Agenda and draft 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.

There were apologies for lateness from Councillor Makbule Gunes.

Apologies for absence were also received from Councillor Ruth Gordon, Cabinet Member for Placemaking and Local Economy.

None.

None.

None.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 14^th October 2024 were agreed as a correct record.

A discussion was held at the Housing, Planning & Development Scrutiny Panel regarding new policies related to housing demand and allocations. During the discussion, the Panel recommended a review of the housing register, as it had not been refreshed or people's circumstances checked for several years. It was suggested that the review be part of the allocations policy update. The panel also proposed offering in-person support for rebranding to assist those who found the online process challenging. The Panel then sought support from the main OSC to forward this recommendation to the Cabinet. The recommendation was for the Cabinet to consider contacting everyone on the housing register and reviewing the register to ensure the information was current and to assess if housing needs had changed over time.

RESOLVED:

A review of the housing register to be forwarded as a recommendation to Cabinet.

To consider a report which summarises the feedback, both positive and negative, that the council received between April 2023 and March 2024, and which also sets out how the organisation has implemented learning from this feedback.

It was reviewed how feedback had been used to improve processes and policies. However, there was some uncertainty about the specific mechanisms linking feedback to policy changes. One concern was whether there were systematic processes in place across all services to ensure feedback could lead to service improvements.

The response clarified that improvements and changes were often specific to individual complaints, with feedback driving some smaller, local changes or larger adjustments within services. The process of using feedback to drive change was described as more cultural, with an emphasis on listening to complaints and using them to identify improvements. Although there was no formal, unified feedback strategy yet, plans were in place to develop a more systematic approach, including new software to manage casework and capture learning.

Further discussion focused on how individual complaints were handled. For example, a complaint about poor communication with adult social care suppliers highlighted an issue that, while initially affecting one resident, pointed to a broader problem. This led to action being taken to prevent similar complaints in the future. The goal was to address the root cause, not just the individual issue.

The discussion also covered the top reasons for complaints, particularly poor service standards and failure to provide services. It was noted that these issues were particularly prevalent in housing services. Questions were raised about how the council would address these concerns and ensure improvements for residents. It was stated the approach was initially prescriptive, suggesting a rigid response to complaints, requiring triage, assessments, and extensive meetings. However, the aim was to shift the mindset so that complaints were not met with defensiveness but with active listening. In some cases, complaints were from a single resident, while others were issues that had been affecting multiple residents but hadn't been formally reported. When these complaints reached management, it was often unclear whether they were isolated incidents or symptoms of a larger problem.

As the issue was investigated further, it became clear that the problem could be addressed locally, without needing an extensive review process. This approach emphasized the importance of not dismissing complaints or thinking that solving the loudest complaint was sufficient. It was crucial to ensure that similar issues weren't affecting other residents, and proactive measures were put in place to prevent further complaints. Additionally, there was a recognition that if the adult social care team did nothing, more complaints would arise, creating a repetitive cycle. It was essential to continue advocating for residents and not be intimidated by the potential impact of addressing their concerns.

Proactive updates from Directors or Cabinet members were suggested, as communication gaps often left Councillors in the dark about ongoing issues. Councillors had expressed frustration about a lack of response or acknowledgment regarding member inquiries, only to later learn that the problem was due to understaffing or resource limitations. Understanding these situations helped Councillors convey the issues to residents, even if the situation was still frustrating.

Concerns were also raised about analysing trends and whether the Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67.

To consider and make recommendations to Cabinet on the draft budget

2025/26 and the Medium Term Financial Strategy 2025/30.

The Chair stated that, according to Haringey Council’s constitution, anything related to scrutinizing the annual budget needed to be chaired by a member of the opposition group. The chairing of the meeting was handed over to the Vice Chair, Councillor Connor.

The Chair referred to Appendix 1 on page 85, which outlined the 2025-2026 forecast budget pressures, focusing on overspending. It was noted that The Director of Finance had kindly agreed to skip straight to the appendices. The Chair then indicated that the discussion would focus on sections related to culture, strategy, engagement, and overview and scrutiny, with an exception for a specific item under environmental resident experience, which would be addressed later.

Appendix 1: Forecast Budget Pressures

Digital Services (Culture, Strategy & Engagement):

The digital services budget had shown an overspend of £454,000. There had also been additional budget impacts related to digital services throughout the budget discussion. The digital transformation had included planned savings of £200,000 for 2025-2026, followed by £2 million in 2026-2027. Additionally, there had been a capital allocation of £1.9 million for memory-related costs. The Chair had sought clarification on how these various budget items aligned with the overall digital services strategy and had looked to Jess Crowe, Director of Culture, Strategy & Engagement, for further explanation.It was explained the digital services team had been working to modernize and transform the department over the past year, with a focus on making it more structured and efficient. The aim had been to move from a service primarily managing contracts to one that could develop in-house systems and programs. This transformation was necessary because previous efforts had failed to fully analyse the service, leading to redundant packages being procured across different departments.

The budget pressure for digital services was forecasted at £545,000, with the need for savings amounting to £2 million in 2026-27. In 2025-26, the target savings were set at £200,000. Despite this, an overspend was already anticipated. Jess Crowe explained that the pressures were mainly due to a major restructuring in digital services, including redundancy costs. Additional challenges stemmed from the incomplete digital transformation, which had yet to be fully implemented due to a lack of in-house expertise. However, the team had begun addressing these issues by hiring the necessary personnel and establishing systems to better track savings.

A roadmap was being developed to outline future savings targets, including potential reductions in staffing and savings on printing and postage. Individual roadmaps for different services, such as digital access for adults and children, and further automation in various services, were also being worked on.

Additionally, ongoing investments were required to maintain essential IT infrastructure, particularly in cybersecurity and licensing, which presented a pressure for the next year. These infrastructure investments were necessary to ensure the council remained secure while continuing its digital transformation. The complexities of the digital service strategy were reflected in various sections of the budget.

Concerns were raised about ongoing pressures related to technological updates, particularly cybersecurity, and the potential for new pressures in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

Verbal update.

This item was deferred to the next meeting.

·         12 December 2024

·         20 January 2025 (Budget)

·         27 March 2025

·         20^th Jan 2025 (7.00pm)

·         27^th Mar 2025 (7.00pm)