Agenda and minutes

Noted that the meeting was webcast.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Bull.

COUNCILLOR PIPPA CONNOR IN THE CHAIR

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 12 below).

None received.

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

Councillor Adje declared a personal interest in Item 7 - Budget Scrutiny – as he worked for London Fire, part of the GLA group.

a.         Deputations

Received a deputation on behalf of the Save Autism Services in Haringey (SASH) group, on the budget proposals to close day centres, given by Anna Nicholson.  Including:

·         The short term savings would lead to long term, higher social care costs as the changes and loss of day centres could result in people with autism and their carers requiring additional NHS services due to health conditions and deterioration of their mental health.

·         People with autism required routine and familiarity and may refuse to go out if the centres closed. Both people with autism and their carers would be further isolated from society.

·         Carers recruited through personal budgets may be untrained in dealing with autism.

·         The proposals did not include alternative provision for how the needs of people with complex needs would be met.

The Committee noted the deputation and Ms Nicholson agreed to send her concerns to Councillor Morton, Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing.

b.         Questions

            Received questions from Anne Gray including:

i.  How much the Council was spending on consultant fees?

     Response:

In response the Committee was reminded that details of consultant costs were routinely published as part of Staffing & Remuneration Committee documents.  At the end of quarter 3 there were 58 interims/ consultants employed within Haringey at an annual cost of approximately £5.6 million.

ii.  A request for further information on the reserves policy

and specifically why the Jobs Fund was needed now when it had not been previously required.

                 Response:

In previous years the Government had funded employment costs and it was important for the Council to continue to support employment and local businesses. Reserves will reduce by the end of this current financial  year.

iii. A request for further information on the schools reserve including: 

A) How much was held in the bank accounts of the four academy schools in Haringey and is that counted as part of this £10.9 million? 

B) Why had the schools reserve gone up by £1.5 million in the last year and what was this extra money needed for?

            Response:

Academy reserves were not included in the schools reserve, as they were responsible for their own funds.  Reserves had increased for a number of reasons but mainly due to the “fair deal for Haringey children” campaign which had secured an additional £7m for the Haringey Schools formula budgets, which had not been fully spent.

Written answers to questions b.i and b.ii above would be provided after the meeting.

Action: Kevin Bartle

To consider the Treasury Management Strategy Statement.

Received the Treasury Management Strategy Statement 2015/16 – 2017/18, introduced as laid out on pages 1-35 of the agenda pack by the Head of Finance – Treasury and Pensions, George Bruce. 

The Committee asked a number of questions, including:

a.         Whether ethical consideration (such as investment in environmentally friendly schemes) was given to investments or whether value for money was the main driver: It was responded that the three main priorities which drive investment were:

·         Security of funds

·         Money being available when required

·         Low interest rates

Ethical considerations were not a focus for Treasury Strategy, particularly as the Council’s balances were relatively low and the Council’s funds would mainly be used to pay off debt in future years. 

b.         Concerns were raised about the £5.8 million spent on consultants in this time of austerity. Haringey Chief Executive, Nick Walkley, expressed his own concern about the Council’s dependence on interim staff, who were employed to fill gaps in skills or when the Council needed specialist skills for short periods of time such as to improve the performance of specific services. Business cases for the use of the consultants had been previously provided in reports to Cabinet in addition to detailed, scrutinised reports to the Corporate Committee.

The Committee noted that the Council had invested in developing existing staff to deliver roles which would normally be delivered by consultants. In response to further questions: the budget already included some savings on consultant spending by individual departments, but no further savings, over and above those included in the Medium Term Financial Strategy to be approved by Cabinet in February, could be expected.

Figures would be provided for the number of posts currently being filled by interim consultants, including how many of these were in Children’s Services. It was explained that some of the planned 633 redundancies would be matched to individual posts currently filled by interim staff and it was hoped that this would significantly reduce the Council’s dependency on such staff. 

Action: Kevin Bartle and Jacquie McGeachie

Post meeting note

Details of the posts being fill by interim consultants

c.         In relation to why the Council was deferring long term borrowing when interest rates were so low, it was explained that there was a cost to long term borrowing for example: day to day borrowing from other local authorities would be at a low rate of c0.5% but other long term borrowing would be at c3.5%. It was believed that interest rates would remain low for 18-24 months and so it was not believed that a long term cost would arise from short term borrowing therefore some long term borrowing would take place alongside some short term borrowing strategies, as provided in the Treasury Management Strategy.

Resolved to agree the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Prudential Indicators for 2015/16 to 2017/18 and to recommend the same to full Council for approval. 

a.         Corporate Plan

To consider the Council’s Corporate Plan 2015-18, previously published as part of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee agenda pack on 18 December 2014 (and emailed to Members) and available using the following link to the Council’s website:

http://www.haringey.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/policies-and-strategies/building-stronger-haringey-together

b.         Budget Scrutiny Recommendations

To approve the final Budget recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Panels.

