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’.

Apologies for absence were received from  Cllr Rice.

Apologies for lateness were received from Ian Sygrave.

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.

In relation to Item 7, Cllr Culverwell declared that he was Vice-Chair of the Friends of Finsbury Park.

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

None.

To approve the minutes of the previous meeting on 18^th December.

The Panel chased responses to outstanding actions,  and requested that they be notified of responses to actions in advance of the meeting in future. (Clerk).

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting on 18^th December be agreed as correct record on the meeting.

The Panel received a presentation on the Green Flag award scheme in Haringey, which had previously been given as part of an all member briefing session on 11^th February. The presentation was introduced by David Murray, AD for Environment and Neighbourhoods. The following arose from the discussion of the report:

a.    The Panel sought clarification about the changes that were proposed to the inspection regime of Parks. In response, officers advised that they were moving away from a Group Judging process which involved unannounced mystery shopping inspections, and back to a full planned inspection regime. Officers commented that they had received an unprecedented level of scrutiny through the Keep Britain Tidy (KBT) inspection regime and that that this had created a very large workload, in terms of responding to individual inspections and defects, as well as arranging follow-up visits. The new inspection regime would involve full inspections of every Green Flag park and was more challenging, but it would allow officers to plan inspections rather than respond reactively to the timings and programme of another organisation. Officers set out that the new regime would be collaborative and would allow a process of dialogue and challenge with the judges during inspections.

b.    The Panel requested an update on the flooding in Albert Rec. In response, officers acknowledge that this had been a long standing issue but emphasised that this was due to the topography of the area in question. Officers advised that hydrology reports had been undertaken and that there was a project underway to try and address the problem. Officers cautioned that resolving the problem would involve external fund raising and would likely run into 2020.

c.    The Panel enquired about proposals to engender behaviour change in parks and what this would involve. In response, the Cabinet Member advised that she wanted residents and service users to feel proud of their local park and to take ownership of it. Particularly in terms of disposing of their own litter but also through engagement on activities and events. A key part of this would involve engagement with stakeholder groups and getting them to be part of process of driving change.

d.    In response to this, the Panel cautioned that behaviour change alone could only achieve so much and members emphasised the need to also increase enforcement and inspections in the parks to ensure compliance. The Panel cautioned that greater involvement of friends groups and volunteers was not a replacement for parks officers and enforcement activities. Officers acknowledged these concerns and set out that they were not expecting friends groups to police parks. The Panel was advised that there had not been any budget savings made in the parks service in latest MTFS and there had been a firm commitment to maintain spending levels in parks. Officers emphasised that in the existing financial climate, with further reductions to local government budgets in the pipeline, the only way to increase the budget for parks was through additional income streams such as events.

e.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

*Clerk’s note – The Panel agreed to amend the order of the agenda so that Item 10 on Reducing the Criminalisation of Children would be taken immediately following Item 7. The minutes reflect the order that the items were discussed during the meeting rather than the order that they were listed on the published agenda.*

The Panel received a report from the AD for Early Help and Prevention which was set out in the agenda pack at pages 51-83. The report provided an update on work that was taking place to reduce the criminalisation of young people that was taking place in partnership with a range of stakeholders. The following arose from the discussion of the report:

a.    The Panel noted that the authority had a key role to play in identification and early intervention with young people through the Haringey Youth Justice Service. Out of Court disposals provided an opportunity for community panels to work with young people and their families to put in place a package of support to prevent further entrenchment within the criminal justice system.

b.    In response to a query, officers advised that there was always a tension in the system between punishing offenders and improving outcomes for a cohort of young people who are often vulnerable and may have undergone significant trauma during their lives.

c.    Officers offered to invite panel members to a youth justice session where they could explore a range of examples of some of the work undertaken around restorative justice. (Action: Gill Gibson).

d.    In response to a question around staffing levels in 2010 compared to present, officers agreed to come back with this information. (Action: Gill Gibson).

e.    The Panel sought to highlight the correlation between school exclusions and criminal behaviour and gang membership in later life. The Panel enquired what was being done around exclusions and how this linked into the Young People at Risk Strategy. Concerns were also raised by the Panel around a failure of schools to change behaviours and lack of awareness of different cultural factors. In response, officers acknowledged the issue of unconscious bias within the criminal justice system. Officers advised that there was an exclusions review underway and that work was also being done around alternative provision. Officers advised that they had a role in challenging schools around exclusions but that it was ultimately up to the schools. The Panel was advised that schools had been engaged with around the development of the Young People at Risk strategy.

f.     In response to a question, officers advised that an analysis done of the 20 most prolific offenders showed a significant amount of trauma from a young age, such as domestic violence. Those traumas went unaddressed throughout their childhood and the system responded to negative behaviour through exclusions which ultimately led to the further rejection of an already vulnerable young person. Discussions with police around adopting a trauma informed approved had been positive.

g.    In response to further questions, officers acknowledged the role of language  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

