Agenda and draft 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 Helena Kania.

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.

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 Members’ Register of 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 interest are

defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Cllr Pippa Connor declared an interest by virtue of her membership of the Royal College of Nursing.

Cllr Pippa Connor declared an interest by virtue of her sister working as a GP in Tottenham.

Cllr Opoku placed on record that she worked closely with the NCL ICB in a professional capacity.

Cllr das Neves declared an interest as a member of the governing board of the North London NHS Foundation Trust.

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

A deputation was received from Nazarella Scianguetta and a group of residents on the subject of disabled accessibility and public toilets. It was noted that the applicants for the deputation had been sent details of the new draft Public Toilets Strategy & Action Plan which had been presented to the Health & Wellbeing Board in September 2025. This document was expected to be presented to the Cabinet for approval in February 2026.

In introducing the deputation, Nazarella Scianguetta explained that she was attending the meeting to advocate for those living with disabilities and impairments in Haringey and made the following points:

• That the availability of accessible public toilets was not a luxury but a basic human right essential to the dignity, independence and inclusion of people with disabilities and impairments.
• That the social model of disability should be used when looking at how the Council’s policies impacted on people with disabilities and impairments. Therefore, when public toilets were not accessible, it was not the impairment that excluded people but the environment and the policies that failed to accommodate everyone.
• Only 40% of public toilets in Haringey were fully accessible, with the remaining 60% lacking basic facilities such as step-free access and grab rails.
• As a consequence of this, people with disabilities and impairments in Haringey were forced to plan outings around the availability of accessible public toilets or to avoid some public spaces altogether. People impacted included elderly residents and families with autistic children.
• The Council had a particular responsibility to ensure that leaseholders to buildings that it owned provided accessible public toilets. This should include active monitoring and enforcement.
• The Council should also emphasise the importance of businesses to meet legal obligations on accessible public toilets in relation to buildings that the Council does not own.

Cllr das Neves, Cabinet Member for Health, Social Care & Wellbeing, responded to the deputation, commenting that the new draft Public Toilets Strategy & Action Plan had been co-produced with a campaign group called Loos for Haringey who also worked on the Toilets Strategy for London. As part of the preparation of the draft strategy, there had been engagement with a range of groups and a public survey. She said that the observations from the deputation would be fed into the co-production work with Loos for Haringey and that there would be a further opportunity for public comment when the draft strategy was put to Cabinet in early 2026. Cllr das Neves added that there were three ‘Changing Places’ accessible toilets in the Borough and the aspiration was to increase the number of these.

Members of the Panel then asked questions about the presentation from the deputation:

• Cllr O’Donovan asked about the community toilet scheme which involved private businesses such as cafes and restaurants allowing non-customers to use their toilets. Nazarella Scianguetta responded that the disabled and impaired community had lost trust in service providers to allow them to use their facilities.
• Cllr Connor asked what influence the Council had on this issue as landlords of leasehold  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

To approve the minutes of the previous meeting.

The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as an accurate record.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 13^th November 2025 be approved as an accurate record.

To consider the annual report of the Haringey Safeguarding Adults Board for 2024/25.

Natalie Cowland, Independent Chair of the Haringey Safeguarding Adults Board (HSAB), introduced the Board’s annual report for 2024/25 by highlighting some key points:

• A Person in a Position of Trust (PIPOT) framework had been introduced which had resulted in a number of cases being reported and responded to.
• The approach to Missing Persons had been reviewed.
• The Board’s strategic priorities would run until 2028 and had been developed in consultation with the Joint Partnership Board.
• Processes on safeguarding and multi-agency collaboration around homelessness had been strengthened.
• Following a review, a revised version of the Board’s Multi-Agency Escalation Protocol had been approved.
• Ongoing challenges included oversight of data which required strengthening.
• The Board was strengthening its relationship with the Joint Partnership Board because of the importance of co-production and understanding of lived experience.
• Further partnership working, including through joint meetings, would be taking place with the Community Safety Partnership and the Haringey Safeguarding Children Partnership board.
• The Board was conscious of the need to maintain the strength of safeguarding structures given the nature of the pressures and restructuring that local agencies were subject to.
• An independent review was ongoing in relation to adult social care and safeguarding, including the structure and resourcing of the HSAB.
• A review of the Board’s Delivery Plan would be carried out to ensure that resources were being focused in the right places.

Natalie Cowland then responded to questions from the Panel:

• Cllr Brennan raised concerns about the difficulties in achieving effective multi-agency communications. Natalie Cowland emphasised the importance of partnership working and building relationships to establish a shared understanding. She acknowledged that there was a risk of relying on individual relationships and so coordination needed to operate at a system level to make sure that pathways were understood with clear guidance in use.
• Asked by Cllr Connor for further details about system-based working, Natalie Cowland said that this was an area where improvement was constantly being sought and that it was working better in some areas than others. She cited the example of close working with the Police as part of their current restructuring and reconfiguration of resources to ensure that the pathways, resources and support on safeguarding issues were available in a timely way when needed. This involved a review of these processes to ensure that the framework was effective.
• Cllr Connor referred to the section of the report on the Safeguarding Adults Reviews (SARs) and the importance of embedding learning. She requested clarification on the relevance of the following points relating to the ‘Victoria’ SAR:

o   Ensuring feedback is given when safeguarding concerns are referred.

o   Ensuring concerns raised about a care provider are shared with the relevant commissioning team.

Natalie Cowland said that a common concern in safeguarding was when people raised concerns but then did not hear anything further about the action taken. Jo Baty, Director of Adult Social Services explained that these issues had previously been raised by the CQC and so a meeting with providers had been organised by the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.

To consider an update and lessons learned from the liquidation of NRS Healthcare which was a provider of community equipment in Haringey.