            TO FOLLOW

a.  Corporate Plan 2015-18

Committee members expressed disappointment in having not seen a summary feedback from the Corporate Plan consultation.  Officers emphasised that all the issues raised in the budget consultation, including the recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, would be published in a report to Cabinet to ensure that the decisions were fully informed. Initial consultation had taken place prior to the Corporate Plan being published in December 2014 (the responses of which had been made available) and subsequent consultation had taken place.  Timescales for consultation periods had prevented all consultation feedback from being made available. There would be a further phase of consultation once the budget had been approved and the Committee will have the opportunity to scrutinise further and ensure proper equalities impact assessments were taking place.

In relation to proposals in the Corporate Plan to close day centres a Member recognised the move towards empowering service users but emphasised the need to ensure equal services were made available. The Chief Executive shared concerns that the cuts would impact service users and explained that all local authorities were facing similar challenges and that it was not a risk free exercise although safeguarding was still a priority. 

Mary Langan, from the Learning Disability Partnership and Haringey Autism, questioned the quality and accuracy of the information provided to members of the public in the various consultation documents including:  

·      No mention that three out of four day centres would be closed.

·      No details had been made available about one quarter of the social workforce being cut under the proposals.

Responses to the two points above would be provided after the meeting.

Action: Deputy Chief Executive

·         Consultations held in November 2014 had not sought opinions on the cuts; only about how Haringey could be made stronger and disabled groups had not been included in the consultations.

In response, Zina Etheridge, Deputy Chief Executive, confirmed that there had been engagement relating to the broad themes in the Corporate Plan, not specific to the budget. Further consultation had taken place in relation to the budget proposals and once a clear decision on the budget had been taken there would be further consultation.

A Committee Member reiterated previous comments made in the deputation that proposals to close day centres could be detrimental to young people and at a further cost to the Local Authority.  Further comments from members of the public included that there were technical difficulties with submitting consultation comments online.  The Chief Executive acknowledged the concerns raised and invited members of the public to write to him with specific concerns about the consultation process.  It was noted that the Council had received more than 1,000 responses to the consultation, which had clearly set out the proposals.

The Committee was assured that there would be on-going consultation on  the individual budget areas once a clear decision on the proposals had been made by Cabinet.  The Committee was advised that the Council was bound by statutory legislation to ensure human rights legislation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

An opportunity to question the Cabinet Member for Resources and Culture, Councillor Jason Arthur, on his portfolio.

Received a brief introduction by the Cabinet Member for Resources and Culture, Councillor Jason Arthur, on his portfolio including that:

·         The Council was nearing the end of the budget process and consultation responses were being considered.

·         In March a report on the outcomes of the Libraries Review would be presented to Cabinet and would include outcomes for the Culture Strategy.

The Committee put a variety of questions to Councillor Arthur, the responses of which are recorded below:

a.         The budget consultation process had been intended to reach as many people as possible and people had successfully engaged.  Whilst it was not a perfect process the Council would reflect on feedback and the responses to the consultations.

b.         The Culture Strategy would recognise the key role of the Borough’s nine libraries in the community but would look at developing libraries as community hubs to include more self-services and arts and cultural provision.  This would include further consideration on the possible relocation of Muswell Hill library to improve access (or the idea of installing a lift in the building).  Councillor Arthur was clear in stating that the Council was committed to having nine libraries in the Borough and all options were still being considered in terms of improving accessibility and provision in libraries, complying with any building covenants and obtaining capital receipts.

c.         A member of the public, Michael Fitzpatrick, was permitted to ask a question on the risks of reduced funding, particularly in social care and for young people with autism.  Councillor Arthur recognised the Council’s responsibility to protect the most vulnerable people in society and many comments and views expressed in consultations had been taken on board when finalising the budget. Committee Members requested that further consultation continued.  He emphasised that due to the cuts in funding the Council was required to transform services in order to make savings. 

21:15 hrs – Councillor Arthur left the meeting

To receive a presentation on Corporate Performance.

Received the Powerpoint presentation (pages 37 – 59 in the agenda pack) introduced by the Chief Executive, Nick Walkley, highlighting performance and areas of focus.