The Panel received a presentation which provided an overview of crime performance data in Haringey. The Panel also received a report for noting which set out performance information for Community Safety and also provided a response to queries raised at the previous panel meeting in relation to; the Gangs Matrix, incidents of serious youth violence in Haringey since December 2018, building community capacity space for young people and funding streams to address serious youth violence. The following arose from the discussion of the presentation and accompanying report:

a.    In relation to proposals for building community capacity space for young people, the Panel noted that discussions had taken place with a number of venues, regarding the potential to run youth projects from their premises. A number of sites were identified where suitable community organisations could be linked together. The organisations being linked as part of phase one, were from the Haringey Community Gold consortium. To avoid any potential post code issues, the report set out that further suitable locations would be identified from across the borough.

b.    The Panel suggested that it would also be useful to see the data presented as per head of the population as well as a percentage increase. The Panel also sought clarification around the locations used in the data, in response officers advised that this was generally ward specific data but that sometimes this was drilled down to a specific hot spot location such as Turnpike Lane. Officers commented that this was a MOPAC dataset and that the methodology used was set by the Mayor’s Office. Officers agreed to clarify whether faith, homophobic and islamophobic hate crime were all subsets of the wider racist and religious hate crime. (Action: Eubert Malcolm).

c.    Panel members acknowledged the positive improvements around gun and knife crime. The Panel sought clarification around why homophobic hate crime was not a bigger priority for the Borough. In response, officers advised that although this was a serious issue, priority had been given to violent offences, which caused a significant degree of harm to the public, as well as high volume offences.

d.    In response to a question about the reasons behind the rise in hate crime, officers advised that this likely reflected an increase in both the number of incidents taking place as well as an increased level of reporting. The data used was reflective of 3^rd party reporting for hate crime i.e. through religious and community leaders.

e.    The Panel raised concerns with the figures that showed an increase in figures for domestic abuse. In response, officers advised that the data showed that there was degree of clustering of incidents in areas of highest housing density, however some of the increase may also be explained by increased levels of reporting. Officers also cautioned that the data could be slightly misleading as all of the high clustering was in the east of the borough, which could give a misleading impression that domestic violence was not prevalent in the west  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58.

The Panel received a short introduction from the Cabinet Member for Communities, Safety and Engagement followed by a question and answer session on issues within his portfolio. The following key points were noted in relation to the discussion of this item.

a.    The Cabinet Member advised that schools had been badly affected by budget cuts and that this had a particularly acute impact on pastoral care, including after-school clubs. The Cabinet Member contended that this had played a part in some of the wider issues discussed such as surge of exclusions and some of the other factors affecting the criminalisation of children. The Panel noted that criminal gangs were the main perpetrators of the criminalisation of children and the Cabinet Member suggested that the scale of the problem was not widely understood, with County Lines criminal activities worth around £500m a year. The Cabinet Member advised that he was looking to set up a round-table seminar with key partners on the issue of criminalisation and agreed to invite panel members to the meeting. (Action: Cllr Mark Blake).

b.    The Committee requested that a separate meeting be established to go through the Council’s Youth at Risk Strategy in detail. (Action: Chair/Clerk).

c.    The Committee sought assurance about what activities were being undertaken at a local level, particularly given that the Council had just agreed its Youth and Risk Strategy. In response, the Cabinet Member advised that the administration was looking to establish a hub in Wood Green which would include the involvement of a detached youth work team as part of the Haringey Community Gold programme. The Cabinet Member also emphasised the role of partners working in specific areas and localities. £100k had been ring-fenced for the retention of the summer clubs programme from last year. There were also a number of lessons learnt from that process, including working with Fusion to reduce entry costs. Conversations had also taken place with HfH around what more could be done on estates. The Cabinet Member emphasised that a lot of the detail was being pulled together and that further progress would be made once the detached youth work team was in place.

d.    In response to further questions, officers advised that the Youth at Risk Strategy was a ten year strategy with a four year action plan and included a public health approach to work right across the system. Officers commented that it was a co-produced strategy that had been developed in conjunction with young people, practitioners and parents. Officers acknowledged that one of the key outcomes from discussions with the community was a lack of trust in institutions and that one of the responses required was to be better at signposting services to the community. The Panel was advised that the Young Londoners Fund would see 2000 people go through the system over a three year period and was awarded to Haringey in refection of the strength of some of the proposals outlined.

e.    The Cabinet Member advised that he would come  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

The Panel received a cover report and a copy of the Panel’s work programme for 2018-20 for approval.

The Panel requested that an item be added to a future meeting to discuss the Active cycling and Walking Plan, which was part of the Transport Strategy. Members also requested to receive an update in relation to the Crouch End  Liveable Neighbourhood Strategy. (Action: Clerk).

RESOLVED

     I.        The Panel noted the work programme for the Scrutiny Panel as per Appendix A of the report and agreed the amendments.

    II.        The Panel feedback comments on the scrutiny process for 2018/19 for the Chair to take forward at the ‘scrutiny stocktake’ meeting being held in early April.

To consider any items admitted at item 3 above.

N/A

8^th April 2019

The next meeting was noted as 8^th April.