Agenda and minutes

Please note: This meeting may be filmed for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council's internet site - at the start of the meeting the Chair will confirm if all or part of the meeting is being filmed. The images and sound recording may be used for training purposes within the Council.

Generally the public seating areas are not filmed. However, 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 for webcasting and/or training purposes.

If you have any queries regarding this, please contact the Committee Clerk

at the meeting.

The meeting was webcast on the Council’s website.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Mallett.

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 below. New items of exempt business will be dealt with at item below).

There were no urgent items.

A member with a personal interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered must disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the interest becomes apparent.

A member with a personal interest in a matter also has a prejudicial interest in that matter if the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the member's judgment of the public interest and if this interest affects their financial position or the financial position of a person or body as described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct and/or if it relates to the determining of any approval, consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to them or any person or body described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct.

There were no declarations of interest in relation to items on the agenda.

To consider any requests received in accordance with Part 4, Section B, paragraph 29 of the Council’s constitution.

There were no such items.

Briefing and answers to questions from Councillor Canver, Cabinet Member for Enforcement and Safer Communities.

The Committee received a briefing and answers to questions from Councillor Canver, Cabinet Member for Enforcement and Safer Communities. 

The Committee noted the achievements highlighted by Councillor Canver including that 171 crack houses and 12 brothels had been closed, 126 families were on parenting programmes and vehicle crime had been reduced. 

The Committee questioned why, out of 13,2219 incidents of litter throwing and dumping, there had been only 119 prosecutions.  Robin Payne (Assistant Director of Enforcement) explained that a large number of incidents were not related to large-scale dumping or fly-tipping and it was important to ensure that any penalties were proportionate to the nature of the crime committed.  Anyone caught fly-tipping would be prosecuted but much of the reduction in dumping had been due to low-level activity such as the issuing of penalty notices.

During discussions about the new Street Enforcement Service arrangements the Committee questioned whether Safer Neighbourhood Team (SNT) officers were encouraged to report incidents of dumping or littering.  Councillor Canver informed Committee Members that SNT priorities were directed by the relevant Police Ward Panel and officers would not necessarily report every day low-level dumping unless there was a specific arrangement between the SNT manager and Council manager.  There were, however, joint protocols to deal with commercial dumping.  Mr Payne informed the Committee that the Police would not normally report low-level littering unless there was an opportunity to add value, however, they would never ignore an offence being committed and would always share information if it identified the source of a problem. 

The Committee agreed that a copy of the minute above would be sent to the Borough Commander, Dave Grant, to consider what the Police could do to help reduce litter and dumping in the borough.

Members of the public could call Enterprise to report dumps and fly-tipping. The number is 0208 885 7700.

The Committee requested that a short briefing about the new Street Enforcement Service arrangements be circulated to all Council Members.

The Committee asked how many of the 341 people found carrying knives were prosecuted and sentenced.  Jean Croot (Head of Community Safety) agreed to circulate a briefing note on the officer time and cost of getting this information from the courts.

The Committee asked how many of the 171 crack houses that had been closed down had been in Council-owned properties.  Officers agreed to provide this information. In response to the Committee’s concern about vulnerable residents becoming involved in surveillance Ms Croot explained that any residents or Council tenants involved were supported by the SNTs and/or victim support.                      

Committee members commented that the process of completing a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) was lengthy. The Chair asked for a briefing note to be circulated to Members explaining the CPO process.

The Committee asked how Transport Police were assisting local Police in dealing with anti-social behaviour from youths.  Councillor Canver explained that a Problem Solving Group had been established which brought Transport Police and parents (of the young people involved) together to discuss problems.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

Briefing and answers to questions from Councillor Bob Harris, Cabinet Member for Resources.

The Committee received a briefing and answers to questions from Councillor Harris, Cabinet Member for Resources.

In response to Councillor Butcher’s question (question no. 1) Stuart Young (Assistant Chief Executive People, Organisation & Development) explained that a number of sickness actions had been operating to improve numbers including monthly call-over meetings to ensure actions were on track so that Haringey could move into the upper quartile of London Boroughs in the Capital Ambition Team’s Employment Profile.

Mr Young agreed to provide  the Committee with information on the average cost of suspending an employee (pending investigation) and reasons for such long suspension periods.

Councillor Harris informed the Committee that whilst long term staff were preferred there were some cases where agency staff chose to work on a temporary basis and assured Members that quality was not affected by this.  Mr Young explained that the Council was working on reducing the 620 members of agency staff and agreed to provide Committee Members with a general breakdown of where agency staff were currently placed within the Council and their costs.

The Committee requested that the broad principles of the Council’s policy for property disposals and a list of property disposals for the past three years be circulated to Committee Members.

