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 lateness was received from Cllr Collet and Cllr Abela.

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.

The Panel noted that Item 8 on Stop and Search would be taken before Item 7 on the Youth Justice strategy.

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.

None.

To approve the minutes of the previous meeting.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting on 26^th June were agreed as a correct record.

Verbal Update.

The Panel received a verbal update in relation to a safeguarding project to look at Stop and Search, including a pilot programme to look at the safeguarding needs of children stopped and searched by police in Haringey. The update was provided by Bev Hendricks, AD for Safeguarding and Social Care. Ann Graham, Director of Children’s Services was present for this item. Cllr Brabazon, Cabinet Member for Children, Schools and Families was also present for this item. The following summarises the update that was provided to Members:

• The Project was initiated because of information relayed to the Director of Children’s Services (DCS) about children’s experiences in Haringey with Stop and Search. The information related to a child stopped and searched 12 times over a period of time and the fact that child was not referred for support. Since then, officers have spoken to a range of families and other relevant groups.
• From the above case it became clear that there was no requirement to refer the case to child welfare agencies unless the attending police officer thought that there was a safeguarding concern, based on a safeguarding criterion used by the police.
• The DCS then entered into a dialogue with the Borough Commander and it was agreed that a pilot project would be set up. Phase 1 of the project was an examination of 6 cases of children being stopped and searched, that were not referred on to the MASH following use of the police matrix, in order to see if there were safeguarding opportunities that had been missed.
• The 6 cases were examined against information held by other agencies largely Children’s Social Care and it was discovered that there were safeguarding concerns that could have been picked up. From the findings of this, there was further agreement to look at a larger sample of cases.
• The project required an information sharing agreement to be agreed with the Police which took a long time.
• Officers agreed that they wouldn’t publish the data before the police, partners to the pilot  were ready to share and it was hoped that this would form part of the police Children First strategy and that was the reason this information was being shared as a verbal update.
• A joint conference with the Police was being organised in Haringey on 12^th December 2023 where the findings of this work would be shared, and the police would set out their response.
• Phase 2 of the project involve an examination of a sample of 90 cases. Of those 90 cases:
  • 3 involved children who were Looked After Children in Haringey. But the authority was not informed of the stop and search as corporate parents.
  • 14 cases involved children from households with domestic abuse
  • 16 cases involved children with significant housing instability
  • Some of the children were known to the Haringey Learning Partnership and other young people had a range of needs including autism and SEND, ( special educational needs and disabilities). 
• Some of the key concerns that came  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

* Note - This report was updated for accuracy purposes and was

republished on 14 September.

The Panel received a report which set out the priorities within the statutory Youth Justice Plan for 2023-24. The report was introduced by Jackie, Difolco, Assistant Director: Early Help, Prevention and SEND, as set out in the agenda pack at pages 9-128. The Director of Children’s Services and the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Schools were also present for this item. The following arose during the discussion of this item:

a.    The Panel queried what preparations had been put in place in anticipation of an upcoming Ofsted inspection. In response, officers set out that an external provider had been commissioned to do a diagnostic assessment of the service. This involved looking at the service, talking to staff, speaking to the Board and reviewing a sample of our cases. This provided management with a good level of assurance, particularly around the impact on young people and around governance. The diagnostic highlighted the need for strengthened management oversight. Since then additional resources have been allocated to the Head of Service and the number of Team Managers had increased from two to three, with one team focused on prevention and the other two on court work.

b.    The Panel queried the ethnicity breakdown in the report and questioned why there was no separate category for Turkish/Kurdish people. In response, officers advised that they were restricted by the ethnicity codes that were allocated to nationally to each Youth Justice Board. However, the information given to the Youth Justice Board was broken down in more detail. It just was not reflected in the report as this was set  nationally.

c.    A Panel Member highlighted a recent piece of research carried out that went through the records of two million Children in Care, which found out that they were 33% more likely to end up in the criminal justice system. That number increased further for people from certain ethnic backgrounds. The Panel Member suggested that officers should be tracking this metric locally.  The Panel Member also highlighted the ever worsening state of young people’s prisons and commented that it was hard to see how you could rehabilitee a person in that environment.

*N.B. Clerk’s Note – the study referred to above is referenced in the following article:https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/sep/21/care-experienced-children-eight-times-more-likely-enter-youth-justice-system-england

d.    The Panel questioned what the factors were that had led to Haringey having the lowest reoffending rates in London. In response, officers set out that it was about the quality of interventions that were carried out by case managers. Haringey did not reduce staffing levels in this area during Covid and this had allowed the team to carry out better quality interventions. These interventions were evidence based and therapeutic and were informed by a trauma-led approach. This was partially do with good training for staff. The Director advised that that it was a difficult area to work in and that some of the more challenging cases were around people who were not know to authorities who suddenly came into contact with the youth Justice service at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The Panel received a report which provided information on the education, training and employment pathways available to young people post 16, with a focus on non-academic routes and information about the advice and guidance available to help young people make choices about their future career pathways. The report was introduced by Julie Khan, Employment & Skills Manager as set out in the agenda pack at pages 129 to 135. Ann Graham, Director of Children’s Services, Jackie Difolco, AD for Early Help, Prevention and SEND, and Cllr Zena Brabazon, Cabinet Member for Children, Families & Schools were also present for this agenda item. The following arose during the discussion of this:

a.    The Panel sought clarification about the number of internships available for young people. In response, officers confirmed that there were 12 apprenticeships available internally across the Council and that they were also looking for further apprenticeship opportunities across the borough, including in catering roles. There were 23 young people signed up for the next round and the Council was looking at providing 60 places over five years as minimum.

b.    The Panel provided feedback that the supported internships did not always reflect what students did at college and questioned how the Council was supporting creative roles such is in art or photography. In response, officers set out that there was a supported internship co-ordinator who matched young people with their area of study and that work was happening with providers to bring more of these opportunities forward. Officers set out that the supported internships were a bespoke programme working with sixth forms to match up the skills and interests of young people. Officers noted that this was a work in progress but that they tried to make sure the opportunities were as diverse as possible.

c.    The Panel sought clarification about the 2.1% of children who were not in education, employment of training (NEET) and how this compared with other boroughs. In response, officers advised that this was average across London but that this reflected steady progress from a position of Haringey being the worst performing borough on this metric. Officers also noted that performance against this measure had decreased due to an improvement in the number of children who were not known to the Council (down from 7% to 1.4%) which had increased the number of children who were NEET.

d.    Officers agreed to provide a written update on how schools were performing in relation to the Gatsby benchmarks on career guidance. (Action: Julie Khan).

e.    The Panel emphasised the role of networks for some young people and also emphasised the career opportunities that were available in the construction sector. In response, officers advised that there was a degree of leverage through development and S106 agreements in relation to stipulating a percentage of local labour and apprenticeship schemes. Officers also acknowledged the role of the construction sector and the fact that opportunities in this area were available through school based work placement schemes.

RESOLVED

Noted

RESOLVED

That the Panel considered its work plan for 2022-24, attached at Appendix A of the report, and whether any amendments were required.

To consider any items admitted at item 3 above.

N/A

·         13 November

·         4 January

·         20 February  

·         13 November

·         4 January

·         20 February