Agenda and 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.

The Chair referred Members present to agenda Item 1 as shown on the agenda in respect of filming at this meeting, and Members noted the information contained therein’.

To note any apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence.

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 as noted below).

There were no items of Urgent Business.

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.

None.

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

The Panel received two deputations, one from Nazarella Scianguetta, which covered a broad range of issues relating to disability access to housing and the issues faced by impaired residents when navigating the housing system. The other deputation was received from Paul Burnham on behalf of Defend Council Housing. This deputation related to the HRA Business Plan agenda item and raised a number of questions around the use of London Affordable Rent models and why rent increases were not part of the public consultation on the next year’s budget proposals.

Ms Scianguetta introduced the first deputation. The following is a summary of the key points of the deputation:

• Ms Scianguetta asked Scrutiny to use the social model of disability when reviewing these policies. This meant looking at how the Council’s systems created barriers for disabled people, and the removal of those barriers would enable everyone to access services equally. Ms Scianguetta advised that she had nine points that would improve disability access in housing.
• Accessibility of accommodation – It was suggested that too many council homes remained inaccessible and that minor adaptations were not enough. What was required was purpose built homes, built around a particular person’s needs.
• Reforming the process of how somebody accesses services. It was posited that the current process was a mess, with confusing forms, inaccessible online portals, and very long waiting times. It was suggested that the process needed to be simplified, so that people were not left behind simply because of bureaucratic inaccessibility.
• Support services and communication – The need for advice and support services to be accessible to all. Information should be written in plain english and available in a format that everyone could access. It was put forward that staff should be trained to understand disability and that those with complex needs should have a single point of contact.
• Anti-deformation and stigma reduction. The Panel heard that discrimination and negative attitudes persisted in Haringey. There was a need for public education and an easy to engage with complaints process, in order to stamp out bias. Every resident deserved to be afforded respect and dignity.
• Co-production and design – Policies for those with disabilities that were made without their direct input were doomed to failure. It was suggested that disabled residents most be involved in the co-design, delivery and reviewing of housing services. Their lived experience was a valuable resource.
• Investment in accessible housing supply – Without proper funding, accessible homes were not possible. This was true both in terms of building new homes and adapting existing ones in order to meet current accessibility standards.
• Improving standards of temporary accommodation. When housing people in temporary accommodation, it was crucial that the housing was suitable and that people were not being put in homes that didn’t meet their needs.
• The need for transparency and accountability- It was commented that residents needed to know how long they would have to wait and be informed of how decisions were made. The Council should publish waiting times and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 278.

To approve the minutes of the previous meeting. 

The Panel sought clarification about the previous minutes and the assertion that historically, Haringey had around 200 new lets in a year, but this number had increased significantly to around 750. The Cabinet Member clarified that there were 739 new lets last year and that there were 240 in the year before that (2023/24).

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the previous meeting on 17 November were agreed as a correct record.

Verbal update.

The Panel received a verbal update from the Cabinet Member for Placemaking and Local Economy, Cllr Ruth Gordon, followed by a question and answer session on matters pertaining to her portfolio. By way of an introduction, Cllr Gordon commented that the last time she gave an update on her portfolio to the Panel she outlined how the strategy for developing Tottenham and Wood Green had been developed as the over-arching strategic framework for a range of placemaking projects, and following extensive consultation with the community and local stakeholders. The Cabinet Member advised that since then, the team had been implementing the projects that sat underneath this framework, such as:

Tottenham

• The opening of the Bruce Grove toilet block and the removal of that building from the heritage’s at-risk register.
• The restoration of the Art-Deco frontage at St Mark’s Church.
• The Chapel Stones project in North Tottenham, which involved a group of artists working with young people to design a mural.
• A partnership project with Youth Employability in Northumberland Park, providing employment support for 16-24 year olds.
• The launch of a new market at Seven Sisters, including the re-introduction of the Latin American Market.

