Agenda and draft minutes

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business.  Late items will be considered under the agenda items where they appear.  New items will be dealt with at item 8 below.

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.

Agreed: The Review Panel will also consider the implications of the new financial freedoms conferred with Foundation Trust status within the terms of reference

Agreed: With the above addition, the terms of reference were approved by the Panel.

To hear evidence from:

 Claire Panniker (Chief Executive) & Joe Harrison (Deputy Chief Executive)

Claire Panniker (Chief Executive) and Joe Harrison (Deputy Chief Executive) gave a presentation (attached) outlining the NMUH’s proposals for foundation Trust status and responded to questions raised by Members.  A summary of the main points to arise from this discussion is provided below.

Consultation process

·        It was noted that the NMUH is also due to consult with Overview & Scrutiny Committee at Enfield Council on the 27^th November 2007.  A copy of responses provided by NMUH to questions posed by Enfield OSC was circulated to members (attached).

·        In response to questions from the Panel, the NMUH indicated that it intended to distribute 25,000 copies of the consultation document within the Haringey and Enfield communities.  The expected response rate was difficult to predict.  Although the BEH Clinical Strategy consultation had a response rate of 2-3%, it was anticipated that the FT status consultation response would be lower as this did not directly concern changes to patient services.

·        NMUH stated that the consultation requirements for applications for Foundation Trust status concerned governance proposals for the Trust.  National policy objectives also state that all NHS Trusts are to become Foundation Trusts by end of 2008.  Consultation questions were thus focussed on those proposals for which the trust was able to respond.

Governance arrangements

·        The Panel were concerned as to how the views and opinions of the Membership would effectively be represented at Board level of the new Foundation Trust.  The Panel heard that the NMUH aims to recruit 5,000-10,000 people to the membership of the Foundation Trust from which representative Governors would be elected.  These 18 public Governors would form a majority on the Board of Governors, which itself would be able to appoint a majority of the Board of Directors (Chair & Non Execs).  The Board of Governors would be expected to engage and consult the Membership and the broader public.

·        In response to Panel questioning, the NMUH indicated that Board meetings would continue to be held in public once Foundation Trust status has been attained.

·        The Panel heard that the Board of Directors would have overall responsibility for day to day management, though the Board of Governors would have influence in the overall strategic direction of the Foundation Trust.  It is prescribed in the legislation that the Chairman of the Foundation Trust will chair both the Board of Directors and Board of Governors meetings.

Agreed: The NMUH was requested to provide an organisational chart of the new governance arrangements for the Foundation Trust (attached).

Partnerships

·        The Panel were concerned that Foundation Status might impact on partnership work in the local health economy as this would in effect take the NMUH out of NHS control.  The NMUH indicated that it would still forge close relationships with other health and social care providers, and noted that partner agencies would all be able to nominate Governors to the Board (of Governors).

Patient Experience

·        The Panel were keen to understand what impact Foundation Trust status would have on the experiences of patients using the NMUH.   The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To hear evidence from:

Maria Kane (Acting Chief Executive), Andrew Wright (Head of Business Development) & Katia Louka (Membership and Marketing Manager)

Maria Kane (Acting Chief Executive), Andrew Wright (Head of Business Development) and Katia Louka (Membership & Marketing Manager) gave a short presentation (attached) and responded to questions from the Panel.  A summary of the points within this discussion is provided below:

Consultation process

The Panel were keen to hear how the MHT would engage the diverse communities that live across the three boroughs. 

·        The MHT reported that the consultation document would be distributed in two formats; the full consultation document and a summarised version.  In total, 30,000 copies would be distributed.  A newsprint version of the consultation document has been produced and will be circulated too all homes across the locality.  Copies have also been distributed to all local libraries and general practices.

·        The Panel suggested that there was a danger of the public becoming consultation weary and inundated with requests to become Members of different local Foundation Trusts.  The MHT indicated that the public could indeed become members of any number of Foundation Trusts.  The MHT was working with the NMUH and the Whittington to develop a joint membership arrangement with these trusts.

Agreed: That Haringey local Area Assemblies be included within BEH MHT consultation programme for Foundation Trust status.

Governance arrangements

The Panel thanked the MHT for the clarity of new governance proposals within the consultation document. The Panel were concerned as to how the community would be represented at the executive level within the Foundation Trust.

·        The MHT proposals for the Members Council include a larger number of Governors than for other Foundation Trusts, this being to reflect the number of boroughs which the trust covers.

·        The MHT indicated that it has a long tradition of user and carer involvement in all aspects of service planning and delivery.  It was expected that this tradition would be expanded under new governance arrangements for the trust.  The MHT also noted that it had a good relationship with its Patient & Public Involvement Forum. 

·        The Panel were concerned at the MHT proposals to change the name of the trust to North London NHS Foundation Trust.  The MHT reported that it proposed to omit reference to mental health in its name to minimise service associated stigma.  The MHT also felt that ‘North London’ was more appropriate to signify the area in which its clients were resident.  The MHT indicated that this particular issue was one of the key consultation questions and agreed to provide specific feedback from the consultation to Overview & Scrutiny.

·        Members questioned the MHT on why there was just one public constituency within proposals for the Membership.  The MHT indicated that a distinct patient constituency for a mental health trust may deter people from applying, thus preferred the general option of one public constituency which would not be stigmatising.  The Panel suggested that it might be more appropriate to retain both public and patient constituencies to give people a choice.  The Panel indicated that it would like to receive feedback on this specific aspect of the consultation.

·        Representatives from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The Panel is due to receive written submissions from:

• Haringey TPCT (to follow – will be avialable on the 19^th November)

No submissions were received from Haringey TPCT.   It was noted that these responses would be distributed to Panel Members once received.

None.

To confirm the date of the next meeting at 2.00 p.m. on 12^th December 2007.

The date of the next meeting was confirmed as 2pm on Wednesday 12th December 2007 (Haringey Civic  - Committee Room 6).