Sara Sutton introduced the report for this item by putting on record her thanks to Council officers for their response to a significant provider failure which had required a collaborative cross-Council effort and ensured a safe and effective transition to the new arrangements.

Cllr Connor requested an explanation of what learning there had been from the provider failure. Rebecca Cribb, Head of Adult Social Care Commissioning & Quality Assurance highlighted some key points about the actions taken after NRS Healthcare Ltd ceased trading:

·       There had been a direct award of a contract given the circumstances. This was made to Provide Care Solutions Ltd as a three-year contract with the option to break the contract after two years based on performance.

·       An eight-Borough partnership, called the North London Equipment Partnership, had been formed to benefit from economies of scales and operate from one warehousing space. The London Borough of Camden was leading on commissioning and contract management with regular meetings between the partners.

·       Earlier financial insight into providers was highlighted as a key learning point.

·       There was also an aim for longer-term efficiencies to be achieved through partnership arrangements. The current low levels of recycling of equipment was an area that could be improved in the future.

Rebecca Cribb then responded to questions from the Panel:

·       Cllr Brennan highlighted a case of a resident who had been waiting for an accessibility adaptation to her home for three years and this was now going ahead which was a positive sign.

·       Cllr Iyngkaran commented that there could be unintended consequences of awarding a direct contract and asked how agreement was reached between the Boroughs on this. Rebecca Cribb explained that the decision needed to be made quickly and that the immediate response was supported by ADASS, the LGA and the London Consortium. This was part of the efforts to scout the market and approach the large providers and also smaller providers in the London area. As many as 42 Boroughs across the country had been impacted by this provider failure so this involved a major call to action to bring about the conversations, negotiations and due diligence. Cllr das Neves commented that she had seen the significant impact on the team and the time spent on various conversations to explore different options on providers and working with different Boroughs.

·       Taryn Eves, Corporate Director of Finance & Resources, added that the challenge had been getting assurance that due diligence had been carried out and that value for money was being achieved while also protecting a service being provided to some of the Borough’s most vulnerable residents. While there hadn’t been time to fully test the market, it was also the case that the market was relatively small so there was a sense of realism. She added that resources were shared between Boroughs to carry out the financial due diligence checks so this had been carried out even though it may have been done quicker than usual. Bobbi Virgo, Head of Supply Chain (Health & Care), emphasised the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

To consider details of Adult Social Care complaints upheld by the Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO).

PART A – To consider a public report by the LGSCO following an investigation into an Adult Social Care complaint.

PART B – To consider an overall overview of Adult Social Care complaints.

Cllr Connor explained that this item would be heard in two parts:

PART A – To consider a public report by the Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) following an investigation into an Adult Social Care complaint.

PART B – To consider an overall overview of Adult Social Care complaints.

Part A

In relation to Part A, Cllr das Neves noted that this item had been reported to Cabinet in November 2025 and summarised the key points as follows:

• The Council recognised the seriousness of the LGSCO’s finding in this case, accepted responsibility for the errors and apologised unreservedly for this.
• The issues reflected historic practices in the Council that had changed since the events that were investigated.
• The backlog of emails had been cleared and the Council now seeks to triage all concerns that come into the inbox within 48 hours.
• Additional staff training on the handling of complaints had taken place.
• An Adult Social Care Improvement Plan was in place which responded to separate issues raised by the CQC.
• A recent letter had been provided by the LGSCO following the Council’s response to them which confirmed the LGSCO’s view that the remedy had been satisfied on time. A redacted version of the letter could be provided to the Panel if required.
• An external review had been commissioned which would verify that the Council’s practice had now improved.

Cllr das Neves, Sara Sutton and Jo Baty then responded to questions from the Panel:

• Cllr Connor requested further details about the current triaging of safeguarding emails, the involvement of social workers and timescales for follow up actions. Jo Baty explained that a short-term solution was currently in place until the safeguarding review reported in January. At present, any safeguarding email that came in was triaged, risk assessed and referred to the most relevant team. Where concern related to a specific resident, this may be directed to the locality team where the resident lives. Other concerns may be related to a service provider.
• Asked about capacity in the locality teams to take on the volume of safeguarding referrals, Sara Sutton said that there was an important distinction to make between safeguarding concerns and care and support needs. The latter would be allocated to a locality team and this could, for example, involve a review of the care and support plan for the resident. If a genuine safeguarding concern had been raised, relating to abuse or neglect for example, then immediate protective measures would be put in place. In some cases, further work would be required to establish the facts. Jo Baty commented that adult social care involved the constant assessment of risk. In terms of capacity, she said that this was a real pressure, particularly in relation to additional demand in the east of the Borough. The service had been fortunate to have been allocated additional funding for staffing and there were new posts to manage risk, including a post on forensic mental health. More training had been put in place  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

Dominic O’Brien, Scrutiny Officer, reported that items for the next Panel meeting in February 2026 were the Q2 Finance Update and the annual item on Quality Assurance, with space for one further item.

Cllr Connor reported discussions with the chair of the Children & Young People’s Scrutiny Panel regarding the concerns reported in recent media articles about the possibility of ‘grooming gangs’ in the Borough and that this issue had now been raised under the annual safeguarding item for both Panels. She proposed that a short agenda item should be scheduled on this issue to which the Borough Commander could be invited to present information about the data that the Metropolitan Police held on sexual exploitation in the Borough. Councillors commented that it was be important to understand how the type of offences related to ‘grooming gangs’ were defined and recorded. It was agreed that this proposal for an agenda item on this topic should be raised with the Corporate Director of Adults, Housing & Health and then an approach made to the Borough Commander. (ACTION)

-       9^th February 2026 (6.30pm)

• 9^th February 2026 (6.30pm)