In response to questions from the Committee it was noted that:

a.         Concerns were raised about people claiming Job Seekers Allowance (page 52) who missed appointments at the Job Centre Plus (JCP) for genuine reasons and had their benefits immediately stopped as a result.  In response it was noted that sustainability and strengthening the Council’s partnership with the JCP was key in ensuring staff/ advisors were better placed to deal with individual situations.

b.         Reasons for high unemployment included a lack of candidates applying for local apprenticeships and local jobs particularly in construction.  Haringey’s Job Brokerage Service worked with large employers such as Tottenham Hotspur Football Club, Sainsbury’s and Stansted Airport to ensure jobs went to local people.  Skilled local people were, however, dropping out of the employment process due to issues surrounding employability and work was being done to give these people the confidence to take on these jobs.

c.         In response to concerns about the lack of careers advice in schools, young people travelling outside of the Borough for further education and young people not being able to sustain employment it was explained that the Council worked mainly with secondary schools offering support in more focused careers advice and to ensure all options were made available to all young people.  Haringey had recently held a careers fayre at a primary school to encourage aspirations and ensure an understanding of the routes to those aspirations and the effectiveness of local institutions in the relevant fields.  Haringey Skills and Employment Board will oversee the work in these areas and will include schools, providers, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and other partners. 

d.         The Corporate Delivery Unit’s work on temporary accommodation (p.53) had looked at other boroughs’ practices and it was noted that all boroughs were challenged by long term homelessness and a lack of private sector housing. The Council was looking at the regeneration of specific areas into more affordable homes and was working with Homes for Haringey to utilise empty properties.

e.         The Chief Executive confirmed that fly-tipping was still a concern and recognised the difficulties in catching persistent offenders. An action plan was in place to target hotspots (Operation Clean Streets) and included managing the appearance of front gardens, which encouraged fly-tipping.

f.          In response to questions on areas for further focus:

·         Numbers for children on child protection plans often fluctuated and had risen across London. This Performance Indicator (PI) was closely related to other PIs and the Council monitored referral rates and police processes (which regularly impacted numbers) in order to understand the changes.

·         The Council social care team was working closely with the NHS social work team to deal with pressures to reduce the high numbers of delays to NHS transfers of care, which were proportionately higher in Haringey compared to social transfers than in other boroughs.  High  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

To receive and note the outline and the proposed process for development of the  Mental Health and Wellbeing Framework.

Received the report outlining the Mental Health and Wellbeing Framework, introduced by the Deputy Chief Executive, Zina Etheridge.  The draft Framework would be considered by the Adults and Children and Young People’s Scrutiny Panels on 18 March 2015 and comments would feed into the Health and Wellbeing Board.

Members made  the following observations:

a.         That the framework should be specific in recognising diversity and inequalities in mental health and the potential differences in expectations of different people.

b.         That consultation and engagement should be as wide as possible and should present all options.  The Deputy Chief Executive confirmed that the Council had worked with Haringey’s Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) to engage with service users in particular to understand their experiences but would liaise with the CCG about the possibility of extending the consultation period.

Action: Deputy Chief Executive

Post meeting note:

Senior officers considered the suggestion to extend consultation of the Mental Health and Wellbeing Framework beyond 20^th February.  The Framework was due to be approved by the Health and Wellbeing Board on 24^th March and if that deadline was not met, approval would need to be delayed until June when the Board meets next. Officers decided that this would be inconvenient and out of sync with the contracting round. The Council was, however, planning to engage extensively between now and the end of February 2015 with a range of stakeholders and residents and was involving HealthWatch and other voluntary organisations at in-depth focus groups to gather views of residents and carers. Furthermore, the Council had been engaging widely to develop this version of the Framework with a range of stakeholders and service users.    

Noted that Chairs of area committees would be formally invited to attend.

None received.

To note the minutes of the following Scrutiny Panel meetings:

a.  Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel – 3 November 2014

b.  Children and Young People’s Scrutiny Panel – 3 November 2014

c.   Environment and Community Safety Scrutiny Panel – 6 November 2014

d.  Housing and Regeneration Budget Scrutiny Panel – 10 December 2014

e.  Environment and Community Safety Budget Scrutiny Panel – 10 December 2014

f.    Adults and Health Budget Scrutiny Panel – 11 December 2014

g.  Children and Young People’s Budget Scrutiny Panel – 15 December 2014

The following Scrutiny Panel minutes were noted and approved as correct records subject to the amendments made to the recommendations as agreed in Item 7 above:

a.  Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel – 3 November 2014

b.  Children and Young People’s Scrutiny Panel – 3 November 2014

c.   Environment and Community Safety Scrutiny Panel – 6 November 2014

d.  Housing and Regeneration Budget Scrutiny Panel – 10 December 2014

e.  Environment and Community Safety Budget Scrutiny Panel – 10 December 2014

f.    Adults and Health Budget Scrutiny Panel – 11 December 2014

g.  Children and Young People’s Budget Scrutiny Panel – 15 December 2014

To approve the minutes of the Budget Overview & Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 18 December 2014.

Resolved that the minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 18 December 2014 be approved as a correct record subject to the removal of ‘Noted that the vice Chair expressed that she did not agree with this proposal” at Minute OSCO08 c.

The next meeting will be held on 26 March 2015

Noted that the next meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee would be held on 26 March 2015.