The Committee challenged the quality of the response to the question on Value for Money (advance question 25)  and requested further details of the “IT Services Value for Money Review” be circulated to Committee Members.

Councillor Newton requested a breakdown of the levels of capability, discipline and grievance (including sickness) procedures taken per department, and whether there was any correlation to stress absence.

Committee Members requested information on support available to local residents who were in Council Tax arrears and the checks that bailiffs were required to conduct before attending a property when acting on behalf of the Council.

Details of the Haringey Guarantee (an additional service to the job centre plus) would be circulated to Committee Members.

RESOLVED

That the briefing be noted.

To receive a report on the Council’s 3 year Financial Strategy.

The Committee received the Financial Planning – Budget Scrutiny report and noted the tabled advance questions and answers.  Gerald Almeroth, London Borough of Haringey’s Chief Financial Officer (CFO), introduced the report which detailed projects and business planning for the three year planning period.  Mr Almeroth highlighted the savings targets of 10% over 3 years from 2010/11 which would need to be made by conducting reviews of how services were delivered, teaming up with other boroughs and reducing back-office costs.

In response to comments that the current system of resource allocation understated Haringey’s needs, Committee Members requested that part of their annual Finance Training included working through the possibility of discussing the future levels of Government funding and the impact on Haringey.

RESOLVED

i.          That the budget scrutiny and associated timetable for the coming months, as set out in the report, be agreed.

ii.         That any further issues in respect of the financial strategy for the Cabinet be considered in the budget setting process.                                                      

To receive a report on the Quarterly Performance Management Exceptions.

The Committee received the Council’s Performance report for April – May 2009 (Period 1&2), introduced by Gerald Almeroth (Chief Financial Officer (CFO).  

Committee Members requested training on Performance Indicators and further information on the actual number of child protection cases which had been reviewed within required timescales (NI 67) and the actual number of children killed or seriously injured in road traffic accidents (NI 48).

In response to the Committee’s concerns that some targets had not been met Margaret Gallagher (LB Haringey Performance Manager) highlighted that Appendix 3 of the report detailed actions arising from targets not being met.

The Committee expressed concerns that the steep increase in demand for assistance to pay rent and council tax (NI 181) should have been foreseen and actioned quicker to improve performance. Mr Almeroth explained that the Housing Benefits team had recruited more staff and had anticipated 5% of additional claims but the actual rise in claims had been 15%; he assured the Committee that the backlog of claims was almost cleared.

Ms Parker (Director of Corporate Resources) informed the Committee that the back-log in benefit claims had a knock-on effect on Call Centre (CS3) performance as did the introduction of the “One Number”.  Ms Parker explained that mechanisms were in place to improve the Call Centre’s performance.

RESOLVED

i.          That the report and the progress being made against the Council’s priorities be noted.

ii.         That the budget changes (virements) set out in the report be noted.

To approve the Scrutiny Review report and recommendations of the Review.

The Committee received the report on the scrutiny review of Support to Young People at Risk of Substance Abuse, presented by Councillor Alexander, Chair of the Scrutiny Review Panel.

The Committee were informed that the Review Panel had concluded that the assessment process for young people at risk of substance abuse was robust and that all agencies were following similar processes and that schools with a high truancy rate should be targeted for early intervention.

In response to the Committee’s concerns about looked after children in the Borough, Jane Painter (LB Haringey Young People's Substance Misuse Commissioner) explained that looked-after-children in Haringey were screened annually from age 12 upward.  Last year, out of 271 looked after children screened, 21 required further intervention.

The Committee noted that young people using drugs were under-identified and referral numbers were low.  There was a national drug treatment monitoring service  but this only monitored people over the age of sixteen.  A specialist substance misuse treatment agency operated in Haringey which used a range of interventions, counselling being the most utilised. Whilst treatment had a positive impact there were difficulties retaining young people in treatment programmes. Ms Painter highlighted that formal screening methods were not suitable for children of a young age and that awareness of factors that may lead to substance misuse was required.  Officers agreed to circulate figures for and evidence of the range of intervention processes in place.

Ms Painter informed the Committee that young people often decided not to access specific treatments due to the stigma attached and because they did not want to consent to being included in national monitoring figures.   Jan Doust (Head of Children’s Network) informed members that she was not aware of specific schools being targeted by drug dealers.

The Committee noted that closer liaison with school Police officers and headteachers would improve identification of children involved in drugs and agreed that recommendation 3 be amended to suggest a number of secondary schools pilot a scheme to improve early identification of pupils at risk of substance abuse.  This would reduce any stigma attached to one specific school being used in the pilot.