Wood Green

• Completion of the Eat Wood Green project which involved a newcommunity-led food growing and education space at Wood Green library.
• Penstock Tunnel had reopened following refurbishment and improved drainage and lighting.
• The launch of the Business Forum
• Improvements made to Turnpike Lane
• The completion of projects at Wood Green Common, including tree planting with local school children.

It was noted that progress had also been made with bigger schemes, such as High Road West, Selby Urban Village and Broadwater Farm.

The following arose in relation to this agenda item:

1. A member of the Panel raised concerns in relation to the Local Plan consultation seemingly proposing that the library provision at Tottenham Green would be replaced with housing and the fact that this seemed to undermine the Council’s manifesto commitment to maintaining all nine libraries. In response, the Cabinet Member commented that the Local Plan sat under Cllr Williams’ portfolio. Cllr Gordon provided assurances that there had been no change of strategy, and that the site allocation for this location had been in place for a long time. The Panel was advised that there were no current plans to develop this site, and that the Council had a vested interest in maintaining the existing leisure and library facilities on this site.
2. The Panel welcomed the reopening of Seven Sisters Market and queried the fact that only 25% of the whole building was being used. Members questioned what the plans were for the remaining 75% of the site. In response, the Cabinet Member advised that the Council did not own or manage the market. Places for London owned the site. Cllr Gordon advised that she had held positive discussions on how the site would be taken forward with Places for London and the traders, and that these discussions were ongoing.
3. The Chair commented that the market  ...  view the full minutes text for item 280.

A set of Key Performance Indicators relating to the Housing Service. For noting.

The Panel received a set of slides which provided an update on arrange of Key Performance Indicators relating to the Housing Service, as set out in the agenda pack at pages 23-48. The Interim Director of Housing, Rachel Sharpe, was present for this item, along with the Corporate Director of Adults, Housing and Health and Paul McCabe, Head or Repairs and Maintenance. The Cabinet Member for Housing and Planning was also present for this item.  The following arose as part of the discussion of this item:

1. The Panel raised concerns about asbestos checks and feedback from residents that these checks were not being carried out. In response, officers advised that they were updating and migrating the database used for recording the register of communal asbestos checks. It was acknowledged  that this had had an impact on the performance figures, as an asbestos check had to be carried out before repairs could be done, as part of the relevant health and safety requirements.
2. The Panel queried whether the void figures in the presentation included HCBS properties. In response, officers advise that the figures related to general needs housing voids and sheltered housing voids. HCBS properties were not included. The Panel requested that future KPI updates include the number of void properties in the HCBS as well as general needs and sheltered housing.  (Action: Robbie Erbmann).
3. The Panel requested that the March Panel meeting include a short, focused agenda item on Legal Disrepair claims. (Action: Clerk).

RESOLVED

Noted

The report sets out the Council’s financial position at Quarter 2 of the 2025/26 financial year.

The Panel received a report which set out the Council’s financial position at Q2 of the 2025/2026 financial year. The report was originally published as part of the agenda papers to Cabinet on 9^th December 2025. The report was included in the published agenda pack at pages 49-104. The following arose in discussion of this item:

1. The Panel sought clarification about the report seemingly indicating that significant improvements had been made in relation to Housing Benefit overpayments. In response, the Chair commented that this sat under Cllr Chandwani’s portfolio and under OSC’s remit. It was commented that OSC recently received an update on this, and that the challenge related to not receiving full benefit reimbursement from DWP for supported accommodation. There were also long running issues arising from the migration of housing benefit to Universal Credit. OSC made a recommendation to support the Council in seeking full reimbursement from the DWP.
2. The Chair queried why the in-year savings target was RAG rated as green, given that £101k of a £3.4m overall savings target had been delivered. In response, the Corporate Director of Adults, Housing & Health advised that the delivery of savings were always anticipated to be backloaded within the financial year. There were a number of things that came into play in the later parts of the year, including rent convergency which went live in September. The majority of the delivery within the acquisitions programme was also due to be delivered in the latter half of the financial year. The Corporate Director reiterated that the in-year savings were expected to be delivered by year end.
3. In relation to the HRA capital forecasts for 2025/26, the Panel queried why most of these were RAG rated amber/red for time. In response, Cllr Williams advised that this was due to delays with the implementation of the partnering contract. Officers advised that the Section 20 consultation had been completed and that they would be engaging with contractors in January, with work expected to begin in April.
4. The Panel noted that the underspend in the HRA capital delivery programme was historically much bigger than in the General Fund and queried whether a failure to spend capital funding in a given year meant that funding was lost. In response, Cllr Williams advised that nothing was lost and that the works would be reprofiled to the following year. The Cabinet Member advised that  a lot of the delays stemmed from the Building Safety Regulator and the backlog of approvals from that body. Officers provided assurances that spend had been reprofiled in order to meet the 100% decency target by 2028.
5. In response to a question about reductions in HRA spending and how this would be monitored, the Cabinet Member commented that the re-profiling of budgets was a continuous journey, in order to ensure that projects could be delivered.
6. The Chair welcomed the progress made to date in reductions in the prevention and outflow of temporary accommodation numbers.

RESOLVED

That the Panel noted the contents of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 282.

To receive and make recommendations on the Housing Revenue Account Business Plan and Budget 2026/27.

The Panel received the Housing Revenue Account Business Plan and Budget 2026/27 report. Every year, the Council sets a business plan for its Housing Revenue Account (HRA). This business plan considers projected income and expenditure over a 10 and 30-year period. The report provided an update on the aims and ambitions across the medium and long term and proposals for the 2026/27 budget which were due to be presented at Council in March 2026 for approval. The report was introduced by Kaycee Ikegwu, Head of Finance, as set out in the agenda pack at pages 105 – 128. The cover report was included in the additional papers agenda pack. Sara Sutton, Corporate Director of Adults, Health & Housing was present for this item, along with Rachel Sharpe, Director of Housing, and Robbie Erbmann, Delivery Director. Cllr Sarah Williams, Cabinet Member for Housing and Planning was also present. The following arose as part of the discussion of this agenda item:

a.    The Panel sought clarification around revenue contributions to capital and the plan to deliver an £8m surplus. The Chair noted that the surplus was forecast at £0.65m next year and £3.8m over the MTFS period. In response, officers clarified that the surplus target was an internal ambition that service set itself in relation to revenue to capital. This was done a few years ago, in relation to the level of risk that was being carried with the significant investment into existing stock and new homes, and determination that it was prudent to build in that level of revenue contribution to capital. Since then, a number of factors had made this increasingly difficult to achieve, in particular rising interest costs.

b.    In response to a follow up question, officers advised that the current business plan was a worst case scenario and that it was hoped an improved position would be reported in the final plan reported to Council in May. There were a number of things that had not been factored into this version, such as rent convergence as the service was waiting for government guidance to be released in January. Discussions were also being progressed with the GLA about covering interest costs in the construction period. It was envisaged that this would also  improve the current position. Officers were also looking at implementing efficiencies within the service to improve the revenue costs to capital. 

c.     The Chair sought clarification that by the end of the MTFS, £76m a year from the HRA would be spent on capital financing costs, which roughly equated to 30% of the overall budget being spent on servicing debt arising from the investment into existing stock and building new homes. In response, officers acknowledged that this was the case and that any major investment, on the scale that was being done in Haringey, would see increasing debt repayment costs. Officers advised that rental income would also increase as a result, and that years 7 onwards of the plan showed a significant surplus being generated from the HRA.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 283.

To note the work programme.

RESOLVED

That the Panel noted the work programme and agreed any amendments.

To consider any items admitted at item 3 above.

N/A

9^th March 2026

9^th March 2026.