Agenda and minutes

Due to a public disturbance, the start of the meeting was delayed until 9pm.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Adje, Alexandra, Diakides, and Schmitz.

See Minutes 84 & 90.

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/orif 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.

The Chief Executive advised of the following advance notice of declarations of interests:

Councillor Davies declared a personal interest in Items 12 & 13 as he was an employee of the housing charity – Shelter, and his partner was a Chair of Governors at a Primary School in Haringey, and a prejudicial interest in Item 16 Motion T as he was employee of the housing charity – Shelter.

Councillors Reith and Winskill declared personal interests in Item 13 as Haringey Leaseholders.

Councillor Strang declared a prejudicial interest in Item 16 Motion R as an Employee of Transport for London.

Councillor Engert declared a prejudicial interest in Item 16 Motion R as a Board Member of London Travel Watch which came under the Greater London Assembly.

Councillors Adamou, Basu, Brabazon ,Egan, Engert, Griffith, Jenks, Khan, Meehan, Peacock, Rice, Scott, Stanton, Vanier and Waters declared an interest in Item 12 as they were Freedom Pass Holders. 

Members to whom this applies must make a declaration if they are present at any part of the meeting and must not vote on any matter relating to the budget.  It is not sufficient for such members to refrain from voting or to absent themselves from the chamber for particular parts of the meeting. Failure to make a relevant declaration constitutes a criminal offence.

Members were reminded of the need to consider whether they needed to make a declaration in accordance with Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 in relation to unpaid community charge or council tax liability which was two months or more outstanding.

No such declarations were made.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 17 January 2011 be signed as a true record.

Item not considered

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Claire Kober, gave the following “State of the Borough” address:

Mr Mayor, the state of the borough is typically an occasion to reflect on the successes of the past year, and consider the opportunities for the one ahead and how together as ‘one borough’ we will grow.

But I approach this year’s address lacking the positivity that typically marks the occasion. That is not to say that we have lost our way or forgotten our vision but rather that the scale of the challenges before us clouds almost everything we are striving for.

Earlier this week I was thinking about my speech this evening and pulled out the previous two state of the borough addresses I have made. What struck me was the things that I’d trumpeted on previous occasions, things that we could rightly be proud of:

The Decent Homes programme - £200 million pounds of investment in our housing stock, giving tenants the dignity that comes from a refurbished home. More than new kitchens, bathrooms, windows and roofs, the programme gave families a renewed sense of optimism in the circumstances and futures.

And what of the Decent Homes programme today? Before Christmas the Tory led coalition government announced at 75 per cent reduction in the programme. Nothing short of decimation. And despite the hard work of our officers, which has seen Haringey receive the highest allocation in London, our allocation is reduced by £50 million pounds – 25 per cent of the value of the entire Haringey programme – in the next two years alone. As ward councillors we all know how vital these works are, and our tenants have been promised that they will go ahead. They have been badly let down by this government.

Last year I spoke with pride of the Future Jobs Fund bringing 221 real jobs to the borough – for young people struggling to get a foothold on the employment ladder and those who had been unemployed for more than six months. Over the last year I’ve met tens of Future Jobs Fund workers – in the council, and in the community. Each of them has been doing valuable work, making a real contribution while in many cases gaining back the self confidence that can be badly knocked when you’re out of the job market.

But in a move that echoes previous Tory administrations, the government has deemed the programme to be unaffordable. They believe, as they always have done, that unemployment is a price worth paying.

The result? One million young people out of work. The utter waste of human talent. And the economic bankruptcy of an approach that says it’s preferable to have young people on the dole queue than in work, paying taxes. Nothing short of a national scandal.

I also spoke about the brilliant success of our schools in driving up pupil achievement, closing the national attainment gap and doing so in buildings that were being transformed as part of £212 million  ...  view the full minutes text for item 81.

The Chief Executive reported proposals to re-organise the top three tiers of staff within the Council, as detailed in the circulated report entitled “Rethinking Haringey”.

The Chief Executive advised that resulting from the re-organisation it would  be necessary to reallocate some of the officer delegated powers so that they reflect the new structure, which would require express authorisation to effect the change. A "Reallocation Schedule" would be prepared for sign off and it was therefore suggested that an additional recommendation be added to the report to effect this, as follows:

3.3"That, arising from the adoption of these recommendations, (i) Members note that the Leader will approve, with respect to "executive-side" functions, a schedule reallocating all existing powers delegated to officers to be added to Appendix E to the Council's Constitution and (ii) Members agree that the Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer be delegated authority to approve the same schedule with respect to "non-executive-side" functions."

Councillor Kober moved the resolution as set out below and it was:

RESOLVED

1. That the proposals attached at appendix one of the report to restructure the top three tiers of Council staff be noted, and that subject to any significant amendments arising from consultation, that the proposals be implemented.
   
   
2. That the consultation with staff taking place during February 2011be noted and that should any amendments other than minor administrative changes arise, that it be agreed that General Purposes Committee consider and approve the staffing structure.
   
