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’.

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).   

None.

None.

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 held on 8^th April.

The minutes of the meeting of the 8^th April were agreed as a correct record.

Verbal update

The Panel received a verbal update from the Cabinet Member for Communities and Engagement on his portfolio area. The following was noted in discussion of this item.

a.    The new Borough Commander for Enfield and Haringey was in place and the Cabinet Member advised that he was looking to set up an all Member briefing session with the Borough Commander in the autumn. The Cabinet Member advised that the Borough Commander had advised that one of her first tasks was to look at shift rosters with the aim of getting more officers on the streets and in the right places. The Cabinet Member also advised that he was seeking to have a detailed discussion with her on Stop and Search and better engagement around this issue.

b.    The Cabinet Member advised that the Community Safety summer programme was being finalised and a total of £120k internal funding had been allocated. The Cabinet Member advised that had had arranged 3 community meetings for July in Wood Green, Tottenham and Muswell Hill. In response to a question, the Cabinet Member advised that the meetings in Wood Green and Tottenham were follow up meetings from last year and Muswell Hill was in response to a recent fatal incident in the area. Cllr Culverwell agreed to speak to the Cabinet Member about holding a similar meeting in Stroud Green (Cllr Culverwell). 

c.    In response to questions regarding the budget for the portfolio area, the Cabinet Member advised that around 75-80% of the budget came from MOPAC and was not subject to the same pressures as internal funding. The Panel were advised that Haringey had done well in its funding settlement in recent years but some other boroughs had not fared so well. The Cabinet Member advised that there would of course be pressures on youth services and keeping the manifesto pledges, but he was hopeful on capital funding to provide a youth space.

d.    In response to a question, officers  assured the Panel that a joined-up approach would be adopted with key services in respect of the detached youth workers.

e.    In response to concerns around media reports of cuts to MOPAC funding officers assured the Panel that the money from the Mayor’s Fund was secured for 3 years. Officers were working with the Cabinet Member to look at longer-term funding but this was at a very early stage.

f.     In response to a question around what the criteria was for installing CCTV in a particular location, the Panel was advised that this was based on mapping of hotspot locations and was done on a case-by case basis. Officers advised that they were also investing in a number of relocatable CCTV cameras. The Chair requested an opportunity for Members to feed into the decision-making on CCTV locations given their knowledge of their respective wards. Officers agreed to consider how Members could best feed into CCTV locations. (Action: Eubert Malcolm).

g.    In respect of the cost of cameras, the Panel was advised that these  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

RESOLVED

     I.        That the Panel noted the terms of reference and protocol for the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

    II.        That the Panel noted the terms of reference/policy areas and membership for each Scrutiny Panel for 2019/20.

RESOLVED

     I.        That a representative from Haringey Association of Neighbourhood Watches be appointed as a non-voting co-opted Member of the Panel for the 2019/20 Municipal Year.

The Panel received a report which provided an introduction to the draft Community Safety Strategy 2019-23. The draft strategy was attached to the report. The Community Safety Strategy is constitutionally required to be considered by Overview and Scrutiny, which had delegated the task to the Environment and Community Safety Panel. The following was noted in discussion of the Strategy:

a.    The Panel expressed concern about Haringey having the lowest score in relation to public confidence in the Police of any of the 33 London Boroughs. The Panel sought clarification on why this might be the case. In response officers advised that confidence was a tricky issue, as it was based on perception as much as reality. The Cabinet Member commented that some of this was historic, however there were a number of anecdotes around the nature and quality of interactions between police officers and young people on the streets. The Cabinet Member acknowledged that they were at a low ebb but reassured the Panel that they were working to improve this.

b.    The Panel sought reassurance around the veracity of consultation and engagement with the community, given the relatively small sample size of 1900 used in the 2018 Residents Survey, which was referred to in the report. In response, officers advised that the surveying was carried out by a national polling company, BMG, who developed a representative sample of residents when undertaking this work. Officers advised that Panel that the consultation and engagement undertaken as part of the strategy was from a number of sources from across the borough, not just the Resident’s Survey. For example, the Godwin Lawson Foundation were involved in the development of the Youth at Risk Strategy, which sat underneath the Community Safety Strategy.

c.    The Chair asked whether Sophie Linton and Lib Peck had been engaged as part of this work. The Cabinet Member advised that they came in August and agreed to look into reinventing them back to Haringey for a follow-up meeting. The Chair requested to be informed of the dates of this meeting so that the Panel had an opportunity to be involved (Action: Cllr Blake/Eubert Malcolm).

d.    The Chair commented that a multi-agency approach was needed to improve confidence in policing and questioned the extent to which bodies such as the VRU at MOPAC had been engaged. Officers advised that officers from the Violence Reduction Unit had been to the Community Safety Partnership and officers had met with them on a number of other occasions. In addition, someone from the VRU had come and worked in Haringey for a few days. The VRU was using Haringey’s Youth at Risk Strategy as an exemplar. The AD for Stronger Communities agreed to circulate further information in relation to the VRU to the Panel (Action: Eubert Malcolm).

e.    The Panel advocated further consideration should be given to how best to communicate with ward panels and the community more widely.

f.     The Panel sought clarification around what role officers played in setting the MOPAC priorities  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The Panel received a report which provided an update regarding the Young People at Risk Strategy 2019-20 which was approved by Cabinet in March 2019. It set out the progress made in the delivery of commitments made in the strategy and the Young People at Risk Action Plan. The following was noted during the discussion of this report:

a.    In response to questions about the funding for this strategy, officers advised that the Council had been successful in securing a range of external funding. Haringey Community Gold involved funding of £500k per year for 3 years from the Mayor’s Office. There was also a £400k grant for the Community Parenting programme from MHCLG and £120k of internal funding for the Summer Programme. Officers also highlighted that there was also some additional funding for the youth space in Wood Green and the Libraries capital programme included some provision for youth spaces in libraries. In addition, Project Futures at Northumberland Park had also received £500k a year external funding. Officers advised that Haringey was viewed positively by external funding organisations as being able to deliver outcomes.

b.    The Panel queried the extent to which the Council was working with cultural organisations such as Bruce Castle to secure funding. Officers agreed to speak to Deborah Hedgecock to look at opportunities for submitting joint bids.  (Action: Hugh Smith).

c.    The Committee raised concerns around the issue of unconscious bias and how that was reflected in the report. In response, officers acknowledged the importance of this issue and advised that there was a BAME attainment group which was looking into this issue and seeing how schools could take this forward. In addition, it was also something that the Haringey Education Partnership were doing some work on.

d.    The Panel suggested that there were a number of issues for specific demographic groups that needed to be looked into further. For example, Turkish and Kurdish groups were significantly over represented in school exclusion figures. Officers acknowledged these concerns and assured the Panel that attainment issues were  being picked up across a number of different forums within the Council and partners.

e.    The Panel set out that a key issue was around providing support to pupils whose language was not English, especially at an early age.

RESOLVED

     I.        That the Panel noted the contents of this report for information.

RESOLVED

     I.        That the work programme was noted and any amendments were agreed

To consider any items admitted at item 3 above.

N/A

3^rd October.

The Panel noted the date of its next meeting on 3^rd October.