The Committee requested details of Haringey’s position in comparison to other Local Authorities in the British Crime Survey Figures and the Council’s protocol regarding knives, which would be circulated to Committee Members. 

RESOLVED

i.          That training sessions on the Common Assessment Framework and around the Joint Area Review Action Plan be strengthened to include the early identification of substance misuse by children and young people, and the correct assessment processes such as training to include school governors.

ii.         That the  Overview and Scrutiny Committee receive a further report in Autumn 2009 on the delivery of the JAR plan, detailing the specific impact   on young people  for whom substance abuse may be an issue.

iii.        That the Panel strongly recommends the introduction of a pilot scheme in a number of secondary schools to improve early identification of pupils at risk of substance abuse with the Director of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

To consider the feasibility of a review on the paving over of front gardens.

The Committee received the report on the feasibility of a full scrutiny review into paving over front gardens, introduced by Martin Bradford, Scrutiny Officer. 

The Committee noted that there was considerable demand for the development of front gardens into off-street parking and the environmental concerns including the reduction in biodiversity, loss of vegetation and heightened risk of flooding.

The Committee expressed concerns about the safety aspects of cars driving over footpaths and larger cars which protruded onto pavements and agreed that officers should be invited to provide a more in depth report on Paving Over Front Gardens at the meeting on 23 November. 

RESOLVED

i.          That the contents of the report be noted.

ii          That a full scrutiny review not be commissioned at this time but that the service be asked to provide a more in depth report on Paving Over Front Gardens at the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting on 23 November 2009.

  To approve recommendations further to new Home Office guidance on the scrutiny of crime and disorder matters.

The Committee received the report on new Home Office guidance on the scrutiny of crime and disorder matters and the implementation of Sections 19 and 20 of the Police and Justice Act 2006 introduced by Trevor Cripps, Head of Scrutiny.

The Committee suggested that it receive regular reports from the Police and/or possibly an annual report from the Crime and Reduction Partnership on how their work linked into the Council’s partnership objectives, and policy matters.

RESOLVED

i.                    That the option to undertake the scrutiny of crime and disorder matters through the existing Committee be approved in principle, as explained  below:  

The new provisions contained in the Police and Justice Act 2006 mean that scrutiny of crime and disorder is now no longer a matter of choice but a requirement for local authorities.  It requires every local authority to have a committee with the power to review or scrutinise crime and disorder matters.  However, there is no requirement to alter existing committee structures.  The role can be undertaken by:

·        A dedicated crime and disorder overview and scrutiny committee; or

·        The main overview and scrutiny committee

ii.                  That the following be noted:

(a)   that recommendation (i) above will require an addition to the Committee’s terms of reference and procedure rules in the Council’s Constitution, as explained in below:

The terms of reference of the designated committee are intended to be to scrutinise the work of the Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP) and the partners who comprise it insofar as their activities relate to the partnership itself.  The role of the committee is to:

·        Consider Councillor Calls for Action (CCfA) that arise through the Council’s CCfA process.  Although there are separate provisions for community safety and other local government matters, local authorities are expected to ensure that their procedures for CCfAs are the same in order to minimise bureaucracy

·        Consider actions undertaken by the “responsible authorities” on the CDRP

·        Make reports or recommendations to the Cabinet or full Council where appropriate.

and

(b)   that a further report for this purpose will be submitted to the Constitution Review Working Group and full Council.

iii.                That a standing invitation be issued to the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) link member for Haringey to attend meetings of the Committee and specific engagement sought where it is considered that police authority input would be of particular benefit to the work of the Committee on crime and disorder matters.

iv.        That Haringey Community and Police Consultative Group (HCPCG) be invited to attend Committee meetings where community safety issues are being discussed and that consideration be given to co-opting a specific representative from HCPCG) onto relevant scrutiny reviews.

To approve the revised recommendations of the Recycling Review of Source Separated and Co-Mingled Collection Methods in Haringey.

The Committee received the report on Recycling – Source Separated and Co-mingled Collection methods in Haringey, which detailed modified recommendations of the Recycling Review as a result of expenditure issues.

RESOLVED

i.      That that the Council commission a report on commingled and source separation collection methods, including separate glass and paper            collection, as part of the procurement process for the new Waste Services Contract. The report should consider the costs and benefits, environmental impacts and carbon dioxide emissions of both collection systems. The report should be creative in its approach and explore and provide options that could reduce the need for additional vehicles and staff.

ii.         That a report is produced on the impact of the North London Waste Authority’s procurement process on Haringey, with regard to co-mingled and source separated collection methods.  The report should include analysis of the impact of a crash in the recyclate markets owing to the global economic crisis.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 29^th June 2009.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 29^th June 2009 be confirmed and signed.

There were no new items.