   
3. That, arising from the adoption of resolutions (i) and (ii), that it be noted that the Leader will approve, with respect to "executive-side" functions a schedule reallocating all existing powers delegated to officers to be added to Appendix E to the Council's Constitution and that authority be delegated to the Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer to approve the same schedule with respect to "non-executive-side" functions.

There were no matters to consider.

The Mayor agreed to admit the report as urgent business. The report could not be circulated earlier as information was awaited from Party Groups. The report was urgent to permit changes to be made to outside body memberships.

RESOLVED

That appointments to outside bodies as set out in the attached Appendix 1 be approved.

There were three deputations to address the meeting.

The first deputation was received from Dave Morris of Haringey Alliance for Public Services.

Members asked questions of the deputation and received responses thereto.

The Leader of the Council responded to the deputation.

The second deputation was received from Symeon Brown  - Save Haringey Youth Centres.

Members asked questions of the deputation and received responses thereto.

Councillor Reith, Cabinet Member for Children’s Services responded to the deputation.

The third deputation was received from Funmi Abari - Haringey Youth Council.

Members asked questions of the deputation and received responses thereto.

Councillor Reith, Cabinet Member for Children’s Services responded to the deputation.

The Mayor thanked the deputations for attending.

The meeting agreed to suspend Council Procedure Rule 7 to permit the meeting to continue beyond 10pm, due to the earlier disruption and consequential late start.

a)     Cabinet – Reports 7 & 8 – 2010/11.

b)     General Purposes Committee – Reports 3 & 4 – 2010/11.

A.  Cabinet Reports 7 and 8 - 2010/11

Councillor Kober introduced Cabinet Reports 7 and 8- 2010/11 – Medium Term Financial Planning 2011/12 to 2013/14, and moved the recommendations contained therein,noting the earlier debate on the ‘state of the borough’. Councillor Goldberg seconded.

Councillor Gorrie, seconded by Councillor Wilson moved the following 5 budget amendments:

BUDGET AMENDMENT 1

Action on Crime

The Council’s budget consultation showed that crime was the biggest concern among local residents. The Labour budget proposes cuts to anti-crime initiatives such as funding for police overtime used to tackle high priority targets and local crime fighting projects. The Labour budget cuts funding for Metropolitan Police cover in Haringey’s parks and volunteers for British Trust for Conservation Volunteers. Overall these come to £400,000.

Liberal Democrats consider action on crime to be a priority and therefore propose reversing Labour’s cuts to the front-line community safety budget. Liberal Democrats would use £40,000 of this budget to maintain the Neighbourhood Watch Co-ordinator post in Haringey.

We propose that the balance of the investment should be spent priorities set by area committees in partnership with the local Police.

Revenue cost:         £400,000

To fund this action on crime we would challenge officers to deliver a further 4% saving on management costs in a full year. The annual cost of senior managers, on salaries over £50,000, is more than £20million per year. This proposal would save £800,000 in a full year, £400,000 in a part year

Management revenue saving        £400,000

BUDGET AMENDMENT 2

Investing in our young people

In a borough such as Haringey youth services are vital and much-valued by our young people and families. Labour plans a disproportionate 75% cut in this budget for these services.

Liberal Democrats would reverse £900,000 of the cuts proposed by Labour.

This investment will be paid for by improvements in our fostering service and reductions in spending on IT. 

It is well known that outcomes for children in foster care are better if they are placed close to their home. Haringey Council has relied on expensive out-of-borough agency foster placements which cost twice the amount of a Council foster placement. Liberal Democrats believe that a £300,000 first year investment in the fostering service would reduce the need to rely on expensive foster agencies would improve the outcomes for our vulnerable children could deliver gross savings of £700,000.

We accept this will be a challenge but we feel it is one worth setting given the service benefits it could achieve. 

Haringey currently spends £16.5million a year on running its IT. Labour is proposing less than a 6% real cut to this budget. Liberal Democrats believe that youth services are a greater priority than corporate IT and would take out further £500,000 from the IT budget.

                                                                                                Cost              Saving

                                          Youth Service revenue cost     £900,000

                                          Foster care revenue cost          £300,000

                                          Foster care revenue saving                              £700,000

                                          IT revenue savings                                             £500,000

                                     Total                                      £1,200,000    £1,200,000

BUDGET AMENDMENT 3

Action on the local economy and jobs

Long-term unemployment remains a major problem in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.

Councillor Goldberg moved the budget report and it was:

RESOLVED:

1.                   That  the earlier debate on the ‘state of the borough’ and the proposed budget package agreed by Cabinet on 8 February 2011 be noted.

2.                   That approval be given to the Medium Term Financial Plan to           March 2014 as attached in Appendices 1 and 2 of the report.

3.                   That the  final housing rent subsidy determination be noted and the proposed Housing Revenue Account budget and average rent increase of £5.36 per week (6.5%) be agreed.

4.                   That the Greater London Authority precept be noted.

5.                   That the reserves policy attached at appendix 3 of the report be agreed.

6.                   That the level of un-earmarked general fund reserves of £10.5 million and specific and other reserves as set out in Appendix 4.1 be approved.

