tended to be very proactive in reporting ASB, as it was detrimental to their business. The Committee was advised that there was a very active Bet Watch scheme in place in Tottenham.
2. The Committee enquired whether there was any way of asking for voluntary contributions from the betting operators to tackle ASB. In response, officers advised that there was no provision in the Act to allow the authority to ask for voluntary contributions. The betting industry did make voluntary contributions to GamCare schemes.
3. In response to a question, the Committee was advised that the Gambling Act did not allow the authority to take demand into consideration nor the number of existing premises in a particular location. Unlike the Licensing Act 2003, the Gambling Act 2005 did not allow ASB as a material consideration.
4. In response to a question about the number of licensing reviews undertaken, officers advised that, so far, they had never had to get to the stage of reviewing a licence. Instead, all problems had been resolved through mediation between officers and individual premises. In response to a follow up question, officers advised that there had been cases in other local authorities where licences had been revoked for issues such as drug dealing taking place on the premises.
5. In response to a question around problem gamblers, the Committee were advised that the industry used a self-exclusion process.
6. The Committee sought information around the impact of betting shops on homelessness. The Lead Licensing Officer agreed to raise the issue with the Association of Betting Shops and get back to OSC. (Action Daliah Barrett).
7. Officers agreed to circulate a previous Scrutiny Review undertaken around the clustering of Betting Shops to the Committee. (Action Rob Mack).

RESOLVED

The Committee reviewed the draft Statement of Gambling Policy and provided comments on the policy for recommendation onto the Cabinet and then Full Council for adoption.

14 January 2018

28 January 2018

25 March 2018