7.                   That the budget scrutiny recommendations made by the Overview  and Scrutiny Committee, and the responses of the Cabinet as set   out in Appendix 12 to the Cabinet report of 8 February 2011 be noted.

8.                   That the budget resolution in the specified format as set out in the attached appendix 5 of the report and the consequent freeze in council tax be agreed.

9.                   That the revised Treasury Management Strategy Statement attached at appendix 6 of the report be agreed.

Item not considered

ORAL QUESTION 1 - TO THE CABINET MEMBER FOR CHILDREN’S SERVICESFROM COUNCILLOR  PEACOCK:

Will the cabinet member comment on the Prime Minister’s assertion that the Tory-led government has not cut funding to Sure Start children’s centres?

ORAL QUESTION 2 – TO THE LEADERFROM COUNCILLOR WINSKILL:

Considering the recent public statements from Tottenham Hotspur FC saying that they will not stay at White Hart Lane even if they are not successful in their bid for the Olympic stadium, should the Leader or any of her predecessors have done anything different in the handling of the Spurs application?

ORAL QUESTION 3 - TO THE CABINET MEMBER FINANCE AND SUSTAINABILITY FROM COUNCILLOR KHAN:

Can the cabinet member provide an update on the government’s assistance to Councils in capitalising redundancy costs?

ORAL QUESTION 4 - TO THE LEADER FROM COUNCILLOR ENGERT:

What meetings have Council members or officers had with Tottenham Hotspur FC officials since 26^th Jan 2011?

ORAL QUESTION 5 –TO THE CABINET MEMBER FOR PLANNING AND REGENERATION FROM COUNCILLOR EJIOFOR:

Can the cabinet member say more about the council’s work to assist local people access affordable credit?

ORAL QUESTION 6 – TO THE CABINET MEMBER FOR FINANCE AND SUSTAINABILITY FROM COUNCILLOR REID:

Please provide details on whether the Council and or Newlyn Plc have been forced to concede and or forced to make compensation or refund payments as a result of complaints received from residents about "phantom visits” by bailiffs.

ORAL QUESTION 7 - TO THE CABINET MEMBER FOR NEIGHBOURHOODS FROM COUNCILLOR BROWNE:

What plans does Haringey have to improve air quality in the borough?

ORAL QUESTION 8 - TO THE CABINET MEMBER FOR PLANNING AND REGENERATION FROM COUNCILLOR ALEXANDER:

With the loss of council apprenticeships how is the council going to help tackle youth unemployment in the borough?

Item not considered

Motion R (2010/11)

Councillor Goldberg has given notice that he will move in the following terms:

Sustainable Transport

·        Cuts of £1.7bn to London’s bus services and £16m cut to London Underground.

·        Boris Johnson’s decision to axe plans to make London Underground step free and close 400 ticket offices across the capital.

·        Under Tory Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, bus fares have already increased by 20% last year, with further planned Tube and bus fares increases of approximately 7%.

·        The Coalition’s decision to impose revenue savings of 21% to the Department of Transport, 28% cuts to TFL budgets, reduction of the bus subsidy by 20% and cuts of local government resource grants by 28%.

·        The scrapping of the Western Congestion Charge resulting in a Transport for London revenue loss of £55 million per annum

·        The low car ownership in the east of borough, and the subsequent importance of public transport

·        The successful completion of Labour’s manifesto pledge to establish a Sustainable Transport Commission.

·        The Labour manifesto commitment to continue educational and awareness raising work on sustainable transport.

·        Ongoing work to extend the successful car club, to reduce private car use in the borough.

This Council Believes:

·        That cuts to transport funding do not represent a “soft cut” and severely undermine our capacity to tackle climate change.

·        Increased costs of public transport will place residents under greater financial strain.

·        Reducing private car usage should continue to be a priority.

·        Income from the Western Congestion Charge could have been invested in services or used to keep bus and tube fares down

This Council Resolves:

• To lobby the Tory Mayor of London, and Coalition Ministers to reconsider these plans.
• To continue to work towards our goal of reducing carbon emissions in spite of swingeing cuts to Local Government funding.

Motion S (2010/11)

Councillor Gorriehas given notice that he will move in the following terms:

Fair Votes Motion

This Council supports moves to change our parliamentary voting system, which will see Haringey’s Members of Parliament elected under a fairer system. 

Council calls on the Head of Electoral Services to take steps to promote participation in the Referendum.

Motion T (2010/11)

Councillor Gorriehas given notice that he will move in the following terms:

Rogue Landlord Motion

This Council notes:

• A recent survey by the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) showing that of those officers working on housing enforcement in the private rented sector, nine out of ten had encountered landlords engaging in harassment or illegal eviction, and 78% had dealt with landlords who persistently refuse to maintain their property to a safe condition
• It is only a minority of private landlords that are threatening and abusive to their tenants
• The damage rogue landlords can have on vulnerable tenants and the wider community
• The lack of protection for tenants if they make a complaint against a landlord
• Local authorities can serve an improvement notice or prohibition order where housing conditions fall below an acceptable standard. If the landlord fails to comply they can be  ...  view the full agenda text for item 91.

Due to the hourMotions R, S, T (2010/11) were not considered.